High hunt Switzerland: Traditional ritual and stress test

Every autumn, the high hunt turns entire regions into temporary shooting zones. For weeks, recreational hunters roam the forests with rifles and kill quotas, while wild animals, hikers and local residents use the same space. The authorities speak of “population regulation” and “tradition”, yet reports of wounded animals, unlawful kills, accidents and reckless behaviour are on the rise. In the canton of Grisons alone, 8,821 red deer, roe deer, chamois and wild boars were shot during the 2025 high hunt; according to the Office for Hunting and Fisheries, around 9 per cent of kills are unlawful every year, and according to SRF one in ten red deer is merely wounded. Using figures, legal foundations and concrete cases, this dossier shows why the high hunt is not harmless custom but a stress test for animal welfare, safety and the credibility of Swiss hunting policy.

What awaits you here

• The high hunt system. How the high hunt is organised in Switzerland, which species are affected and what role licence hunting and territorial hunting systems play.
• Grisons as a hotspot. Why the Grisons high hunt in particular shows how a “traditional event” becomes a danger zone, what the official figures say about missed shots and fines, and why the hunting inspector himself warns of a “worrying development”.
• The special hunt as a permanent solution. What happens when kill quotas are not met, how the special hunt has evolved from an emergency instrument into routine, and why it is particularly problematic from an animal welfare perspective.
• Animal welfare and error rates. Why wild animals die without stunning during the high hunt, what the follow-up search statistics show and how the high hunt differs from Swiss animal welfare law.
• The high hunt as a safety risk. When shots are fired near settlements, warnings are missing and public space becomes a temporary firing zone.
• Culture of violence and psychology. What the behaviour of recreational hunters during the high hunt reveals about acceptance of violence, group pressure and self-image.
• Politics and law. How hunting legislation, enforcement practice and lobby pressure block reforms, and why the National Park offers the counter-example.
• What would need to change. Concrete political demands: professional wildlife wardens instead of recreational hunting, hunting-free quiet zones, a ban on particularly stressful hunting methods, and predators as natural regulators. Argumentary. Answers to the most common justifications for the high hunt.
• Quick links. All relevant articles, studies and dossiers at a glance.

The high hunt: what it is and what it means from the animals' perspective

The «high hunt» (Hohe Jagd) historically stems from a noble privilege: it referred to the hunting of prestigious large game such as red deer, fallow deer, chamois and ibex. In Switzerland, the high hunt remains the central hunting period of the autumn to this day. Depending on the canton, it spans several weeks in September, during which red deer, roe deer and chamois in particular are hunted intensively. Hunting seasons, kill quotas and hunting areas are set by the cantons, while the practical execution lies largely in the hands of recreational hunters holding a hunting licence and, in some cases, territorial rights.

Officially, the high hunt is meant to regulate wildlife populations, limit browsing damage in forests and create «balance». From an animal welfare perspective, it means above all one thing: intense hunting pressure within a short period, flight, stress, mortal fear and a high risk of misses and grazing shots. Unlike farm animals, which must be stunned before being killed (Art. 21 para. 1 TSchG), wild animals killed in the high hunt generally die without stunning: while fleeing, wounded, on steep slopes, and sometimes only after long follow-up searches. Art. 178a para. 1 lit. a of the Animal Welfare Ordinance (TSchV) exempts recreational hunting from the stunning requirement. Switzerland's modern understanding of animal welfare is thus in open contradiction with a practice that stages violence as a seasonal «natural custom».

The scale is considerable: in 2025, the Federal Hunting Statistics record 65,394 roe deer, red deer and chamois shot, plus 20,938 red foxes killed; in total, 133,508 wild animals were killed, not counting ibex (Swiss Hunting Statistics 2025). These are not isolated cases, but the toll of a mass system.

More on this: Animal welfare versus hunting practices in Switzerland and Hunting in Switzerland: fact check, types of hunting, criticism

The Grisons high hunt: when tradition becomes a danger zone

Hardly any canton shows the downsides of the high hunt as clearly as Grisons. In January 2025, hunting inspector Adrian Arquint warned in the magazine «Bündner Jäger» of a «worrying development»: during the 2024 hunting season there were negative incidents involving the behaviour of individual recreational hunters and in some cases entire hunting groups, directed at other recreational hunters, non-hunters, wild animals and the wildlife wardens. Department head Lukas Walser confirmed to SRF that «especially around Chur, significantly more incidents were registered»: shots fired close to settlements, conflicts between recreational hunters, damage to other people's high seats.

The official figures paint a structural picture. During the high hunt, around 9,000 red deer, chamois, roe deer and wild boars are killed in the canton of Grisons every year (2025: 8,821). Around 9 per cent of these kills are unlawful. In the 2022 high hunt, the Office for Hunting and Fisheries reported 790 erroneous kills out of roughly 9,200 animals shot, a share which, according to game warden Stefan Rauch, is «roughly the same every year». One in ten red deer is merely wounded rather than cleanly killed. In the five years before 2016, recreational hunters paid fixed penalty fines of over 700,000 francs for erroneous kills. In 2014 alone, 1,007 fixed penalty fines were issued and 95 reports were filed with the district offices; practically one in five of the 5,804 active recreational hunters was an offender that year.

The consequences for breaking the rules are minor: fixed penalty fines of up to 500 francs, in practice a symbolic sum. No hunting licence is permanently revoked, and no systematic fitness review is initiated. The signal is clear: recreational hunting tolerates breaches of the law as a calculated systemic risk.

More on this: Grisons high hunt under pressure: oversight and consequences for recreational hunters and The blacklist of JagdSchweiz

Special hunt: when animal cruelty becomes routine

On paper, the high hunt ends with the last hunting day. In reality, in many places it is extended by special and follow-up hunts. When kill quotas are not met during the high hunt, cantons order additional hunts in the late season in order to «correct populations». The focus here is particularly on female and young animals: hinds and their young, often on steep terrain, in snow, fog and poor visibility, with a correspondingly high risk of erroneous kills.

The figures show that the special hunt is long since no longer an exceptional instrument. In the canton of Bern, a total of 1,047 red deer were shot in 2023, a third of the estimated population. Of these, 133 hinds and young animals fell in the special hunt alone, which took place from 24 November to 6 December in the wildlife areas of the Bernese Oberland. Officially, this is described as "regulation mandate fulfilled". From an animal welfare perspective, it is a hunting regime that step by step lowers the threshold for how deeply wildlife populations may be interfered with.

In Grisons, 3,432 red deer and 2,502 roe deer were shot during the 2025 high hunt, a result above the 20-year average. The canton called it a success. Even so, it declared the special hunt in November and December: an additional 1,711 female red deer and their calves, 281 roe deer and 10 chamois were to be killed, while the canton released wild boars without limit. By the last day of the special hunt on 20 December 2025, a total of 4,630 red deer, 2,776 roe deer, 2,894 chamois and 78 wild boars had been killed, with 1,049 red deer and 203 roe deer taken in the special hunt alone. For 2026, the cantonal kill quota provides for 4,616 red deer.

Particularly problematic is the "contradiction model" of hunting planning: what is forbidden, unethical and punishable during the high hunt in September, namely the shooting of young animals and mothers, is expressly desired in the special hunt a few weeks later. Pregnant hinds are shot, foetuses suffocate in the womb, calves wander about or starve. A long-term study on the Scottish island of Rum shows that the loss of the mother increases the mortality risk of red deer calves even after weaning (Andres et al. 2013, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology); more on this in the article Special hunt in Grisons: protected in September, cleared for killing in December. Drive hunts and driven hunts in the late year cause massive stress, a high risk of injury and flight over great distances, precisely at the time when wild animals need their energy reserves for the winter. What is labelled as an epilogue to the high hunt is in fact a second hunting programme with drastic consequences for animal welfare and winter survival.

More on this: The special hunt in Bern: from emergency measure to permanent solution and Special hunts and the limits of recreational hunting

High hunt as a safety risk: when the forest becomes a firing zone

The high hunt is by no means held in uninhabited wilderness. Hikers, bikers, families and locals use the same paths and slopes on which recreational hunters roam with live ammunition. When shots are fired in the immediate vicinity of trails, and warning notices are missing or ignored, public space temporarily becomes a danger zone. The responsibility lies not with walkers, but with a system that permits lethal violence under leisure conditions.

Documented cases from the blacklist of JagdSchweiz show that recreational hunters regularly shoot at the wrong targets: donkeys instead of roe deer, cats instead of foxes, sheep instead of wild boars. In a militia system with an ageing community of recreational hunters, performance-oriented kill quotas and group pressure, the risk of wrong decisions and misfires rises. Every year in Switzerland, people are injured and killed by the risk group that is recreational hunters. That this very framework should be protected as 'preserving tradition' seems, from a public safety perspective, like an anachronism.

The Grisons authorities themselves confirm the problem: Lukas Walser of the Office for Hunting and Fishing admitted to SRF that for some recreational hunters 'their own hunting success moves more into the centre while awareness of their surroundings recedes into the background'. Hunting inspector Arquint warned that without 'personal responsibility and sensitivity', 'the credibility of hunting' is at stake.

More on this: Recreational hunting fact check: a quick licence to kill instead of knowledge and Hunting and weapons: risks, accidents and the dangers of armed recreational hunters

Animal welfare versus the high hunt: stress, mortal fear and error rates

The Swiss Animal Welfare Act (Art. 4 para. 2 TSchG) requires that no one may unjustifiably inflict pain, suffering or harm on an animal. Art. 26 para. 1 lit. a TSchG makes animal cruelty a criminal offence. The Foundation for Animals in Law (TIR) has criticised for years that driven hunts, drive hunts, earth hunts and moving hunts expose wild animals to massive stress and a high risk of missed shots. In the high hunt these problems accumulate: heavy hunting pressure within a short time, panicked flight movements, shots at distance in difficult terrain, and follow-up searches that happen too late or not at all.

The follow-up search statistics confirm how little controlled the high hunt actually is. In the Grisons, tracking dog handlers were called out for 1’018 follow-up searches in 2021, and only 57 per cent were successful (Thousands of hunting offences, barely any animal cruelty convictions). Between 2012 and 2016, 56’403 red deer, roe deer, chamois and wild boars were killed in the canton, and over five years up to 1’000 animals were classified as missed kills. Studies on grazing shots document hundreds of wild animals with gunshot wounds found as fallen game, and that is only the visible tip. Analyses assume that a significant proportion of the animals shot at are initially only wounded and are found days later or die somewhere in the terrain (The follow-up search as a reflection of the missed-shot rate).

While farm animals must be restrained and stunned at the slaughterhouse, wild animals are killed on the high hunt under maximum stress. They flee in mortal fear, are frequently wounded and not infrequently die outside the shooters' field of vision. From the standpoint of animal ethics, it is hard to justify why a state that claims to protect animals permits such practices as a leisure activity instead of reducing them to what is absolutely necessary under professional supervision.

More on this: Hunting and Animal Welfare: What the Practice Does to Wild Animals

A culture of violence on the high hunt: what the behaviour of recreational hunters reveals

Anyone who regularly kills animals exercises violence – legally sanctioned, but violence nonetheless. The high hunt is the concentrated form of this culture of violence: groups of recreational hunters who want to hit kill targets, spur each other on, compare trophies and 'successes', and operate in a milieu in which lying and exaggeration are part of the folklore. The annual report of the Grisons Office for Food Safety and Animal Health noted that up to 30 per cent of wild animal carcasses were wrongly assessed by recreational hunters – an indication that cheating is systematic when it comes to judging meat quality.

When hunting authorities report 'reckless conflicts' among recreational hunters, damage to high seats and a rising number of fines, it shows that this is not about a few black sheep but about a structural climate. The high hunt creates a concentration effect: within three weeks, thousands of recreational hunters are released into a confined area at the same time, under pressure to perform, in the grip of hunting fever and with trophy ambitions. Psychologically, this constellation shifts boundaries. Anyone who experiences violence as leisure content, labels it 'conservation' and sees it constantly glorified in trophy photos, hunting tales and hunting magazines becomes accustomed to a normality of killing.

The high hunt is emblematic of the performance narrative of recreational hunting: presence in the field, meeting targets, status within the group. A psychological analysis describes recreational hunting as an institutionalised form of violence in which the death of wild animals has become the social glue of a scene. The question of whether such a culture should still be granted social legitimacy in a modern society is long overdue.

More on this: Psychology of hunting in the canton of Grisons and Psychology of Hunting Dossier

Politics and law: hunting act, lobby and deadlock

The Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds (JSG, SR 922.0) sets out the framework: which species are protected, which may be hunted and what aims hunting is meant to pursue. The concrete arrangements – hunting system, hunting seasons, high hunt rules and the use of special hunts – are a matter for the cantons. Officially, they are supposed to balance animal welfare, safety, ecology and societal concerns.

In practice, hunting administrations and political bodies are in many places strongly shaped by recreational hunters. The institutional proximity between the hunting administration, recreational hunters and agricultural interests makes independent oversight difficult. Animal welfare demands for hunting-free refuge zones, restrictions on particularly stressful methods of hunting, or the transfer of tasks to professional wildlife wardens meet with fierce resistance.

The deadlock is exemplified in Grisons. In 2013, a popular initiative to abolish the special hunt was submitted with over 10,000 signatures. Cantonal minister Mario Cavigelli (CVP) had not made public that the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) had found the initiative did not violate higher-ranking law and that there were indeed alternatives. In December 2018, the 120-member Grand Council recommended rejecting the initiative by 96 votes to 1, with 13 abstentions, on the basis of incomplete information; in May 2019, voters rejected it with 54.2 per cent. IG Wild beim Wild filed Criminal complaint. As long as hunting law is understood primarily as an instrument for safeguarding recreational hunting, the high hunt will remain a symbol of political deadlock.

An often overlooked counter-example lies right in the middle of the canton: for over a hundred years, the Swiss National Park has shown that ungulate populations fluctuate within natural ranges without recreational hunting, governed by climate, food supply, disease and predators. Anyone who is serious about regulation does not need to send more recreational hunters into the forest, but should improve habitats and accept predators as natural regulators. In Grisons itself, the return of the wolf has already helped to reduce the roe deer population in some areas and to cut back the special hunt (Special hunt in Grisons: protected in September, cleared for killing in December). The forestry association welcomes this development. The lynx, too, has demonstrably reduced roe deer numbers in regions such as Toggenburg, Uri, the Bernese Oberland and Solothurn.

More on this: Recreational hunters in Grisons have failed and Canton of Geneva: the counter-model without recreational hunting

What needs to change

• Reducing recreational hunting in favour of professional wildlife wardens: Where populations genuinely need to be regulated, the task should fall to game wardens with a federal professional certificate, clear standards and oversight, rather than leisure hunters with vested interests. The canton of Geneva has practised this model successfully since 1974. Template motion: Establishing a professional corps of game wardens
• Hunting-free quiet zones and longer hunting-free periods: Wild animals need extensive refuges free from hunting pressure so that they can display natural behaviour and recover from stress. The high hunt must no longer serve as a justification for an almost season-spanning chain of hunting. Template motion: Wildlife corridors instead of kills
• Banning particularly stressful forms of hunting: Driven hunts in difficult terrain, in snow or in the immediate vicinity of settlements and paths must be prohibited. Anyone who wants to reconcile recreational hunting with animal welfare must first put an end to the most extreme practices.
• Stricter entry hurdles and aptitude tests for hunting licences: The accumulation of fines (over 1,000 a year in Grisons alone from 2012 to 2020), accidents and incidents shows that the current system does not reliably keep unsuitable people out. Template motion: Transparent hunting statistics
• Accepting predators as natural regulators: Scientific studies show that wolves are the most effective regulators of ungulate populations. The growing number of wolf kills undermines this natural solution. Cantons must integrate predators into their wildlife management strategies rather than fight them.

Talking points

“Without the high hunt, populations will explode.” The hunting act names population regulation as its aim, yet high numbers are often the result of human interference: feeding, agriculture, the killing of predators, hunting-induced stress and the shift of animals towards nocturnal activity. Grisons itself shows how little recreational hunting manages to regulate on its own: despite decades of intensive hunting, the red deer population grew to over 16,000 animals by 2020; the 17 per cent decline to 13,485 red deer in spring 2026 was achieved only by removing roughly a third of the spring population each year and by holding an annual special hunt. In the areas where the wolf has returned, by contrast, populations are falling of their own accord. An ecological strategy would first improve habitats and allow natural regulation by predators.

“These are only isolated cases; most recreational hunters act correctly.” The Grisons figures contradict the isolated-cases narrative: 790 wrongly shot animals out of 9,200 killed in a single hunting season (2022), 9 per cent unlawful kills, fixed penalty fines of over 700,000 francs in five years, and from 2012 to 2020 more than 1,000 fines and reports every year; since then the authority has no longer published the figure. Recurring reports of accidents, rule violations and special hunts as a permanent instrument point to structural deficits, not slip-ups.

“The high hunt is living culture.” Many historical practices, from bear-baiting to bullfighting, are regarded as unacceptable today, even though they were once considered culture. Culture is no moral free pass. A “tradition” based on mortal fear, injuries and safety risks must be measured against today’s standards of animal welfare and ethics.

“Hunting protects the forest; without it, nothing works.” Animal welfare and nature conservation experts stress that recreational hunting can at best be one of several instruments. What matters are forest conversion, protected areas, predators and an agricultural policy that allows natural processes. The Swiss National Park has shown for over a hundred years that ungulate populations fluctuate within natural ranges without recreational hunting. A hunting practice that fights predators and uses the high hunt as its main tool above all stabilises itself.

“Stricter rules endanger the acceptance of hunters.” The question is whose acceptance is decisive: that of a shrinking recreational hunting minority (0.3 per cent of the Swiss population hold a hunting licence) or that of the wider public, who increasingly regard wild animals as sentient individuals. Anyone seeking social legitimacy must orient themselves towards social standards.

«The special hunt is an emergency instrument.» In Grisons, the special hunt has been a fixed part of hunting planning every year since the late 1980s. In the canton of Bern, it has for years been a firmly scheduled component of red deer management. What takes place thirty years in a row is not an emergency but a systemic flaw, one that conceals the fact that the high hunt alone cannot meet the politically mandated kill figures.

Quick links

Articles on Wild beim Wild:

• High hunt in Grisons: control and consequences for recreational hunters
• Recreational hunters in Grisons have failed
• Special hunts and the limits of recreational hunting
• Bern's Special Hunt on Red Deer: From Emergency Measure to Permanent Solution
• Animal welfare versus hunting practices in Switzerland
• Psychology of hunting in the canton of Grisons
• The blacklist of JagdSchweiz
• Switzerland hunts, but why still?
• Grisons: Yes to abolishing the special hunt
• Recreational hunting fact check: a quick licence to kill instead of knowledge
• Canton of Geneva: the counter-model without recreational hunting
• Hunting season: background and criticism
• Special hunt in Grisons: protected in September, cleared for killing in December
• 4’616 red deer: what Grisons hunting planning reveals
• Grisons hunting 2026/27: incidents, violations and developments
• Template text: Reform of the cantonal high hunt
• Template text: Abolition of the special hunt
• Hunting Fact Check

Related dossiers:

• Hunting and Wildlife Diseases
• Night hunting and high-tech: the myth of fair hunting
• Hunting Dogs: Use, Suffering and Animal Welfare
• Lead ammunition: the toxic legacy of recreational hunting
• High hunt Switzerland: Traditional ritual and stress test
• Swine fever as a justification for recreational hunting
• Hunting Accidents in Switzerland
• Hunting and Animal Welfare: What the Practice Does to Wild Animals
• Hunting and Weapons
• Driven Hunt in Switzerland
• Wait Hunting: Waiting, Technology and Risks
• Earth hunting
• Trap hunting
• Wait hunting
• Special Hunt in Grisons
• Swiss Hunting Statistics 2025: What the Federal Figures Show
• Poaching and hunting crime in Switzerland: Systematic impunity and the limits of self-control

Our Standard

The high hunt is a burning glass for how Switzerland treats wild animals: as populations to be regulated, as hunting objects and as collateral damage of a leisure culture. This dossier documents why a hunting model based on mortal fear, error rates and special hunts does not fit an animal welfare state of the 21st century, and what alternatives exist. The dossier is updated continuously whenever new data, rulings or political developments require it.

More on the topic of recreational hunting: in our hunting dossier we bring together fact checks, analyses and background reports.