Night hunting and high-tech hunting

Around 30,000 recreational hunters are active in Switzerland. Many of them now use technologies that, just a generation ago, were reserved exclusively for the military and law enforcement: thermal imaging cameras that make the body heat of wild animals visible in complete darkness, night vision devices that enable precise shots without any daylight, drones that track and drive wild animals from the air, and digital calls that exploit instincts that are millions of years old.

What is marketed by hobby hunters as "modern hunting practices" and "efficient wildlife protection" turns out, upon closer inspection, to be a system of technological overpowering that deprives wild animals of their only remaining protected areas: the night, the burrow, the thicket, and the narrative of tradition, connection to nature, and "fair hunting" are definitively refuted.

Swiss law in this area is a patchwork of regulations that is virtually impossible to control: cantons have different rules, enforcement is structurally difficult, and at the federal level, there is no coherent response to technological advancements in hunting. This dossier documents the facts, identifies the animal welfare problems, and shows why technologically enhanced recreational hunting is the antithesis of ethical hunting practices.

What awaits you here

Thermal imaging cameras: How wild animals are detected even before dusk, why even the hunting community in Valais demanded a ban and what this says about proportionality.
Night vision devices: Why night shooting is particularly problematic from an animal welfare perspective, what injury patterns occur, and what happens to wounded animals in the dark.
Drones: How drones are used as "drivers from the air", why the canton of Glarus has already reacted and where the line between fawn rescue and hunting tool lies.
Digital lures: How hobby hunting uses evolutionary instincts as a trap, which devices are freely available, and why the narrative of "fair competition" is being dismantled.
The patchwork of regulations in Switzerland: Why 26 cantons produce 26 different sets of rules, what the parliamentary reaction at the federal level looks like, and why enforcement is structurally almost impossible.
The myth of fair hunting: Why high-tech hunting and ethical hunting are an irreconcilable contradiction.
What needs to change: Six concrete demands for proportionate regulation.
Argumentation: Answers to the most common justifications of amateur hunters.
Quick links: All relevant articles, studies and dossiers at a glance.

Thermal imaging cameras: Driven from the cover of darkness

The thermal imaging camera has evolved from a specialist tool to a standard piece of equipment for recreational hunters. "These night vision devices have experienced a real boom. Almost every hunting group carries one. This increases competition among hunters and puts more pressure on wildlife," says Sven Wirthner of the Valais Office for Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife. Hunting areas are scanned for animals with the camera even before dusk; shots are then fired at the first light of day at the deer and stags identified during the night. The night, which is evolutionarily the most important protected zone for wild animals, is thus systematically eliminated.

Even within the hunting community, acceptance of this practice is limited. The canton of Valais banned thermal imaging cameras at the initiative of its own hunting association – not because a law required it, but because the pressure on wildlife had become too great. "Animals should also have their chance to escape hunters using their instincts," is the justification from Valais. It is noteworthy: if the recreational hunting community itself considers a tool too effective and therefore unfair, any serious discussion of animal welfare should take precisely that as its starting point – and not dismiss it as an isolated opinion.

In the canton of Bern, thermal imaging cameras are legal for observation purposes, as long as they are not used directly as aiming aids for shooting. Different rules apply in other cantons. The result is a technological advantage that effectively creates constant hunting pressure, leaving wildlife no respite. From an animal welfare perspective, chronic hunting pressure is not a marginal issue: persistent stress increases cortisol levels, disrupts reproductive cycles, increases the risk of accidents during escapes, and weakens the immune system.

Night vision devices: When the animal no longer has a chance

While thermal imaging cameras are used for reconnaissance, night vision devices and thermal imaging riflescopes go a step further: they enable direct shooting in complete darkness. The legal situation regarding these devices is contradictory. In Germany, thermal imaging riflescopes are permitted as clip-on devices for wild boar hunting in several federal states; fully integrated thermal imaging riflescopes, however, remain prohibited. In Switzerland, cantonal regulations govern what is permitted – with the consequence that the same device is legal in canton X and prohibited in canton Y. In the canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, there is an official information sheet that explicitly lists night vision devices as prohibited aids. Other cantons remain silent on the matter.

From an animal welfare perspective, night shooting is particularly problematic. Accurately identifying an animal species with thermal imaging devices is significantly more difficult in the dark than in daylight, making misfires more likely. The situation is even more serious with wounded animals that are not killed immediately: the search for the wounded animal can usually only begin the following morning at the earliest. The injured animal spends hours struggling to die, alone, in the dark, without any possibility of help. Wildlife Protection Germany states: "Animals shot at night often cannot be found during the search – resulting in a painful death." This is not responsible hunting. This is organized suffering.

At the federal level, a motion to ban night vision devices for hunting has been submitted to the Swiss National Council. This shows that the problem has gained political traction. However, a coherent federal regulation is still lacking. The recreational hunting lobby argues that night vision devices are essential for "efficient wild boar management." This argument is circular: recreational hunting significantly contributes to the problem of wild boar populations by decimating natural predators, and then demands more technology to solve it.

More on this topic: Dossier on wild animals, fear of death and lack of stunning , and cruel hunting methods – tolerated and promoted

Drones: The «driver from the air»

Proponents of drones for hunting promote their usefulness in rescuing fawns from mowing machines. This is legitimate and welcome from an animal welfare perspective. However, the use of drones as an active hunting tool is a completely different matter. In the canton of Glarus, the cantonal government has stated that drones can be used as "droners from the air," "directly disturbing" game, which violates ethical hunting practices, and has recommended a review of hunting regulations. This is a remarkable admission: The state acknowledges that drones are problematic in hunting – but takes no action.

Drones enable the systematic tracking, flushing, and manipulation of wild animals from the air. For the animals affected, this means yet another element of total surveillance of their habitat: no thicket offers any safety when a drone circles overhead. Deer and fawns, in particular, which instinctively "hide" when threatened—remaining motionless in tall grass or undergrowth—are especially vulnerable to drones. This behavior, an evolutionary protective strategy, is deliberately exploited and undermined by drone hunting.

The Federal Office of Civil Aviation (BAZL) regulates airspace, but not the specifics of drone use for hunting. The German Hunting Association has recommended to its members that they refrain from using drones to drive or disturb game – but this is not a legally binding restriction. It remains the responsibility of recreational hunters to avoid misusing a technology that gives hunting a significant advantage. The history of hunting technology shows that voluntary restraint cannot be relied upon.

More on this topic: Dossier Hunting in Switzerland: Fact check, hunting methods, criticism and alternatives to hunting: What really helps without killing animals

Digital lures: Deception as a system

Digital calls precisely imitate the sounds of prey, other animals, or young in distress. Played through Bluetooth speakers, they can attract animals from hundreds of meters away. The fox following a digital mouse cry has no way of recognizing that it's a trap. The buck reacting to a fawn's cry, seemingly trying to protect its young, is killed the very moment it acts on a protective instinct. This isn't hunting on equal terms. This is the systematic exploitation of instincts that are millions of years old and offered no protection against a loudspeaker.

In Switzerland, the use of sound devices to attract wildlife is prohibited in many cantons, but enforcement is minimal. Digital calls with hundreds of pre-recorded animal sounds, including those of protected species, are readily available online. It is virtually impossible to monitor whether a recreational hunter is using a digital call in the field. What isn't monitored, happens.

Amateur hunters justify digital calls as a "natural instrument" because hunters used to use calls in the past. This comparison is flawed: A mouth-blown reed call requires skill, produces a limited sound range, and is anything but precise. A digital device with a GPS speaker and 300 pre-recorded animal sounds in HD quality is the antithesis of natural. It is the use of consumer technology against animals that have no way of discerning the difference.

The patchwork of Switzerland: Regulation without enforcement

What makes Switzerland particularly distinctive regarding hunting technology is the complete regulatory inconsistency. The cantonal sovereignty over hunting law means that up to 26 different regulations can exist for the same technology in 26 different cantons. Thermal imaging cameras are banned in the canton of Valais at the initiative of the hunting community, permitted for observation in the canton of Bern, and not even mentioned in other cantons. Night vision devices are explicitly listed as prohibited aids in Appenzell Ausserrhoden, while other cantons' legislation remains silent on the matter. Digital calls are sometimes prohibited, sometimes tolerated, and sometimes unregulated by canton.

Enforcement is structurally almost impossible. Game wardens are few and far between, hunting areas are large, and the darkness in which night hunting takes place provides additional protection for recreational hunters. Checking whether thermal imaging scopes were used at night is virtually impossible without real-time on-site documentation. The consequence is a legal situation that exists on paper but, in practice, effectively tolerates technological advancements.

At the federal level, a motion has been submitted to ban night vision devices for hunting. It remains to be seen whether Parliament will act. As long as there is no federal regulation, the protection of wildlife from technological overpowering will continue to depend on the goodwill of individual cantonal associations. This is not a system. This is a matter of chance.

More information: Sample texts for motions critical of hunting in cantonal parliaments and dossier on hunting in Switzerland

The fairy tale of fair hunting

Recreational hunting publicly justifies itself with tradition, a connection to nature, and the principle of giving wildlife a fair chance. The concept of "ethical hunting" is central to this: it suggests a respectful approach to wild animals, an ethical stance that distinguishes recreational hunting from mere killing. Technological reality refutes this narrative on all levels.

Thermal imaging cameras allow animals to be tracked even before daybreak, depriving them of the night as a refuge. Night vision devices enable shots in complete darkness, turning tracking wounded game into hours-long death struggles. Drones flush wild animals from secure hiding places for which there is no evolutionary defense strategy. Digital calls exploit protective instincts and mating reflexes that are hundreds of thousands of years old. Not one of these tools has anything to do with tradition or a connection to nature. They all have one thing in common: they maximize human advantage and minimize the wild animal's chance of survival to zero.

The canton of Geneva has demonstrated since 1974, and Luxembourg since 2015, that wildlife management works without any form of recreational hunting. Anyone who hunts animals with military technology forfeits the right to invoke tradition and ethical hunting practices.

More on this topic: Geneva and the hunting ban: 50 years without recreational hunting and a hunting ban in Switzerland: Why an end to recreational hunting is overdue

What would need to change

A federal ban on thermal imaging riflescopes and night vision devices for recreational hunters: Technological advancements have rendered the patchwork of cantonal regulations obsolete. A federal ban on thermal imaging riflescopes and night vision devices would create a uniform legal framework across Switzerland and ensure enforcement.
Clear legal definition of drones as prohibited hunting tools: Drones used to track, scare or drive game are to be classified as prohibited aids under hunting law at the federal level.
Nationwide ban on digital calls: The use of digital sound devices to attract wild animals must be prohibited throughout Switzerland. Online sales of such devices should not be stopped, but their use on public and private hunting grounds must be punishable by law.
Reporting requirement for nighttime shootings and searches: Every shooting at night must be reported, including the start of the search and its outcome. This would allow the actual number of dead, unrecovered animals to be statistically recorded for the first time.
Mandatory training for the use of new technologies: Anyone wishing to use thermal imaging devices for observation, where permitted, must provide verifiable training in the accurate identification of animals. This reduces the number of mistakenly shooting protected species.
Transparency obligation for the hunting lobby: Manufacturers and retailers of hunting technology should be required to report sales figures to the authorities. This is the only way to regulate the spread of new technologies in a timely manner. Model motions: Sample texts for motions critical of hunting and Parliament.ch: Motion to ban night vision devices for hunting

Argumentation

"Thermal imaging devices make hunting safer because they prevent misfires." The opposite has been proven: Determining animal species and sex at temperatures near zero degrees Celsius, where thermal signatures are similar, is prone to error. Furthermore, the perceived precision leads hunters to take shots they wouldn't dare in daylight. Wildlife Protection Germany documents an increasing number of misfires of protected species using thermal imaging devices.

"Night hunting is necessary for wild boar population control." The claim that increased culling would permanently reduce the wild boar population is scientifically untenable. Studies show that wild boar compensate for losses through increased reproduction. The actual cause of wild boar pressure—intensive agriculture, corn monocultures, and a lack of predators—is not eliminated by night hunting, but merely masked.

“Drones saving fawns – that’s a good thing.” The use of drones to rescue fawns from mowing machines is certainly welcome. However, this doesn’t change the fact that the same technology is used as a hunting tool to flush out and drive wild animals. Defending both simultaneously is a double standard that comes at the expense of wildlife.

“Hunters have used digital calls in the past – that’s nothing new.” A hand-blown deer call and a Bluetooth speaker with 300 pre-recorded HD animal sounds are so fundamentally different that the comparison is invalid. The crucial difference is not the intention, but the effect: Digital calls are so precise and far-reaching that the animal has no way of recognizing the imitation. This is not traditional hunting practice, but rather the use of technology against a structurally inferior animal.

"Recreational hunting regulates itself – Valais proves it." Valais demonstrates the opposite: self-regulation only worked when the pressure on wildlife was already so high that the hunting community itself reacted. Relying on voluntary restraint without a legal framework is irresponsible from an animal welfare perspective.

“Technology is value-neutral – it all depends on its use.” Technology is not value-neutral when it creates asymmetrical power relations. Between a wild animal dependent on evolutionary instincts and a hobby hunter with a thermal imaging scope, drone, and digital call, there is no longer any competition. There is only execution.

Quick links

Posts on Wild beim Wild:

Related dossiers:

External sources:

Our claim

Wild animals are not targets. The technological upgrading of recreational hunting is not progress, but a capitulation to the principle of proportionality: what remained as the only sanctuary for wild animals – the night, the thicket, their instincts – is being systematically undermined by thermal imaging cameras, drones, and digital calls. Swiss law is an uncontrollable patchwork that comes at the expense of wildlife. Recreational hunters portray themselves as nature lovers and ethical hunters – but those who hunt animals with military-grade precision technology forfeit the right to this narrative. This dossier is continuously updated as new data, legal developments, or technological trends necessitate it.

More on the topic of hobby hunting: In our dossier on hunting, we compile fact checks, analyses and background reports.