Recreational hunting starts at the desk

Hunting is not just forest – it is administration. Since January 1, 2026, the Hunting Ordinance (JSV) has been published in its updated version on Fedlex and is thus a citable reference for all objections, complaints and political initiatives. At the same time, the annual recruitment rounds are starting in the cantons: In the Canton of Zurich, the places for the hunting supervision examination 2026 are already fully booked, the hunting examination 2026 has a registration deadline of March 15. In the Canton of Schwyz, registration for the hunting course 2026/2027 is running with criminal record extract, liability insurance proof and passport photo.

These dates are not marginal notes. They are the administrative starting signals of a year in which hunting is once again offered as a qualification process – while questions about animal suffering, ecological impacts and social legitimacy remain secondary in implementation. Those who want to effectively control recreational hunting must start before the shooting: with rules, training, orders, file inspection and deadlines. This dossier provides the tools for it.

What awaits you here

Hunting 2026 as administrative routine: How the updated JSV, registration deadlines and training courses renew the system every year – and why this is politically relevant.
What the JSV 2026 newly regulates: The most important changes that come into force on January 1, 2026, and what they mean for hunting practice and control.
Training as normalization machine: How hunting training functions as an administrative process – and what is said about animal welfare, animal suffering and responsibility: little.
Transparency Protocol 2026 – Step 1: Make hunting decisions visible early: Why formal notification is crucial and how to demand it.
Transparency Protocol 2026 – Step 2: Secure file inspection and deadlines immediately: Which steps are necessary within which deadlines and what irreversible interventions require.
Transparency Protocol 2026 – Step 3: Uniform questionnaire to the cantons: The complete instrument for organizations and media professionals – with ready-to-copy template.
Transparency Protocol 2026 – Step 4: Publication according to the principle 'We have asked': How public inquiries become political pressure.
Cantonal training logic in comparison: How Zurich, Schwyz and other cantons organize hunting training – and what is missing.
Arguments: Answers to the most common objections against more transparency in hunting administration.
Quick links: All relevant articles, regulations and resources.

Hunting 2026 as administrative routine

'Soft news' like regulatory updates and registration deadlines appear harmless. In reality, these are the maintenance cycles of a system that organizes the killing of wild animals as a qualification and normalizes it socially. Anyone criticizing recreational hunting must make this normalization visible before the next intervention occurs.

With the publication of the JSV as of January 1, 2026, a current, citable reference is available. It defines terms, responsibilities and thresholds that make interventions in wildlife populations appear as regular enforcement. In the canton of Zurich, registrations for the 2026 hunting examination are accepted until March 15 – examination fee Fr. 250 –, the hunting supervision examination costs Fr. 200 – plus Fr. 80– for the hunting law examination and Fr. 100 – for the communication course. In the canton of Schwyz, registration for the 2026/2027 hunting course requires a criminal record extract, proof of liability insurance and a passport photo – all administrative normality for an activity that leads to the death of tens of thousands of wild animals per year. Authorities communicate hunting as a training program that is processed like an administrative procedure: registration start, deadlines, submission requirements. Precisely this language is documentable and thus usable journalistically and politically.

More on this: Hunting laws and control: Why self-supervision is not enough and Hunter lobby in Switzerland: How influence works

What the JSV 2026 newly regulates

The JSV revision, which came into force on February 1, 2025 and is citable in the current version of January 1, 2026, brought several relevant changes. Drones are – with the exception of fawn rescue – explicitly listed as prohibited aids for hunting practice. The minimum requirement for barrel length of hunting firearms was shortened from 50 cm to 45 cm. The night hunting ban in forests was introduced, but simultaneously supplemented with cantonal exception rules for 'damage prevention' that in practice continue to allow night shooting under certain conditions. The JSV now explicitly refers to the Animal Welfare Act (TSchG) in the preamble – a formal recognition that remains without consequences due to lack of effective control mechanisms.

For organizations and political actors, this is crucial: The updated JSV is the legal basis for culling orders, population regulations and exceptional permits. Anyone who wants to challenge an order needs the current version – not last year's.

More on this: Blind hunting: Waiting, technology and risks and Hunting and weapons: Why 'hobby' and firearms are politically connected

Training as a normalization machine

Hunting training in Switzerland is regulated differently by canton, but follows a common logic: It is structured in two phases. In Canton Zurich, the theory exam and shooting test is followed by an 'apprenticeship period' of at least two years in a Zurich hunting district before the practical hunting exam can be taken. In Canton Schwyz, registration for the hunting course includes a data protection declaration, a criminal record extract and proof of insurance.

What does not appear prominently in any of the publicly accessible training forms and communications: How many training hours are specifically allocated to wildlife ecology, animal behavior and animal welfare aspects – compared to weapon handling and shooting practice? What role does animal suffering play as a learning subject, not just as error case management? How is decision-making competence tested – i.e., the ability to decide when a shot is ethically unjustifiable – and not just accuracy? These questions are not answered in the public training documentation. This is itself political information.

More on this: The hunting license and Hunting and children: What it means to sell killing as a nature experience

Transparency Protocol 2026

The following protocol is directed at organizations with party status as well as political actors who want not only to comment on hunting decisions, but to control them verifiably. Legal foundations and a list of authorized organizations are documented at FOEN. Those who only criticize hunting after culling takes place are lagging behind implementation. The more effective approach comes earlier: with transparency of decision-making bases, deadlines, file access and the question of how hunting is organized as a qualification.

Step 1: Make hunting decisions visible early

Many hunting-related measures are communicated informally – through websites, press releases or official bulletins. For legal protection, it is crucial that a decision is formally announced and is tangible as a challengeable act with reasoning, conditions and legal remedy instructions. If formal announcement is lacking, it must be actively demanded. Administrative authorities are obligated to provide formal announcement as soon as an organization with party status makes such a demand. This transforms administrative communication into a legally reviewable administrative act.

Step 2: Immediately secure access to files and deadlines

The right to access files is a component of the right to be heard and is well established in Swiss administrative law practice. It generally applies to pending proceedings and can be claimed informally – even by email. As soon as a decision becomes known, four steps are necessary:

Request access to files: Particularly regarding data foundations, proportionality considerations and examined alternatives.
Record legal remedy deadline: Document when it begins – usually from formal announcement, not from press release.
Review suspensive effect: For irreversible interventions such as pack removals or complete population regulations, immediately examine whether an application for suspensive effect or precautionary measures is necessary.
Document silence: If an authority does not respond within the statutory deadline, silence itself is also a documentable administrative act with legal consequences.

Step 3: Uniform catalogue of questions to the cantons

To ensure criticism remains verifiable, every inquiry is structured identically and publicly documented. This makes silence measurable and enables comparability between cantons.

A. Legal basis and objective
What specific legal basis supports the decision – with article references from JSG and JSV? What objective does the measure pursue and how is its success measured?

B. Proportionality and animal suffering
How is animal suffering considered in the assessment? What non-lethal alternatives were examined and for what specific reasons were they rejected?

C. Data foundations and control
What monitoring data, damage reports or estimates form the basis? Who collected them? How are errant shots, tracking wounded animals and shot animals recorded and published?

D. Training and decision-making authority
How many hours in cantonal hunting education are allocated to weapon handling and shooting practice – and how many to wildlife ecology, animal behavior and animal welfare aspects? How is decision-making competence tested?

E. Transparency and Legal Protection
Where is the complete justification published? Which authority is responsible for appeals? From which date does the legal remedy deadline run?

Step 4: Publication according to the principle 'We have asked'

Every inquiry is publicly documented – with date and addressee, subject of the decision, status of deadlines, question catalog, response status and next step. This makes visible which cantons work transparently and which ones evade. Systematic silence is politically exploitable: It shows that control is not functioning – and gives the right to say so publicly.

Ready-to-copy template for NGO inquiries

Betreff: Transparenzanfrage zu Jagdentscheid: Rechtsgrundlage, 
Datengrundlagen, Verhältnismässigkeit, Kontrolle

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren

Wir ersuchen um Auskunft und Akteneinsicht zum folgenden 
Jagdentscheid: [Titel, Datum, Publikation, Link].

Bitte bestätigen Sie uns die laufenden Fristen, insbesondere 
ab welcher Eröffnung die Rechtsmittelfrist zu laufen beginnt.

Wir stellen folgende Fragen und bitten um Beantwortung mit 
Verweisen auf Rechtsgrundlagen und Datengrundlagen, soweit 
möglich mit Aktenstellen oder Dokumenten:

[Fragenkatalog A bis E einfügen]

Bitte senden Sie uns die Antwort bis [Datum], damit eine 
sachgerechte Prüfung innerhalb der Fristen möglich ist.

Freundliche Grüsse
[Organisation, Kontakt]

More on this: Independent hunting supervision: External control instead of self-control (model motion) and Transparent hunting statistics (model motion)

What would need to change

Publication obligation for training weightings: Cantons publish annually how many training hours are allocated to weapon handling, shooting practice, wildlife ecology, animal behavior and animal welfare. Without this data, no independent assessment of hunting education is possible.
Formal notification obligation for all shooting orders: Every decree that orders or approves the shooting of wild animals is formally notified and made publicly accessible, including complete justification, data basis and legal remedy notice. Model motion: Transparent hunting statistics
Animal welfare as mandatory examination subject in hunting education: Animal suffering, behavioral biology and decision-making competence (when a shot is ethically unjustifiable) are included as an independent examination subject in the cantonal hunting exam, with separate passing threshold. Model motion: Ethics as mandatory component of the hunting exam
Independent hunting supervision: Control of hunting practice is carried out by an authority that is not organizationally intertwined with hunting associations or cantonal hunting administrations. Model motion: Independent hunting supervision: External control instead of self-control
Standardized response obligation to transparency requests: Cantons are obligated to respond completely to transparency requests from organizations with standing within a defined timeframe (e.g. 30 days). Non-response is documented as a violation of the duty to provide information and is subject to appeal.
Public hunting register at federal level: The federal government creates a digital, publicly accessible register of all cantonal shooting orders, exceptional permits and regulatory decisions, including legal basis, data foundation and outcome.

Arguments

«Hunting administration is technical and inaccessible to outsiders.» That is the goal of the system, not its characteristic. Administrative law, deadlines and file inspection rights are publicly accessible and clearly regulated in Switzerland. Organizations with standing have the enshrined right to access. Technical complexity is no excuse for non-transparency – it is an argument for why independent support is necessary.

«Hunting education is already strict and comprehensive.» In the Canton of Zurich, the hunting exam registration form precisely lists the examination fee – CHF 250.–. How many hours are devoted to animal protection and animal suffering is not apparent in any public document. Strictness is not the same as transparency. As long as educational priorities are not published, no independent assessment can take place.

«Appeals slow down necessary wildlife management measures.» Suspensive effect and appeals are rights that legislators have deliberately introduced – especially for irreversible interventions. If authorities classify measures as so urgent that they do not want to allow legal protection, that itself is a legal problem. Proportionality and animal welfare are not obstacles to wildlife management. They are its legal prerequisite.

«Organizations abuse procedures for political purposes.» Legal remedies and transparency requests are not manipulation – they are democracy. Those who implement government decisions with public funds must withstand public scrutiny. This applies to every administrative activity. Recreational hunting is no exception.

Quicklinks

Articles on Wild beim Wild:

Related Dossiers:

Our Standard

Recreational hunting does not begin in the forest. It begins at the desk: with regulations, registration deadlines, examination fees and directives that organize the killing of wild animals as administrative routine. Those who want to control this system must intervene before the shooting, not after. This dossier provides the operational tools for this: legal foundations, deadlines, a standardized questionnaire and a template for transparency requests that can be copied.

IG Wild beim Wild documents not only what happens in the forest, but also what is decided in government offices, so that the public can judge whether hunting administration serves animal welfare or merely administers it. This dossier is updated annually when new JSV data, cantonal regulations or court decisions require it.

Call to Action: You have submitted a transparency request to a cantonal hunting administration and received a response or revealing silence? Share both with us: wildbeimwild.com/kontakt

More on the topic of recreational hunting: In our Hunting Dossier we compile fact-checks, analyses and background reports.