Poaching and hunting-related crime in Switzerland: Systematic impunity and the limits of self-regulation

Poaching is officially considered a marginal problem in Switzerland. Cantonal hunting inspectorates speak of "a few isolated cases," hunting associations emphasize the law-abiding nature of their members, and national statistics simply do not exist. This dossier shows why this portrayal does not hold up to scrutiny: Scientific studies, court proceedings, and investigative research document a structural problem that extends far beyond classic poaching and calls into question the credibility of the entire recreational hunting system.

The dossier is based on data from the KORA Foundation, court rulings, cantonal hunting statistics, research by Pro Natura, and media reports. It documents forms of hunting-related crime, highlights structural weaknesses in monitoring and prosecution, and shows why predators such as lynx and wolf are particularly affected. Those wishing to delve deeper will find the introduction to hunting criticism a foundation for a broader discussion.

What awaits you here

How big is the problem? Why there are no national statistics and what the few available figures reveal.
Forms of hunting crime: From snares and illegal shootings to the poisoning of protected species.
Who controls recreational hunting? Why game wardens and gamekeepers are structurally overwhelmed or biased.
Criminal prosecution: Why proceedings are discontinued and what penalties are threatened.
Focus on cantons: Valais, Schwyz and Graubünden as hotspots.
Predators as the main victims: Why lynx, wolf and birds of prey are systematically persecuted.
The Geneva model as a counter-example: Professional game wardens instead of self-control.
What needs to change: Concrete political demands.
Argumentation: Answers to the most common counterarguments.

How big is the problem?

Switzerland does not keep national statistics on poaching. This is not a technical shortcoming, but a structural failure. While Germany records cases of poaching in its crime statistics every year (1,080 cases in 2020), there is no systematic data collection in Switzerland, neither at the federal nor the cantonal level. As investigations by the animal magazine "Tierwelt" and SRF have shown, the cantonal hunting inspectorates simply do not have the figures. Or they refuse to release them.

The few available data points nevertheless paint a picture: The Graubünden hunting inspector estimated 10 to 20 cases per year in the canton of Graubünden alone. The Valais hunting office registers 5 to 10 cases annually. The Aargau public prosecutor's office reported a total of 31 convictions for misdemeanors and 41 for violations of the hunting law for the period 2005 to 2015. The canton of Bern listed a total of 42 offenses against the hunting law for 2021. The Zurich cantonal police reported eleven offenses between 2010 and 2016, but a perpetrator could only be identified in one single case.

These figures are minimum estimates. Heinrich Haller, former director of the Swiss National Park, documented several hundred confirmed cases of poaching in the Engadine, the Val Müstair, and neighboring areas since 1910. Within the National Park itself, at least 77 poached animals have been recorded since 1910: 34 chamois, 28 red deer, 9 ibex, 3 roe deer, and 3 golden eagles.

Graubünden public prosecutor Claudio Riedi explained the missing figures by saying that poaching cases are often grouped together with other offenses and therefore don't appear as poaching in the statistics. What is meant as an explanation actually describes the problem: a crime that doesn't exist statistically cannot be addressed politically.

Forms of hunting crime

Hunting-related crime in Switzerland is more diverse than the classic image of the nighttime poacher. Documented forms include:

Illegal killing of game species: Hobby hunters who shoot outside the hunting season, without a permit, in other people's hunting grounds, or exceeding their allocated quota. In the Prättigau region, the Graubünden cantonal police solved ten cases in 2021 in which a local hobby hunter had regularly killed chamois and roe deer bucks, as well as non-game red deer, outside the hunting season since 2014.

Targeted killing of protected species: The killing of lynx, wolf, golden eagle, or birds of prey is not a trivial offense, but a crime that is prosecuted ex officio (Art. 17 JSG). Nevertheless, KORA data, media reports, and court rulings document numerous cases. Since 1999, at least 13 wolves have been proven to have been poached in Switzerland; experts believe the actual number is considerably higher. According to WWF Switzerland, illegal shooting is the second most frequent cause of death for lynx.

Snares and poisoning: In 2016, the research team led by Prof. Raphaël Arlettaz (University of Bern) discovered a system of 17 lynx traps in the Valais Pre-Alps, three of which were still active, strategically placed along the only migration corridor into Valais. In the canton of Fribourg, Roger Schuwey, a member of the cantonal parliament and amateur hunter, was convicted after laying out poisoned bait.

Mistaken identities and negligence: The "black list" of documented cases includes a hobby hunter who shot a cat because he mistook it for a fox, another who killed an Icelandic pony instead of a wild boar, and hobby hunters who killed four deer in a nature reserve in Bilten. The Swiss Animal Protection Association (STS) concluded in a study that hobby hunters are among the worst shots.

Organized poaching: In the canton of Jura, four amateur hunters, including an assistant game warden, poached a total of 138 deer, 36 hares, 12 wild boar, and 11 chamois between 2002 and 2006. In the Val Poschiavo, three men were convicted in 2021 for illegally killing three deer and a protected common buzzard within a single year.

More information: The blacklist of hunting in Switzerland and dossier on hunting accidents in Switzerland

Who controls the hobby hunting community?

The control of recreational hunting in Switzerland is structurally flawed. In most cantons, it is the hunting authorities themselves—government agencies institutionally intertwined with recreational hunters—that are responsible for prosecuting violations, or rather, for not prosecuting them. Game wardens, who conduct field checks, are understaffed: in many cantons, there are only a few game wardens for hundreds of recreational hunters.

Interconnections between game wardens and recreational hunters are not the exception, but the rule. In the canton of Jura, one of the convicted poachers was an assistant game warden. In Graubünden, a man convicted of poaching was also a police officer in the neighboring village. In Valais, RTS investigations quoted an anonymous employee of the cantonal hunting office as saying that the office's motto used to be that a "good lynx" was "a dead lynx." The same employee admitted to having shot a lynx himself.

Nine cantons refused to release data on mistakenly culled animals to the Swiss Animal Protection Association (STS), despite being invoked in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. This refusal is not a sign of transparency, but rather of a system that prioritizes self-regulation over public accountability.

More on this topic: Dossier: Hobby hunter lobby in Switzerland and arguments for professional game wardens

Criminal prosecution: Why cases are dropped

The Swiss Hunting Law (JSG) distinguishes between offenses (Art. 17: imprisonment for up to three years or a fine) and infractions (Art. 18: fine of up to 20,000 Swiss francs). In practice, however, penalties regularly fall at the lower end of the scale. The amateur hunter who shot a golden eagle in Seewis in 1976 paid a fine of 250 Swiss francs. A Valais resident without a hunting or firearms license, who repeatedly shot at deer from his car and filmed his actions, received a twelve-month prison sentence and an 800-franc fine from the Entremont District Court—one of the harshest sentences in recent years.

The main problems with prosecution are: poaching takes place in remote areas, witnesses are scarce, evidence is weak, and dead animals are often not found or examined. In Valais, investigations following reports from hikers about found traps went nowhere for years because the police could no longer locate the traps during subsequent checks. Only research by the University of Bern, which secured DNA traces on the snares, led to a conviction.

Another problem is the statute of limitations. Minor offenses expire after three years, while more serious offenses expire after seven to ten years. Given the difficulty of proving these offenses, these time limits are often insufficient. Furthermore, in many cantons, a convicted recreational hunter does not automatically lose their hunting license. The regulations regarding license revocation vary from canton to canton and are often ineffective.

Cantons in focus

Wallis: Systemic turning a blind eye

The canton of Valais is the best-documented hotspot for hunting-related crime in Switzerland. Of the 13 wolves proven to have been poached since 1999, seven were found in Valais. A 2020 study by Professor Raphaël Arlettaz (University of Bern) showed that the strikingly low lynx population in Valais can only be explained by poaching. His team found 17 snares along the only lynx migration corridor. DNA from the snares led investigators to a hobby hunter who had already been photographed next to two dead lynx in 1995, but was acquitted at the time.

Arlettaz spoke of a "systemic problem" in the Valais government offices and a "culture of silence." Former Valais government president Jean-René Tornay had publicly used the formula "see, shoot, shovel, be silent," a phrase that became the subject of a criminal complaint.

More on this topic: All articles in the category Crime and Hunting

Schwyz: Bounties, poaching and local loyalty

The canton of Schwyz has been described in an analysis as an "Eldorado for hunting crimes." Documented cases include poaching with snares near Pfäffikon, the use of prohibited hunting methods such as wire snares, and a bounty system in which compensation for livestock killed by wolves effectively acts as rewards for wolves. The prosecution rate for hunting offenses is low, and the connections between recreational hunters, hunting authorities, and local politicians are close.

More on this topic: Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Schwyz

Graubünden: Unreported cases and border region

Graubünden is the canton with the most culls and an estimated 10 to 20 unreported cases of poaching per year. Its proximity to Italy and Austria facilitates cross-border poaching. In 2021, a poached wolf was found in Val Poschiavo, and in the Prättigau region, police uncovered a poaching spree that had been going on for years. The public prosecutor's office reports 2 to 3 cases per year that go to trial, suggesting a high number of unreported cases.

Predators as the main victims

Predators such as lynx, wolf, and birds of prey are disproportionately affected by poaching, not because they are randomly targeted, but because they are deliberately eliminated. The motivation differs fundamentally from traditional poaching: it is not about the individual animal killed, but about eliminating a competitor that gets in the way of recreational hunting or small-scale livestock farming. In a documentary, Pro Natura spoke of a "second extermination" of the lynx in Switzerland.

The KORA Foundation confirms: The most frequent known cause of death for wolves in Switzerland is authorized culling, followed by traffic accidents and illegal killings. According to the WWF, illegal killing is the second most frequent cause of death for lynx. Particularly alarming: Researchers from the KORA Foundation documented several cases of "silenced transmitters" in tagged lynx, which are highly likely attributable to illegal killings. Without radio telemetry, many of these cases would never have been discovered.

Birds of prey are also affected. In the Swiss National Park, three golden eagles have been documented as poachers' prey since 1910. Cases of poisoning, in which birds of prey were killed via poisoned bait, are known from several cantons. The Sempach Bird Observatory has been warning for years that the number of unreported cases of persecution of birds of prey is high.

More on this topic: Dossier: The wolf in Europe and The importance of the lynx for the preservation of biodiversity

The Geneva model as a counter-example

The Canton of Geneva has demonstrated since 1974 that professional wildlife management can function without recreational hunting. The state-run environmental guards are trained professionals with a clear mandate and public accountability. There is no overlap between those in charge and those being inspected, no hunting associations tasked with supervising their own members, and no recreational hunters working as assistant game wardens.

Geneva is relevant to the issue of hunting-related crime because its model eliminates the structural conflict of interest: whoever holds the monopoly on firearms in the forest must be trained, monitored, and independent. This is not the case in the patent hunting system of most Swiss cantons.

More on this topic: Abolishing recreational hunting: The Geneva model and dossier: Hunting ban in Switzerland

What would need to change

National poaching statistics: The federal government must introduce a uniform, publicly accessible statistic on hunting offenses. Without a data basis, there can be no evidence-based policy.
Independent game management: The control of recreational hunting must not be in the hands of bodies that are institutionally intertwined with the recreational hunting community. Professional, independent game wardens based on the Geneva model are the solution.
Automatic patent revocation: If convicted of hunting offenses, the hunting patent must be revoked, uniformly across the canton and without any discretion on the part of the hunting authority.
DNA database for wild animals: Establishment of a forensic DNA database for poached predators, analogous to the prosecution of other crimes.
Whistleblower protection: Anonymous reporting systems for suspected poaching that do not go through the hunting administration, but directly to the public prosecutor's office.
Higher penalties and longer statutes of limitations: Current fines are not a deterrent. For protected species, the statute of limitations should be extended and the maximum penalties increased.

Argumentation

"Poaching is a marginal phenomenon; there are only a few isolated cases."

This claim cannot be substantiated because there are no national statistics. The limited cantonal data available shows double-digit case numbers per canton per year. According to experts such as Heinrich Haller, Professor Arlettaz, and the WWF, the number of unreported cases is considerably higher. For lynx, illegal shooting is the second most frequent cause of death. To speak of "isolated incidents" in light of this data is disingenuous.

"The hobby hunting community regulates itself and takes action against black sheep."

The documented cases show the opposite. According to independent research, a culture of turning a blind eye prevailed in Valais. In the canton of Jura, an assistant game warden was himself involved in organized poaching. In Graubünden, a poacher was also a police officer. Self-regulation doesn't work when those doing the checking and those being checked belong to the same social circle.

"Predators are not being specifically targeted; these are tragic cases of mistaken identity."

Professor Arlettaz's study documents a system of 17 strategically placed snares along the only lynx migration corridor into Valais. This is not a case of mistaken identity, but planned elimination. Pro Natura spoke of a looming "second extinction" of the lynx. The KORA data on "silenced transmitters" in tagged lynx reinforce the suspicion of systematic persecution.

"The penalties are appropriate; the hunting law is sufficient."

A 250 Swiss franc fine for poaching a golden eagle. The statute of limitations for violations is three years. There is no automatic revocation of the hunting license. Current practice shows that the penalty has no deterrent effect. Those who poach, in the worst case, face a fine lower than a speeding ticket on the motorway.

"Poaching also occurs in the canton of Geneva, so the hunting ban is useless."

No one claims that a hunting ban completely prevents poaching. What Geneva shows is that a system without structural conflicts of interest can combat poaching more effectively. Professional game wardens have no personal incentive to eliminate predators. They monitor and are monitored, independent of hunting associations and local recreational hunting policies.

Quick links

Related articles and dossiers on wildbeimwild.com:

Sources: KORA Foundation (loss data for wolves and lynxes), WWF Switzerland (position on hunting and trophy hunting), Pro Natura (documentary "Who kills the lynx?"), Prof. Raphaël Arlettaz, University of Bern (study on lynx poaching in Valais, 2020), Heinrich Haller (poaching in the National Park and Engadine), Tierwelt (research "Urgently needed: figures on poaching", 2016), SRF ("Poaching in Switzerland: The allure of illegal trophy hunting", 2021), Swiss Animal Protection STS (investigation of misfires), Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds (JSG, Art. 17 and 18), cantonal hunting statistics (AG, BE, VS, GR, ZH).