An end to fox hunting – write to your cantonal councillor
Every year around 19,000 red foxes are shot in Switzerland. The official justification: population control, disease control, protection of ground-nesting birds. More than 30 years of wildlife biology research consistently show no sustainable regulatory effect from fox hunting. A study by the Sorbonne (Jiguet et al. 2026) has, for the first time, quantified the economic balance: The hunting costs amount to over 100 million euros annually – almost 64 euros per killed animal. The damage caused: only 8 to 23 million euros. Hobby hunting costs the public up to thirteen times what it supposedly prevents.
The canton of Lucerne is the only canton that systematically records the health status of killed foxes. Of 2,217 killed foxes, only 39 had a disease finding. Over 98 percent of the shot animals were healthy. At the same time, a French study (Comte et al. 2017) shows that intensive hunting increases the prevalence of the fox tapeworm from 44 to 55 percent – because young foxes fill the gaps and carry a higher parasite load. In Luxembourg, the infestation rate fell from around 40 to under 20 percent after the fox hunting ban in 2015.
Most cantons answer petitions on fox hunting without citing a single study. The canton of Zug is the only exception: in 2025 it commissioned an independent study from SWILD. The result (May 2026): fox hunting does not regulate populations sustainably, does not improve disease control and is inferior to non-lethal methods.
You can do something – no matter which canton you live in. Write directly to your cantonal councillor or your National Councillor as a personal email. This is legal, effective and takes you five minutes.
Choose your canton
For the following cantons we have prepared complete contact lists and canton-specific background information:
👉 Canton of Lucerne – 120 cantonal councillors with email addresses; RUEK rejected the petition without any studies
👉 Canton of Glarus – list of members by party; the government rejected the petition without any studies
👉 Canton of Basel-Landschaft – members of the cantonal council with email addresses; the government rejected the petition without any studies
👉 Canton of Zug – the only canton with an independent scientific study (SWILD 2026); first conclusions drawn
👉 Canton of Bern – cross-party motion in the Grand Council (GLP, SP, SVP, Greens, EVP, FDP); the government itself admits that fox hunting is «effectively an end in itself»
In all other cantons, you can use the universal template letter below and obtain the email addresses via your cantonal council's website.
Template letter – usable for all cantons
Copy this text into your email programme, adjust the name, place of residence and salutation, and send it as a personal email. Please do not send it as a mass mailing – only as an individual, personal message.
Subject: Fox hunting – please take action
Dear Ms [Name] / Dear Mr [Name]
As a citizen, I am writing to you directly because the practice of fox hunting in Switzerland concerns me.
Every year, around 19,000 red foxes are shot in Switzerland. The canton of Lucerne is the only one that systematically records the health status of foxes killed: of 2,217 animals killed, only 39 had a pathological finding – over 98 per cent were healthy. No significant contribution to disease control is therefore discernible, because killing almost exclusively healthy animals does not contain any disease.
More than 30 years of wildlife biology research consistently show no sustainable regulatory effect from fox hunting. Compensation effects – higher birth rates, immigration – quickly offset kills (Baker & Harris 2006; Rushton et al. 2006; Kämmerle et al. 2019). In the case of the fox tapeworm, hunting is even counterproductive: a study from the Nancy region (Comte et al. 2017) showed that intensive hunting increased prevalence from 44 to 55 per cent, because young foxes fill the gaps and carry a higher parasite load. In Luxembourg, the infestation rate fell from around 40 to below 20 per cent after the fox hunting ban in 2015. A study by the Sorbonne (Jiguet et al. 2026) has, for the first time, quantified the economic balance: the hunting costs amount to over 100 million euros annually – almost 64 euros per animal killed. The officially reported damage amounts to only 8 to 23 million euros. Hunting costs the public up to thirteen times what it supposedly prevents.
Rabies was not defeated by hunting, but by oral vaccine bait programmes from 1978 onwards. Foxes are also natural protective factors against tick-borne diseases: they regulate mice and rodents, which are regarded as the main reservoirs for ticks transmitting Lyme disease. The Swiss National Park has been hunting-free since 1914 – over a hundred years, without any population explosion or disease problems.
In 2025, the canton of Zug was the only canton to commission an independent study on fox hunting (SWILD, May 2026). The result: fox hunting shows no demonstrable regulatory effect on the population, does not improve disease control and is inferior to non-lethal protective measures. The hunting commission subsequently decided to no longer proactively promote fox hunting. The canton of Geneva has managed without hobby hunting since 1974 – and thus, in effect, also without fox hunting: only state game wardens are permitted to intervene there, with not a single regulatory kill in the past two years.
I ask you to advocate for a scientifically grounded review of fox hunting and to examine whether this practice – with no proven benefit, with considerable animal suffering and at the expense of taxpayers – is still appropriate and proportionate. No federal law obliges the cantons to conduct fox hunting. The canton of Zug has shown that the available scope for action can be put to use.
Kind regards
[Your name]
[Your place of residence]
Important note
Please copy the template letter into your own email program and send it as a personal email. Individual, personal messages are cleaner and politically more effective than mass mailings.
You can find the email addresses of cantonal councillors via the official websites of your cantonal parliament – usually under «Members» or «Council members».
What science says
More than 30 years of wildlife biology research consistently show: intensive fox hunting does not reduce populations sustainably, does not improve disease control and does not effectively protect ground-nesting birds. The canton of Zug had this confirmed by SWILD in 2026. Cantons such as Geneva (since 1974) and countries such as Luxembourg (since 2015) demonstrate that wildlife management works without hobby hunting.
The complete overview of studies: Studies: Impact of hobby hunting on wild animals
📌 SWILD – Kistler C. & Bontadina F. (2026): Scientific foundations on fox hunting. Canton of Zug.
To date the only cantonal commissioned report on fox hunting in Switzerland. No sustainable regulatory effect, no contribution to disease control, non-lethal methods superior.
📌 Jiguet F. et al. (2026): Biological Conservation.
383’299 red foxes killed per year in France – no statistical correlation with damage reduction.
Hunting costs exceed 100 million euros annually – almost 64 euros per killed animal. The officially reported damages: only 8 to 23 million euros. Hunting costs up to thirteen times what it allegedly prevents.
📌 German Animal Welfare Federation (2026): New study – hunting the fox and others is costly and ineffective.
The German Animal Welfare Federation considers the Jiguet study to be groundbreaking and calls for a rethink towards evidence-based wildlife management. Instead of blanket hunting, prevention and deterrence are needed.
📌 Comte S. et al. (2017): Echinococcus multilocularis management by fox culling: An inappropriate paradigm.
Intensive hunting increased the fox tapeworm prevalence from 44 to 55 per cent.
📌 Baker PJ et al. (2002): Effect of British hunting ban on fox numbers. Nature.
During the British hunting ban in 2001, no increase in fox populations.
📌 Brief summaries of scientific literature on the red fox (PDF)
Compilation of key study findings on the population biology, role in disease, and effects of hunting on the red fox.
What has happened so far in the cantons
📌 Fox hunting in Lucerne: 98 per cent of killed animals healthy
The canton's own statistics refute the main justification for fox hunting.
📌 Fox hunting: Bern government refuses to examine the evidence
The Bern cantonal government rejects a cross-party motion.
📌 Stop fox hunting – write to the Bern Grand Council
Cross-party motion in the Grand Council; the cantonal government concedes that fox hunting is «leffectively an end in itself». Decision expected in the autumn session 2026.
📌 Glarus rejects petition on fox hunting without examining the evidence
Three paragraphs, not a single study, petition rejected.
📌 Canton of Basel-Landschaft responds to fox hunting petition – without a single scientific source
Four pages of administrative jargon, not a single study cited.
📌 After Bern and Lucerne: Basel questions fox hunting
In the Basel Grand Council, a council member calls for a scientific review.
📌 Lucerne and the red fox: When politics ignores the facts
The RUEK waves the petition through – Luxembourg, Geneva and Ticino have long shown the opposite.
📌 Killed by the million – for nothing: New study exposes hunters' tales
Study in «Biological Conservation»: Killings reduce neither populations nor damage.
📌 Hobby hunters as false wildlife experts
How Pascal Wolf submitted petitions in over 12 cantons – and what the authorities made of them.