Cantonal popular initiative – Canton Glarus

«For professional wildlife protection»

Memorial petition to the Landsgemeinde of Canton Glarus

Based on Art. 56 ff. of the Constitution of Canton Glarus of May 1, 1988 and on the Law on Political Rights

Submitted by [Name], [Residence GL], [Date]

Note: Canton Glarus is a Landsgemeinde canton. At the Landsgemeinde, all citizens entitled to vote can directly vote on constitutional and legislative proposals. A memorial petition can be submitted by any individual citizen entitled to vote. No signatures are required.

Petition

The Landsgemeinde of Canton Glarus decides the following amendment to the Constitution of Canton Glarus of May 1, 1988:

Art. [new] Professional wildlife protection

1 The practice of hunting by private individuals (licensed hunting, recreational hunting) is prohibited throughout the entire territory of Canton Glarus.

2 The protection, care and, where necessary, regulation of wild animals is the exclusive responsibility of professionally trained wildlife managers in the service of the canton.

3 The culling of wild animals is only permissible as a last resort when all other suitable measures for damage prevention or hazard control have been exhausted or are insufficient. It requires prior approval from the wildlife commission.

4 The canton establishes an independent wildlife commission composed of representatives from animal and nature protection organizations, science, and the relevant authorities. The commission supervises wildlife management and decides on regulation measures.

5 The canton promotes natural regulation of wildlife populations, habitat connectivity, and coexistence between humans and wildlife.

6 The details are regulated by law.

Art. [new] Protection of endangered and protected wildlife species

1 The canton refrains from submitting applications for preventive population regulation of protected wildlife species under the Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds, particularly for wolves, lynx, bears, beavers, otters, golden jackals, golden eagles, mergansers, and other species protected under federal law.

2 It focuses on promoting coexistence between humans and wildlife, passive damage prevention, ecological enhancement of habitats, and scientific monitoring of wildlife presence.

3 Measures against individual wild animals that pose an immediate and significant threat to humans remain reserved. They must be limited to the minimum and carried out by the canton's competent authority.

4 The canton actively advocates for the protection and conservation of endangered wildlife species within the framework of intercantonal cooperation and vis-à-vis the federal government.

Transitional provision

1 The government council shall issue the necessary implementing regulations within two years of the adoption of this constitutional amendment.

2 Existing hunting licenses expire upon the entry into force of the implementing regulations. Patent fees already paid for the current hunting season will be refunded proportionally.

3 The government council ensures continuity of wildlife management during the transition period.

Explanations

1. Background

In the canton of Glarus, a small alpine canton with around 40,000 inhabitants across 685 km² of territory, today's hobby hunting is a system that serves neither species protection nor contemporary wildlife management. It is the practice of bloody recreational entertainment at the expense of sentient beings, legitimized by outdated narratives that do not withstand scientific scrutiny. The claim that ecological balance would collapse without hobby hunting has been empirically refuted by the Geneva model for over 50 years (see the comprehensive dossier on the Geneva hunting ban on wildbeimwild.com).

Hobby hunting in Glarus is organized as a patent hunt. Private individuals obtain a cantonal license and hunt without fixed territory responsibility (see the psychology of hobby hunting in Canton Glarus as well as the critical analysis of hunting education on wildbeimwild.com).

The wolf is present in Glarus territory. The lynx is native to the canton. The golden eagle breeds in the Glarus Alps. The beaver may be shot upon cantonal application since February 2025. The Klöntal and Sernftal valleys are habitats of regional significance. The UNESCO World Heritage site Tectonic Arena Sardona is partially located in Canton Glarus (see the analysis of hunting policy on wildbeimwild.com and the wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

Canton Glarus has the opportunity to set a clear signal here. The Landsgemeinde provides the ideal democratic instrument for this: A single person can propose the motion, and the entire voting population decides directly.

2. The model: Canton Geneva

On May 19, 1974, around two-thirds of voters in Canton Geneva voted for the abolition of militia hobby hunting. The experiences are unambiguous:

– Biodiversity has markedly increased. The number of overwintering waterfowl has multiplied from a few hundred to around 30,000. Geneva today hosts the largest brown hare population and one of the last partridge populations in Switzerland.

– The roe deer population has stabilized at a healthy level, with an annual special cull by professional game wardens of only 20 to 36 animals.

– In 2005, 90 percent of Geneva voters spoke out in favor of maintaining the ban. In 2009, a motion for reintroduction was rejected by 70 to 7 votes.

– Total costs amount to around 1.2 million francs annually, roughly 2.40 francs per inhabitant per year.

Geneva's fauna inspector Gottlieb Dandliker describes the recreational hunting ban as the most cost-effective alternative. Detailed analysis in the Dossier «Geneva and the Hunting Ban» on wildbeimwild.com. The efficiency of the Geneva model is evident in direct comparison: A professional game warden in Geneva needs an average of 8 hours and a maximum of 2 cartridges for a sanitary cull of a wild boar. A hobby hunter in the Canton of Zurich needs 60 to 80 hours and up to 15 cartridges for the same task. The field hare density in Geneva is 17.7 animals per 100 hectares (highest in Switzerland), in the Canton of Zurich only 1.0 per 100 hectares (cf. Fact Check Zurich Government Council).

3. The Concept: Professional Game Management Instead of Recreational Hunting

The memorial motion replaces recreational hunting with professional wildlife management according to the game warden model:

Professional competence instead of recreational entertainment. Professional wildlife managers act on a scientific basis (cf. the critical analysis of hunting education).

Last resort principle. A cull is only permissible when all non-lethal measures have been exhausted.

Democratic control through a wildlife commission.

Natural self-regulation as guiding principle. Proven by Geneva, National Parks and studies.

4. Why Glarus?

Landsgemeinde: Most direct democracy in Switzerland. A single eligible voter can submit a memorial motion. No signatures required. The lowest hurdle in all of Switzerland.

UNESCO World Heritage Site Tectonic Arena Sardona. Professional wildlife management strengthens the protection of this unique area.

Glarus Alps: Protection forests and wildlife. Wolf, lynx, golden eagle, ibex, chamois. Klöntal and Sernftal as valuable habitats (cf. wildbeimwild.com on protected areas and wolf policy).

Similar size to Geneva. 685 km² vs. 282 km². More sparsely populated, fewer conflict zones (cf. wildbeimwild.com on wildlife in settlement areas).

Patent hunting = simple system change. No lease contracts, no municipal compensation.

5. On the Motion Text

The six paragraphs of the first article and the four paragraphs of the second article correspond exactly to the Geneva model and the patent hunting variant of the entire initiative series. Compliant with federal law according to Art. 3 Para. 1 JSG. Geneva unchallenged since 1974. The wildlife commission prevents the government council from independently approving exceptions (cf. wildbeimwild.com/jagd-fakten).

6. On the Second Article: Protection of Endangered and Protected Wildlife Species

Wolf, lynx, golden eagle present in the canton. The 'in particular' formulation also protects future returnees (cf. the wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

7. Cost Implications

In Geneva (282 km², 500,000 inhabitants): 1.2 million francs annually. For Glarus (685 km², 40,000 inhabitants) the following deliberately conservative projection results, generously accounting for additional alpine costs:

Personnel costs: 360,000 to 700,000 francs. Required are 3 to 5 full-time positions. Glarus is a topographically demanding alpine canton with the UNESCO World Heritage Site Tectonic Arena Sardona, the Klöntal and the Sernftal. The higher number of positions accounts for red deer transition management.

Material costs: 70,000 to 130,000 francs. Damage compensation: 35,000 to 90,000 francs.

Livestock protection start-up investment: 300,000 to 500,000 francs. One-time investment in livestock protection infrastructure for the Glarus Alps and the Sernftal over three to five years.

Lost revenue

With the abolition of recreational hunting, patent fees of an estimated 200,000 to 350,000 francs annually would be eliminated. However, this is offset by the never-accounted external costs of militia hunting – wildlife accidents, hunting-related browsing damage in protection forests, administrative overhead, police and court interventions – which amount to several times these revenues. In the canton of Geneva, these revenues have been eliminated since 1974 – without financial problems: Before the hunting ban, over 400 hobby hunters were active; today, three full-time positions do the same work better. Sanitary and therapeutic culling by professional wildlife wardens is not the same as regulatory hunting based on hunters' folklore or misunderstood 'nature experience' of hobby hunters. A full cost accounting shows: Militia hunting costs taxpayers significantly more than it generates (cf. 'What recreational hunting really costs Switzerland' on wildbeimwild.com).

Hobby hunters in politics vote against nature conservation. The recreational hunting lobby systematically opposes biodiversity and species protection concerns. In 2024, it opposed the biodiversity initiative (63 percent No). In 2020, the hunting law it helped shape failed at the ballot box (51.9 percent No). In 2016, the Ticino hunters' association torpedoed the Parc Adula National Park. In the legislative period 2015 to 2019, hobby hunters in parliament predominantly voted against environmental concerns. Anyone claiming hobby hunters are conservationists ignores their voting behavior (cf. Ticino Hunters' Association: 30 Years of Nonsense and Cost Dossier).

Total gross costs: 465,000 to 920,000 francs. After savings (no patent administration, hunting supervision, shooting planning; one pointlessly killed wolf costs 35,000 francs): Net additional costs 250,000 to 600,000 francs annually. Red deer are present in the Glarus Alps. Compensatory reproduction through hunting pressure also affects Glarus. After the system change, targeted transition management is needed in the first three to five years. For a canton with a budget of around 434 million francs (2024 state accounts, FFA), this is modest: less than 0.15 percent (cf. Hunting Myths Fact-Check).

8. Compatibility with superior law

Compliant with federal law (Art. 3 Para. 1 JSG, three equivalent hunting systems, Geneva since 1974). Art. 7a JSG enables but does not mandate preventive regulation. Unity of subject matter maintained.

9. Anticipating foreseeable objections

'Glarus is too small'

The facts: Geneva has been doing it for 50 years on 282 km². Glarus has 685 km² and is less densely populated. 250,000 to 600,000 francs in absolute terms (cf. the Psychology of recreational hunting in canton Glarus).

Communicative short formula: 'Geneva has been doing it for 50 years on 282 km². Glarus has 685 km².'

'The wolf endangers livestock'

Communicative short formula: 'Professional herd protection protects herds. Hobby hunters do not protect them.'

'The costs are too high'

Communicative short formula: '250,000 to 600,000 francs. 0.1 to 0.2 percent of the cantonal budget.'

10. Summary

This memorial motion gives the Glarus Landsgemeinde the opportunity to advocate for modern, evidence-based wildlife management. The Landsgemeinde is the ideal democratic instrument: A single person submits the motion, the voting population decides directly. Switzerland's lowest democratic hurdle for the greatest possible change.

Applicant: [Name], [Address], [Municipality GL]

(Any person eligible to vote in canton Glarus may submit a memorial motion.)

Appendix: Further documentation

Geneva model in detail: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/genf-und-das-jagdverbot

Scientific studies: wildbeimwild.com/studien

Hunting in Switzerland: wildbeimwild.com/jagd-in-der-schweiz

Psychology of recreational hunting in canton Glarus: wildbeimwild.com – Psychology of recreational hunting in canton GL

Wolf dossier: wildbeimwild.com/category/wolf

Predators: wildbeimwild.com/category/raubtiere

National Parks: wildbeimwild.com/category/nationalpark

Hunting Myths: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/jagdmythen

Canton Basel-Stadt Ballot Initiative: Basel-Stadt Template Text

Procedural Note

A memorial application can be submitted by any individual person entitled to vote in Canton Glarus. The application must be submitted to the Council Chancellery no later than the deadline published in the official gazette. The application will be published in the Memorial. The Government Council will issue a statement. At the next ordinary Landsgemeinde (always on the first Sunday in May), the application will be voted on. The applicant has the right to personally justify the application.

Strategic Briefing for Activists

Memorial Application «For Professional Wildlife Protection» – Canton Glarus Internal Working Document – Status March 2026

Summary

Glarus is a Landsgemeinde canton. A single person can submit the memorial application. No signatures required. The lowest hurdle in the series. 685 km², 40,000 inhabitants. UNESCO World Heritage Sardona Tectonic Arena. 150,000–350,000 francs net additional costs.

1. Special Feature: Landsgemeinde Procedure

No signatures. A memorial application can be submitted by a single eligible voter.

Personal justification. The applicant justifies the application personally at the Landsgemeinde (3–5 minutes).

Direct vote. The voting population decides by show of hands.

Observe deadline. The application must be submitted to the Council Chancellery in time.

2. Opposition Analysis

«Glarus is too small»: «Geneva has been doing it for 50 years on 282 km². Glarus has 685 km².»

«The wolf endangers livestock»: «Professional herd protection protects the herds. Hobby hunters don't protect them.»

«The costs are too high»: «250,000 to 600,000 francs. 0.1 to 0.2 percent of the cantonal budget.»

3. Key Messages

«Geneva has been leading the way for 50 years.» 90 percent approval.

«Professional instead of hobby.» Specialists instead of recreational shooters.

«The Landsgemeinde decides directly.» No detour through party politics.

4. Timeline

Phase	Content	Timeframe
Prepare application	Consult lawyer; finalize text	Months 1–3
Submission	Council Chancellery, before deadline	According to official gazette
Media work	Südostschweiz Glarus, Glarner Nachrichten	After submission
Support network	SP, Greens; Pro Natura GL; BirdLife; local associations	Ongoing
Landsgemeinde speech	3–5 min., clear, fact-based, personal	Before Landsgemeinde
Landsgemeinde	1st Sunday in May; justify application; show of hands	Landsgemeinde day

5. Tips for Landsgemeinde Speech

Brief and clear. 3 to 5 minutes. Begin personally. Geneva as proof. «Geneva has been doing it for 50 years. 90 percent want to keep it.» Concrete costs. «250,000 to 600,000 francs.» End with appeal. «Vote for professional wildlife protection. For our animals. For our Glarnerland.»

6. Sources

This document is a template text by IG Wild beim Wild. It can be freely used by activists, organizations or applicants and adapted to the conditions in Canton Glarus.

Fact-check: The Claims of the Hobby Hunting Lobby

The brochure «Hunting in Switzerland protects and benefits» by JagdSchweiz reads like an advertising leaflet – but the central claims do not withstand fact-checking. Ten narratives under scrutiny, from «state responsibility» via «biodiversity» to «80% approval»: Dossier: Fact-check JagdSchweiz Brochure →