Referendum against Hunting Act confirmed: 70’000 signatures
Within a short period of time, 70'000 signatures were collected against the revision of the Hunting and Protection Act,
The referendum against the thoroughly flawed Hunting Act is going ahead and will be submitted to the Federal Chancellery on 9 January 2020. The decision now rests with the electorate.
Since 8 October, environmental and animal welfare organisations have collected more than 70’000 signatures. The required threshold was 50’000 within 100 days. It is therefore clear that the referendum will succeed. The collection deadline runs until 16 January.
Should the vote result in a No, the newly constituted Parliament could address the opportunities for species protection that were missed in the current revision of the Hunting Act, said Pro Natura Central Secretary Urs Leugger-Eggimann, President of the referendum support association, as quoted in the press release.
Wolf culling without prior protective measures
The protection of wolves and other species is to be weakened in Switzerland under the revised Hunting Act, according to the parliamentary majority. The relaxation of protections is set to go even further than the Federal Council had proposed.
In future, authorities would be permitted to authorise population regulation without wolves having caused any damage and without any protective measures first having to be taken. Wolves would not even be safe in hunting exclusion zones, now renamed wildlife protection areas.
One-sided interests instead of species protection
In a time of biodiversity loss and species extinction, this relaxation serves one-sided interest groups and weakens the protection of endangered animal species rather than strengthening it.
The support association behind the referendum against the flawed Hunting Act sees good prospects ahead of the vote. It cites surveys showing that a clear majority opposes preventive culls.
Dossier: Wolf in Switzerland: facts, politics and the limits of hunting
More on the subject of recreational hunting: In our dossiers on recreational hunting gather fact-checks, analyses and background reports. The scientific evidence is presented in the overview Studies on the Effects of Recreational Hunting.
The position of IG Wild beim Wild: IG Wild beim Wild rejects recreational hunting. Our model is the canton of Geneva, which has managed without recreational hunting since 1974: without hunting seasons, without hunting dogs, without driven hunts, without high seats, without the animal cruelty and crime that go hand in hand with hunting season elsewhere. What has worked there for over fifty years disproves every position paper by JagdSchweiz. An association that bases its policy on claims it refutes in its own documents is not a professional organisation, but a factory for misinformation.
