Setback for otter hunting in Upper Franconia

The general administrative order authorising the shooting of Eurasian otters was issued on 14 February 2025 by the Government of Upper Franconia in Germany.

It designates areas and the respective maximum numbers of animals that may be killed, for which simplified applications can be submitted.

Against this, the DUH filed a legal challenge in March. The Bayreuth Administrative Court dismissed the application for interim relief on 3 June 2025 as inadmissible, on the grounds that the general order did not constitute a direct shooting permit, but merely a designation of areas and a cap on otter removals.

The DUH lodged an appeal against that decision before the VGH in Munich. The court initially issued an interim holding order stating that, on the basis of the general administrative order, no Eurasian otters may be shot in Upper Franconia under the simplified procedure during hunting by hobby hunters until 30 June, and subsequently confirmed this with its ruling of 30 June 2025 in the expedited proceedings.

The ruling of the Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal is an important victory for the protection of the Eurasian otter in Upper Franconia and sends a clear signal for the necessary strict species protection in Germany. With our application for interim relief, we have successfully halted the planned culling, from which not even juveniles or pregnant females would have been safe. This is an important step towards protecting the severely endangered Eurasian otter. The conflict between fish farming and otter conservation cannot be resolved through culling. The goal must be a constructive dialogue aimed at sustainable solutions for both sides. – Sascha Müller-Kraenner, Federal Executive Director of DUH

Attorney Eric Weiser-Saulin from the law firm Baumann Rechtsanwälte, who conducted the proceedings together with attorney Lisa Marie Hörtzsch at both instances, evaluates the decision as follows:

The Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal thoroughly examined the criticism raised by Deutsche Umwelthilfe and the expert reports that formed the basis of the general administrative order on the Eurasian otter. In doing so, the court followed our argument that neither an adequate data foundation existed for determining areas and maximum extraction numbers for Eurasian otters in Upper Franconia, nor can it be ensured that the conservation status of the strictly protected Eurasian otter will not deteriorate.

In the view of IG Wild beim Wild, hobby hunters require annual medical-psychological fitness assessments modelled on the Dutch example, as well as a binding upper age limit. The largest age group among hobby hunters today is 65+. Within this group, age-related impairments such as declining visual acuity, slowed reaction times, lapses in concentration, and cognitive deficits increase statistically in a marked manner. At the same time, accident analyses show that the number of serious hunting accidents involving injuries and fatalities rises significantly from middle age onwards.

The regular reports of hunting accidents, fatal errors of action, and the misuse of hunting weapons highlight a structural problem. The private ownership and use of lethal firearms for recreational purposes largely evades continuous oversight. From the perspective of IG Wild beim Wild, this is no longer justifiable. A practice that is based on voluntary killing while simultaneously generating considerable risks for humans and animals forfeits its social legitimacy.

Recreational hunting is furthermore rooted in speciesism. Speciesism describes the systematic devaluation of non-human animals solely on the basis of their species membership. It is comparable to racism or sexism and cannot be justified on either cultural or ethical grounds. Tradition does not substitute for moral scrutiny.

Critical scrutiny is essential, particularly in the realm of hobby hunting. Few other fields are so thoroughly shaped by euphemistic narratives, half-truths, and deliberate disinformation. Where violence is normalized, narratives frequently serve as justification. Transparency, verifiable facts, and open public debate are therefore indispensable.