Wind power in the canton of Bern: Green Councillor Trede fails with ordinance against municipal consultation rights

It could hardly have been closer: by 76 votes to 75, with one abstention, the Grand Council of the canton of Bern passed a motion on 10 September 2026 that aims to legally guarantee host municipalities' consultation rights on large wind energy projects.

With this, the cantonal parliament narrowly rejected the ordinance route favoured by its own government – a wafer-thin margin, but clear enough to represent a political setback.

The political constellation is remarkable. It was the Green Director of Justice, Aline Trede, whose directorate sought to strip municipalities of their right of consent via an ordinance. Of all people, a representative of the very party that champions civic proximity and grassroots democracy wanted to curtail municipal co-determination not through a referendum-capable legislative amendment, but by means of an urgent ordinance.

The federal legal background

The trigger is the federal acceleration decree for renewable energy, which has been in force since 1 April 2026. For wind and solar installations of national interest, the host canton now conducts a consolidated planning approval procedure, which also bundles together previously municipal approvals. In principle, the consent of the host municipality remains a requirement, but federal law allows cantons to enact deviating regulations. It is precisely this cantonal-law design that lies at the heart of the Bern conflict.

The directorate under Councillor Trede sought to exploit this leeway to the utmost in an implementing ordinance: under the draft, the consent of the host municipality would no longer have been required for such projects. Particularly striking is the fact that the draft was not submitted to an ordinary public consultation, but merely to a limited consultation – and this in the middle of the summer holidays. The Association of Bernese Municipalities described the ordinance route as highly problematic from a legal standpoint. VBG president Daniel Bichsel spoke of constitutional concerns. Critics consider the approach questionable both constitutionally and legally.

The popular vote that was set to become meaningless

The example of Kirchlindach shows just how far-reaching the issue is. Above the municipality, Windenergie Schweiz is planning a wind farm with five turbines around 200 metres high. The population had taken precautionary action: in June 2026, voters approved an amendment to the municipal regulations by 1,261 votes to 322, which enshrines a municipal ballot decision on any potential project. It was precisely this democratic instrument that risked becoming meaningless as a result of the cantonal ordinance. The municipal council of Kirchlindach explicitly criticised the draft ordinance.

Motion passed, matter not yet decided

The motion submitted by SVP Grand Councillor Nils Fiechter demands that municipalities' right to consultation be regulated not merely at the ordinance level, but in a law. The core of the criticism: such a restriction may not occur without the consent of the Grand Council, but requires a referendum-capable legislative amendment. The opposing side argued that these were projects of national interest.

For context: the passing of the motion does not yet settle the matter definitively. A motion is a binding parliamentary mandate to the government, not an immediately applicable law. The Cantonal Council must now draft a bill that will go through the parliamentary process and may be subject to a referendum. The Grand Council will then decide again whether host municipalities retain an explicit right of consent for such projects. However, following today's decision, the political pressure to abandon the planned ordinance route is considerable.

Why this matters for wildlife protection

For us, this episode is more than a lesson in democratic policy. When the local population no longer has a say, nature loses one of its most effective protective bodies. It is often the host municipalities that contribute local knowledge about forests, wildlife corridors, migration routes, and breeding and retreat areas. Early and binding consultation can help identify or rule out sites with high conflict risks more precisely.

Wind energy is not without consequences for wildlife. Birds in particular, along with bats, are endangered by collisions with the rotors. In bats, alongside direct collision, barotrauma is also discussed as a mechanism – an internal injury caused by pressure changes at the rotor blades. An overview in Nature Reviews Biodiversity cites estimates suggesting that wind turbines in countries with high wind power density alone could kill around one million bats annually; for Germany more than 200,000, and for the USA more than 500,000 dead bats per year are estimated. According to the IG Wald ohne Windturbinen, an ornithologist documented 86 killed birds within two days at the Gotthard wind farm in June 2022. Wind turbines in mountainous areas pose particular risks to birds of prey and migratory birds, which use thermal updrafts and, in doing so, enter the danger zone of the rotors. What matters here is the choice of location, the season, the weather, the species present, and effective shutdown periods.

There is also the question of location: Switzerland is among the weakest-wind regions in Europe. Wind turbines generate electricity depending on weather conditions, and their annual output depends heavily on wind availability, location and turbine height. From critics' perspective, many of the up to 210-metre-high Alpine installations show a mismatch between yield, public subsidy, and the impact on landscape and habitats. For wildlife protection, it is therefore not enough to label an installation as “renewable” across the board. Every installation must be assessed on whether its electricity yield justifies the impact on landscape and habitats, especially where sensitive species, migration routes or largely undivided habitats are affected.

The narrow Bernese decision thus sends a dual signal: for municipal autonomy, and for the protection of those wild animals that cannot defend themselves against rotor blades. It also aligns with the aims of the Gemeindeschutz Initiative, which seeks to guarantee voters the final say on wind power projects in all cantons.