Wolf shooting in Staldenried: Federal government sues Valais, Darbellay keeps ranting

On 3 May 2026, a wolf was shot in the municipality of Staldenried.

The Valais State Council had authorized the shooting after the animal was alleged to have killed seven farm animals within a few weeks. The cantonal interpretation: it was a lone wolf with no pack affiliation, a matter falling under cantonal jurisdiction.

The Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) sees things differently. From the federal perspective, the animal killed was a parent of the Nanztal pack. That would make the legal situation crystal clear: decisions on pack animals fall exclusively to the federal government, and shootings are only permissible between June and January. The FOEN has therefore filed a formal complaint with the Valais State Council and is seeking to have the shooting retroactively declared unlawful.

Darbellay's reflex: “Over-bureaucratic”

Instead of addressing the legal question, Christophe Darbellay responds in the “Walliser Bote” with his usual tone: “The FOEN is acting over-bureaucratically, but we make decisions on the ground.” The statement is more than just a rhetorical jab. It is a programmatic declaration against the rule of law. When a department head publicly states that cantonal “on-the-ground decisions” take precedence over federal law, that is precisely the attitude that has made Valais a stronghold of poaching for decades.

The reference to “local biologists” who allegedly denied the pack affiliation does nothing to change the fact that there are jurisdictional rules in Switzerland. The “Swiss Wolf Concept” has stipulated for years that genetics and monitoring are decisive, not the gut feeling of hobby hunters who happen to also sit in the cantonal government office.

The hobby hunter in government office

Christophe Darbellay is not just any politician signing files. He is himself an active hobby hunter and takes part in wolf hunts. This dual role is the scandal behind the scandal: the politically responsible official for shooting orders against the wolf is part of the very hobby hunting lobby whose interests he enforces by decree. In any other policy field, this would be called a conflict of interest.

Darbellay's publicly stated goal is to reduce the number of Valais packs from eleven to three. This is not a scientific figure, but political wishful thinking. Already in the 2025/2026 period, his department have 27 wolves killed, including seven juveniles. The shooting in Staldenried fits seamlessly into this pattern.

The canton with the worst reputation worldwide

Valais has worked hard to earn its reputation. The University of Bern, under the leadership of Raphaël Arlettaz, documented that the lynx density in the canton is only 0.32 animals per 100 km². The most likely cause: decades of poaching. In the migration corridor into Valais, 17 lynx traps were discovered, three of them still active.

An anonymous employee of the Valais hunting administration quoted the internal maxim to the French-speaking press: “A good lynx is a dead lynx.” Today, the motto is merely: whoever shoots a lynx should be alone, because the administration will no longer cover the shooter if a conservationist catches him. In plain terms: what has changed is caution, not attitude.

Then there are the documented cases: twelve hobby hunters in the Val d’Entremont reported to authorities, 26 wild animals illegally killed. A young Valaisan sentenced to one year in prison after “bloodbath” in the Entremont valley. A Valais game warden who is alleged to have mistreated golden eagles and has repeatedly come to attention for animal welfare offenses. A state-run trophy hunt for ibex that brings 650,000 francs annually into the cantonal coffers and is booked by trophy hunters from all over the world. This is not an isolated problem, but a culture.

Already in 2015: same pattern, same actors

Anyone who believes the Staldenried case is an aberration is mistaken. Back in 2015, WWF Switzerland and Pro Natura had to take legal action in the Augstbord area because the canton of Valais issued shooting permits without herd protection having been implemented. Even then, the canton had discontinued its wolf monitoring by Grand Council resolution, thereby actively preventing the documentation of juvenile wolves. The methodology has tradition: first create data gaps, then use these gaps as justification for shootings.

Groupe Loup Suisse and Pro Natura Valais demonstrated in 2024 systematic deficiencies in the Valais regulation files. Their analysis speaks of irregularities, criminality, and a breach of international obligations.

What is at stake

The FOEN is not threatening the canton with any direct penalty. The issue is the "interest in a declaratory ruling" — that is, the retroactive classification of the shooting as unlawful. Should the Federal Supreme Court ultimately side with the FOEN, Valais would have to accept significantly stricter thresholds for individual culls in the future. That is precisely what Darbellay fears. His "super-bureaucratic" accusation is nothing other than a preemptive attempt to shift the discussion away from the law and toward emotion.

In parallel, Switzerland is the subject of an investigation by the Council of Europe for violations of the Bern Convention. Valais's proactive pack regulations are a central point of criticism. What Darbellay sells as "saving agriculture" is challengeable under international law — and, in this specific case, evidently under federal law as well.

The FOEN's lawsuit is overdue

The Staldenried case is not an administrative dispute. It is the logical result of a policy in which a hobby hunter, as a cantonal councilor, decides over life and death of strictly protected animals — in a canton known worldwide for poaching, and where authorities have for decades made turning a blind eye routine.

That the federal government is now suing is not "bureaucracy." It is the minimum standard of a constitutional state that takes its international obligations seriously. Whoever signs the Bern Convention cannot use every torn flock of sheep as a blank check for arbitrary kill orders. And anyone who, as a hobby hunter, pursues a wolf policy directed against the wolf should at least be willing to face the question of whether he holds the right office.

The FOEN should have sued long ago. Repeatedly. And precisely at the moment when the Valais "on-the-ground decisions" became standard practice.