Wolves under constant fire: Swiss hunting policy ignores science

On December 9, 2025, Switzerland will be experiencing a wolf hunt unprecedented in Europe: within two winters, well over a hundred wolves, mostly pups, have been preemptively shot. Despite this, pack numbers continue to grow. Official justifications range from protecting forests and alpine farming to public safety. The data tells a different story.

Editorial Team Wild beim Wild — December 9, 2025

The Federal Office for the Environment has now evaluated the first two major regulatory phases, 2023/24 and 2024/25.

In the first phase (December 2023 to the end of January 2024), the cantons were permitted to shoot approximately 100 wolves; 55 animals were actually killed. In the second phase (September 2024 to the end of January 2025), the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) authorized the culling of about 125 wolves; 92 were actually shot, almost exclusively as a preventative measure. Nine entire packs were to be removed. Nevertheless, after the second phase, 36 packs, 25 of which had established territories, remained entirely within Switzerland.

Current wolf monitoring by KORA shows that 41 packs have already been confirmed in the 2025/26 monitoring year, 31 of which are entirely within Switzerland, and 10 of which are cross-border. In addition, 130 pups have been documented so far.

In other words, Switzerland conducts one of the most intensive wolf hunts in Europe, without the population decreasing. It continues to grow, just more slowly. Nevertheless, the political discourse is not about population control, but increasingly about decimation.

Puppy hunting as a management strategy – a large-scale experiment without results

An SRF analysis using KORA reveals the true story behind the dry figures from the Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU). In 2024, 221 wolves were genetically identified in Switzerland. From the beginning of June 2024 to the end of January 2025, seven individual wolves and 92 pack animals were proactively shot. A large proportion of these were pups. According to KORA expert Sven Buchmann, around 60 pups were killed, almost half of their age group.

The idea is to regulate packs without eliminating parent animals everywhere, in order to maintain the social structure. No one knows what the actual effects of this are on behavior, damage, genetics, and acceptance. KORA emphasizes that Switzerland is conducting a global experiment with this approach to regulation – ongoing research projects exist, but there are no reliable results yet.

At the same time, the Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU) itself states that neither the long-term population trend nor the effects of regulation on wolf behavior can be assessed after two periods. Nevertheless, new, far-reaching hunting rights are written into the hunting regulations year after year. Wolf hunting thus explicitly takes place, even though the BAFU's own current understanding describes the effects as largely unclear.

Graubünden as an example: 48 dead wolves, one wiped-out national park pack

The canton of Graubünden is considered a laboratory for this hard line. Between September 2024 and January 2025, 48 wolves were shot there. The complete elimination of the Fuorn pack, which partly lived in the Swiss National Park, was particularly controversial.

DNA analysis later revealed that a one-year-old female from the herd was involved in one cattle kill. In the second attack, the evidence was too poor to definitively identify a specific animal. Nevertheless, the entire herd was killed. The national park criticized the federal government for not consulting with them and for failing to consider alternative approaches despite a petition with tens of thousands of signatures.

This is precisely where it becomes clear how much the logic of hunting dominates: The legally protected population of large predators is massively reduced at the behest of cantons and hunting authorities, even though neither ecological effects nor alternatives have been seriously explored, even in the heart of a national park.

How big is the wildlife problem really in the forest?

A key political argument is that without intensive hunting of roe deer, red deer, and chamois, and without strict wolf management, the forest suffers. Damage from browsing by wild animals threatens protective forests and the climate-resilient transformation of forest stands.

Our own research paints a more nuanced picture. A nationwide overview by WSL researcher Andrea Kupferschmid and colleagues shows that foresters classify the impact of wildlife as low or insignificant on approximately 68 percent of the assessed forest area. 27 percent fall into a medium category, and only 5 percent are considered silviculturally unsustainable.

Yes, browsing can cause significant problems locally – especially for fir, oak, and rowan trees, which are important for protective forests and climate adaptation. But the data refute the narrative that Switzerland is facing a widespread browsing collapse.

What wolves actually do in the forest – and what they don't.

The ecological role of the wolf is often reduced to slogans in the public discourse. Some envision a second Yellowstone, while others warn of a "forest without wildlife." Both are oversimplifications.

A synthesis of the influence of wild ungulates on forest regeneration in Switzerland shows that browsing damage is a relevant factor, but varies greatly depending on region, tree species and location, and is not problematic everywhere.

An analysis of the role of wolves on forests and wildlife concludes that a single wolf pack cannot "on its own" reduce wildlife populations in a heavily human-influenced cultural landscape to a desired level, but it can significantly alter their behavior. Browsing becomes more fragmented, wildlife becomes more mobile, and it retreats to rocky or wooded areas. The equation "wolf = less wildlife = browsing" does not automatically hold true; the effects are complex and location-dependent.

The Calanda region, where the first Swiss pack originated, clearly demonstrates this: browsing damage to important tree species such as fir, maple, and rowan has decreased significantly in the pack's core territory, while pressure can increase in winter habitats. This nuanced picture is rarely addressed in political debate.

New major study: Hunting and land use control deer populations, not the wolf

An international study, led by the University of Freiburg and published in the Journal of Applied Ecology in 2023, examined the factors influencing red deer population density at 492 sites in 28 European countries. The result: In Europe's cultural landscapes, human hunting and land use determine population density significantly more than large predators such as wolves, lynxes, and bears.

Only where all three large predators occur together and human influence is relatively low does deer density decrease measurably. In typical Alpine regions with intensive hunting, tourism, grazing, and forestry, the numerical influence of large predators remains low.

Applied to Switzerland, this means that the number of deer, roe deer, and chamois roaming the forest is primarily determined by hunting regimes, feeding programs, agricultural land use, snow sports, and roads. Wolves alter the behavior and distribution of prey, but they cannot single-handedly repair a wildlife management system that has been completely disrupted for decades, mainly due to hunting interests.

Livestock protection works – and weakens the arguments for hunting.

While politicians and parts of the hunting lobby continue to increase culls, data has been available for years that clearly shows what really reduces livestock losses: herd protection.

An analysis by the "Bote der Urschweiz" newspaper, in conjunction with the Wolf Switzerland group, shows that the number of farm animals killed per wolf has fallen from over 50 to a constant level below 10 since the species' return. According to the Wolf group, the main reason is improved livestock protection.

For 2023, several sources show that in the cantons most affected, Valais and Graubünden, the number of livestock kills decreased by 55 and 80 percent respectively in the first half of the year, while the wolf population continued to increase. Crucial to this were newly implemented, federally funded livestock protection measures such as guard dogs, fences, and supervised herds.

Nevertheless, the Federal Council simultaneously lowered the damage thresholds for culling and facilitated the regulation of herds. In technical terms, this means that instead of consistently expanding a functioning strategy (livestock protection), policymakers are enshrining a second, scientifically under-evaluated strategy (preventive culling) on an equal footing – primarily to appease hunting and agricultural circles.

Hunting policy in conflict with species conservation

The revised hunting regulations define a minimum of only twelve wolf packs for the whole of Switzerland. Experts like former National Park Director Heinrich Haller openly speak of a decimation policy and criticize the fact that this limit is not biologically based, but politically determined.

At the same time, the Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU) emphasizes in its own press release that the consequences of the regulation on the behavior of the wolves and the future population development cannot yet be assessed. Nevertheless, one hundred animals per year are targeted – in a population of only a few hundred individuals.

For species conservation, this means that a species strictly protected under international agreements is being hunted so intensively in the name of "conflict management" that wolves can never develop a meaningful ecological role in the forest-wildlife-human ecosystem. At the same time, the actual levers of wildlife management – hunting quotas, feeding practices, winter resting areas, and tourism management – remain largely untouched.

What Switzerland needs now

Instead of ever lowering shooting thresholds and symbolic pack eliminations, Switzerland needs a hunting and wildlife policy based on three simple principles:

Primacy of science over the shotgun
Management measures must be tied to clear objectives and measurable indicators. Without independent performance monitoring, a general obligation to monitor, and transparent data, wolf hunting remains a political reflex, not an instrument of evidence-based environmental policy.
Livestock protection first, culling last
The available data on livestock kills, kills per wolf, and the effectiveness of livestock protection clearly show where the priorities should lie. Culling can mitigate individual cases, but it is no substitute for comprehensive, professionally funded, and professionally supervised prevention measures.
Make hunting policy honest
Large-scale studies on red deer in Europe show that we primarily control wildlife populations in our cultural landscapes ourselves – through hunting, land use, and disturbances. When hunters claim that only strict wolf management can save the forest, this contradicts their own international scientific literature.

On December 9, 2025, wolf hunting in Switzerland is not a factually justified tool in a finely balanced ecosystem management system, but rather an expression of political power dynamics. Wolves are shot in large numbers, even though

the stocks continue to grow,
Herd protection has been proven to be effective,
the ecological consequences of regulation are largely unexplored and
The major problems in the forest are primarily related to climate, land use, and human wildlife management.

The central question, therefore, is not how many wolves "Switzerland can tolerate." The question is how long a modern society can afford to base its wildlife policy on hunting-related reflexes rather than on research, ethics, and long-term ecological responsibility.

Dossier: Wolf in Switzerland: Facts, politics and limits of hunting

Further reading