Wolf: easier culls, consultation closes today

Context

TL;DR

• The Federal Council proposes making wolf culls easier.
• Environmentalists are calling for the project to be suspended.
• USC supports the revision, but considers it insufficient.
• The new law has been in force since February 1, 2025.

Key facts

• Proponent → Federal Council, at Parliament’s request
• Subject → Revision of the Hunting Act (LCP)
• Consultation → Expected to close today
• Entry into force → February 1, 2025
• Period mentioned → February and March
• Objective → Curb the growth of the wolf population

The revision of the Hunting Act

At Parliament’s request, the Federal Council has proposed a revision of the Hunting Act (LCP) that provides for new provisions facilitating the culling of wolves. The proposal divides environmental and agricultural organizations.

During the consultation procedure, which closes today, Pro Natura, BirdLife Svizzera and Gruppo Lupo Svizzera (GLS) submitted a joint position statement. The three NGOs are calling for the project to be put on hold so that it can be examined as part of the broad revision of the LCP already announced by the government.

They point out that the new federal regulations on hunting and the protection of wild mammals and birds entered into force on February 1, 2025. According to the organizations, experience with this legal framework must be gained before the legislation is amended again.

The positions of the parties

The environmental NGOs, which consider the wolf a protected species, reject the proposal to expand the legal authority to cull it. They object in particular to the possibility of killing canids even in areas where a hunting ban is in force.

The Swiss Farmers’ Union (USC), on the other hand, particularly welcomes the possibility of culling problem wolves throughout the year. However, it considers the planned changes insufficient: the expanded intervention options would continue to face significant obstacles. In the USC’s view, the requirement for at least two attacks on livestock kept under protected conditions in an area subject to a hunting ban is excessive.

The Swiss Alpine Economy Society (SSEA) also supports the revision. In its view, the experience of the last three years has revealed gaps with serious consequences for mountain agriculture. The association hopes for rapid implementation and the possibility of removing isolated wolves or packs when the population reaches a predetermined number of specimens.

The project would authorize the culling of problem wolves—namely, specimens that attack flocks and herds or pose a danger to humans—throughout the year, including February and March. The objective is to curb population growth, while the number of packs has continued to increase despite regulatory measures in operation since 2023. According to the Federal Council, the provisions facilitating culling remain compatible with international conventions: the species’ status has changed from “strictly protected” to “protected.”

Operational details

Three points of contention

The project's practical scope focuses on timing, territory, and the conditions for intervention. The proposal concerns not only the possibility of culling a problem wolf, but also the time of year and the areas in which action would be permitted.

The first element is timing. Culling would be authorized throughout the year, including the breeding period indicated as February and March. For USC, this extension is an improvement, because problem wolves could be culled without a seasonal pause. Environmental organizations, on the other hand, regard it as a further legal possibility for killing a protected species.

The second element is territory. NGOs object in particular to the possibility of intervening in areas where a hunting ban is in force. USC starts from a different concern: it considers the threshold of at least two attacks on livestock under protected conditions, occurring in an area subject to a hunting ban, excessive. The disagreement therefore concerns both the scope of the authority to cull and the level of conditions required.

Comparison of the conditions

The third element is the population-related criterion. SSEA formulates its request in relation to the number of specimens, while USC refers to attacks on livestock. These are two different ways of describing when intervention should become possible, both of which are present in the discussion on the revision.

For mountain agriculture, SSEA links gaps in the legislation to serious consequences and calls for rapid implementation. For environmental organizations, the fact that the new law entered into force on February 1, 2025, makes it preferable to gain experience before intervening in the legislation again. The Federal Council, on the other hand, presents the revision as a tool to curb the growth of the wolf population, which has increased despite the regulatory measures in force since 2023.

The project is also presented as respecting international conventions, because the wolf's status has changed from “strictly protected” to “protected”. The Swiss discussion therefore revolves around the balance between species protection and the safeguarding of mountain agriculture, without the source yet announcing a definitive outcome of the procedure.

Key points

Following the dossier without confusing the stages

The procedure indicated by the source ends today. To read the revision correctly, it is useful to distinguish the law that has already entered into force from the proposal submitted for consultation and check, point by point, which conditions are actually described.

Five reading steps

1. Separate the legislation and the proposal. Since February 1, 2025, the new federal legislation governing the hunting and protection of wild mammals and birds has been in force. The amendment now under discussion is instead a proposal by the Federal Council, drawn up under a mandate from Parliament.

2. Identify the problematic wolf. The definition contained in the draft concerns individuals that attack flocks and herds or pose a danger to humans. The text therefore does not present culling as applying indiscriminately to every wolf.

3. Check the calendar. The easing applies year-round and also includes the breeding period in February and March. This is what must be distinguished from the regulatory measures already in force since 2023.

4. Verify the location and threshold for attacks. The proposal also takes hunting-ban zones into account. However, USC considers excessive the condition requiring at least two attacks on livestock under protected conditions to have occurred in one of these zones.

5. Compare the population criterion. SSEA is in favor of culling individual wolves or packs as soon as the population reaches the predetermined number of specimens. This request should be kept distinct from the attack criterion mentioned by USC.

This route makes it possible to read the three operational issues separately: the time of year, the areas in which culling would be possible, and the conditions necessary to intervene. It also helps avoid confusing the positions: the NGOs are calling for the project to be suspended and included in the major revision of the LCP; USC supports it but considers it insufficient; SSEA hopes for its rapid implementation.

For those following mountain agriculture, the central reference is the serious consequences reported by SSEA over the last three years. For those concerned with wolf protection, the central point remains the status of the species, defined as protected, and opposition to further culling options. Finally, the proposal must be distinguished from the outcome of the consultation: the source describes the draft and the positions taken, not a final decision.

Source: swissinfo.ch