Hunting law: an overview of the arguments for and against

Not sure what to vote for under the Hunting Act? These arguments help you (maybe)

According to the latest polls, the race for opponents and supporters remains open when it comes to voting. Are you still undecided? These are the arguments of both sides.

Reports of wolf packs sighted and dead sheep and calves have risen in recent weeks, just in time for the vote on the revised hunting law on September 27.

The latest polls show that the opinion has yet to be taken. According to 20 Minuten / Tamedia, 49 percent are against and 48 percent are in favor of the presentation, three percent are undecided. According to the SRG, 46 percent are on the yes side and 48 percent on the no side.

This has created a stalemate. Six percent of the electorate remains undecided. Those still undecided could tip the balance.

Are you still undecided? These are the arguments of the opponents and supporters at a glance:

Here’s what the proponents say:

The new hunting rules have nothing to do with a “shooting law,” as opponents complain. According to representatives of the hunting association, the farmers’ association, the mountain regions and the civil parties (SVP, CVP, BDP), the reform improves the welfare of the animals. Animals such as beavers and lynxes would be better protected with the revised hunting law. This is what the huntress of Aargau Rahel Frey says. The new law is in the spirit of wildlife and nature conservation. In the video she explains why it is necessary to renew the hunting law of more than 30 years:

Many of the proponents are in agriculture. So does Jeanette Saurer, a 26-year-old sheep farmer from the Bernese Oberland. Two years ago, one of her sheep was ripped from the wolf and later had to be redeemed by the ranger. In the video, she explains why it is problematic for the city population to also be able to vote on this template:

What opponents say:

According to opponents, the revised hunting law points badly. Instead of a sensible regulation to deal with the wolf, the parliament approved a “completely incomprehensible attack on numerous species of protected animals”. The referendum held by environmental and animal welfare organizations supports parliamentarians from various political fields. The SP, FDP, Greens, GLP and EPP parties are against the bill.

A preventive demolition, without the people and parliament being able to comment, goes against the current. Rather, agriculture must also adapt when it comes to wild animals. This included effective herd protection measures. The public sector could co-finance this. The fact that even many foresters and hunters are against the law shows that the hunting law has failed.

In fact, resistance has formed among the hunters. Contrary to the hunting association’s yes mottos, numerous hunters have formed a no committee. “We want to show that there are also hunters who have no problem with wild animals or protected species,” says David Gerke of the “Hunters Committee for Species Protection.” Hunters would not benefit from the revised law, but species protection would be weakened, which should be avoided.

It is misleading that the wolf has now dominated the debate. Because the revision of the law would have an impact on the entire animal world. “Protected animal species can be regulated, even if they haven’t caused any harm, including the wolf,” says Gerke.

However, the hunter and shepherd understands the concerns of the farmers: “The fears are real, they must be taken seriously. But the solution to this problem is not this law. “Because even with the revised hunting law, the concerns of farmers would not go away.” Even if you can shoot the wolf more easily, the animals are still exposed to risk. ”

Therefore, you have to invest in herd protection measures. Even if the new hunting law were adopted, farmers would still have to take herd protection measures. “And this problem, that is, better financing of herd protection measures, will not be solved by the new law,” says Gerke.