Hasliberg Wolf Attack on Llamas Triggers Urgent Calls for Action
A Monday incident in the Bernese municipality of Hasliberg has shocked livestock keepers and raised questions about how Switzerland protects domestic animals from wildlife. Three llamas were killed in the attack, and a fourth was wounded. The event is notable precisely because llamas are not a common target for wolves, making the breach of protection standards all the more troubling for farmers in the region.
The Bernese Farmers’ Association (Berner Bauernverband) quickly publicized the incident and urged cantonal authorities to ask the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) to issue a permit to shoot the wolf believed to be responsible. The organization described the ongoing wolf presence as intolerable for farming families and emphasized that the situation has reached a point where decisive action is necessary to prevent further livestock losses and potential harm to local residents. “The animal that has lost its natural fear of cattle and people poses a serious threat to both livestock and the population,” the association stated in its response to the attack.
The Facts of the Incident and Immediate Reactions
According to the canton’s hunting and wildlife service, the three killed llamas were not sufficiently protected against predators. For New World camelids like llamas, Swiss guidelines typically require sturdy fencing of at least 120 centimeters in height. The service explained that this standard had not been met, a factor they say contributed to the animals’ vulnerability in the encounter with a predator capable of independent movement through the area. The explanation signals that while the wolf is the focal point of controversy, issues of fencing and on-farm security remain essential elements in preventing future tragedies.
In response to the tragedy, the Wolf Group Switzerland, an advocacy organization, underscored that the llamas were not protected in accordance with current law. The group criticized opponents of the wolf for demanding state action without adhering to legal frameworks. The mixed reactions reflect a broader debate in Switzerland: how to balance the protection of a protected species with the livelihoods and safety concerns of farming communities.
Legal Context and What Comes Next
Wolves in Switzerland are a protected species, and lethal control is tightly regulated. Any act to kill a wolf typically requires authorization from federal or cantonal authorities, and such actions are generally considered only under specific circumstances to protect livestock and human safety. The current case thus highlights the tension between the legal protections afforded to wildlife and the urgent needs of rural residents who bear the brunt of predator pressure. Farmers argue that without prompt, lawful responses, future losses are almost guaranteed and the social contract with rural communities erodes.
The Hasliberg attack also raises questions about preventive measures. Beyond legal permission for action, there is emphasis on preventative practices such as robust fencing, vigilant herding, and possibly the use of guard animals or other deterrents. The incident serves as a reminder that prevention, not just response, is integral to safeguarding livestock within predator-prone landscapes.
Implications for Farmers and Policy
For farmers, the episode underscores the need for clear, enforceable standards that translate into tangible protections on the ground. The debate now covers funding and guidance for building compliant enclosures, the role of compensation programs for losses, and the thresholds for when lethal control might be considered under Swiss law. For policymakers, the Hasliberg case could accelerate discussions about how to refine existing regulations so they are both humane toward wildlife and practical for rural communities. The dialogue between farmers, wildlife authorities, and civil society groups is likely to intensify in the coming weeks as more observers weigh in on how best to safeguard livelihoods without undermining conservation goals.
What This Means for Swiss Livestock Protection
Across Switzerland, the incident is a reminder that coexistence with predators requires ongoing investment in preventative infrastructure, continuous monitoring, and transparent decision-making. While the legal framework remains protective of wolves, it also recognizes the need to shield farms from irreversible losses. The Hasliberg case may become a reference point for future discussions about fencing standards, compensation schemes, and the appropriate balance between conservation and agricultural resilience.
