Luxembourg hunters reject accusations and demand respect for their role

Statements by Nic Etgen, president of the Federation of Hunting Syndicates, earlier this week have provoked a strong reaction from Luxembourg hunters. At the centre of the controversy is a proposal to reform hunting legislation, including the idea of giving landowners the right to choose their own hunters and limiting hunting leases to three years. These ideas sounded like a rebuke to the lack of co-operation on the part of hunters, and this was the boiling point.

At a general meeting of hunters in Mertzig, representatives of the Luxembourg Federation of Hunters (FSHCL) said that they do not agree with such criticism. According to the organisation's vice-president Marc Reiter, the problem of overpopulation of wild fauna in certain regions cannot be blamed solely on hunters. They believe that the system as a whole is working and that problems are only caused by individual cases, which should not be the reason for a major reform.

Farmer and hunter Nico Kass made a key point: "Animals belong to no one", which means that liability for damages should be collective. He gave a practical example: if a farmer leaves an open field edge along the forest when planting maize, this will make it easier for hunters to see and reduce mutual claims. Kass believes that mutual information and simple steps can improve the situation more than controversial changes in legislation.

Kass also noted: if a hunter fails to fulfil his duties after notification from the landowner, this can and should be reported to the hunting union. This is not about abolishing regulations, but about using the mechanisms already in place.

Nevertheless, trust between the parties remains weak. Financial reasons are not officially voiced as the central problem, but underlying discontent can be heard in the speeches. According to Reiter, hunters are tired of being the only ones to bear the costs, from damages to organisational costs. He notes that even when animals are shot significantly, the responsibility for the damage caused by game still falls on the hunters, which they consider unfair.

Reiter emphasises that the existing law is fundamentally effective, but it lacks a clear framework and guidelines, especially regarding damage to the forest. He suggests looking not only at the consequences, but also at the causes - for example, to find out why wild animals congregate in certain regions, perhaps because they are driven away from other areas.

Michel Leytem, head of the National Agency for Forests and Nature, also attended the meeting of the hunting syndicates on behalf of the Minister of Environment, Serge Wilmes. He emphasised: all parties must be heard and the problem requires a comprehensive approach, not mutual accusations. In this spirit, the Round Table on Forests and Game is planned, where participants will be able to openly discuss complex topics, looking beyond the symptoms to solutions for reducing game numbers in the long term.

Obviously, one of the key conclusions is the need to strengthen hunting, despite possible resistance from a part of society. However, hunters believe that their work should not be perceived as a threat to nature, but as an integral part of ecosystem management. As Kass puts it, society must remember that the forest is a value that must be protected, and there is no time for slowness.