The vote on the biodiversity initiative in Switzerland was held on 22 September 2024. 63% of the Swiss said "no" to the initiative, thereby underlining that all is well in Switzerland when it comes to forestry and the conservation of biodiversity. Had a majority of eligible voters backed the initiative, the Swiss federal government and the cantons would have had to establish even more protected areas, supervise them even more strictly and invest even more money in protecting biodiversity.

WaldSchweiz* president and member of the central board in the canton of Appenzell, Daniel Fässler explains why the forest owners' association WaldSchweiz recommended rejecting the initiative from the outset.

WaldSchweiz is part of an alliance of business organisations campaigning against the biodiversity initiative. Why does the association oppose it?

The initiative is unnecessary for the forest, because biodiversity in the forest is already indisputably at a high level. This has also been confirmed by the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) in its publication "Forest Policy 2020". It highlights not only the improving ecological quality of Switzerland's forests, but also their importance in conserving native biodiversity. Together with the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), FOEN has established that forest biodiversity has been maintained and is developing in line with the federal government's forest policy objectives.

Forests and their owners undoubtedly already do a great deal for biodiversity. Could more be done?

Our rejection of the initiative is not directed against biodiversity — quite the opposite: forests are important for biodiversity. Around sixty per cent of the plants, animals, fungi and bacteria found in Switzerland depend on forest habitats. But the forest has other functions too: it is an area for local recreation, it has a protective function, and it also has a productive function. The initiative would have a substantial impact on the management and use of forests.

In what way?

Every initiative demands a change to the current situation. This initiative is no different. The debates on the counter-proposal rejected by Parliament show that it would affect the forest as well. Even more forest reserves would be needed, in which forestry intervention is generally prohibited. The area of productive forest would shrink still further. That is in the interests of neither forest owners nor the timber industry.

What would happen if the initiative were adopted?

Parliament would have to implement the initiative in legislation. The text of the initiative states that nature must also be conserved outside protected areas. What that would mean for the forest is perfectly clear. The Forest Act already prescribes sustainable forest management. It already supports the conservation and promotion of biodiversity in the forest, but at the same time it places strict limits on forest owners with regard to use. The cantons have designated valuable forest areas that can be set aside as protected areas. This is normally done with the consent of the forest owners, who receive compensation for it. If the initiative is adopted, it is conceivable that the current forest policy target — designating ten per cent of the forest area as forest reserves — will be increased considerably. That would create additional restrictions for forest owners, who cannot expect any improvements as a result of this initiative. That is not in the interests of Swiss forestry. That is why the WaldSchweiz central board decided to join the alliance (of those opposed), signalling that it rejects the initiative.

Switzerland's forests are extensive. They cover around a third of the country's territory. Would the area affected by this initiative be significant?

Yes, a very large area! If twenty per cent of the forest area had to be protected as forest reserves, that would amount to about seven per cent of Switzerland's territory. That is a great deal. At the same time, we must not forget that one fifth of the forest is already forest reserve: twenty per cent of the forest area has not been managed at all for half a century. The reasons for this vary: either because the forests in question have poor growing conditions, or because managing them is not worthwhile. On top of that, there are forests belonging to private owners who are no longer able to manage them themselves. Once a forest is no longer tended, the recreational function is no longer provided and access to the forest can become difficult.

So if the initiative is adopted, local forests will have both less productive land and fewer places to spend leisure time?

Yes, if larger areas are set aside for forest reserves in which the forest can no longer be tended and used, the area available for recreation will shrink as well. Managing forests does not harm biodiversity — quite the opposite: skilful management promotes biodiversity. Instead of harvesting everything, you leave a pile of branches in one place, some damaged timber in another, and so on. Over two or three decades this material decomposes and helps to create valuable habitats. Nature conservation organisations acknowledge this today as well.

Your motion "Securing sustainable forest management and use" has also had a beneficial effect on biodiversity. Between 2020 and 2024, around 28 million Swiss francs were allocated to biodiversity measures in the forest. What happens from 2025?

To secure this funding, I have submitted a further motion, "Forests. Rapid adaptation to climate change". As the first chamber to consider it, the Council of States** adopted it by a large majority, with only three votes against. UREK-N, the responsible committee of the National Council, followed the Council of States and, by 17 votes to 4, asked the National Council to adopt the motion. The National Council will decide on it at one of its forthcoming sessions. I am convinced that the importance of forests and biodiversity is indisputable.

Interview by Ralph Möll

* WaldSchweiz – the Swiss forest owners' association, formerly Waldwirtschaft Schweiz WVS. It represents the interests of around 250,000 private and public forest owners. WaldSchweiz is committed to establishing a framework that allows forestry enterprises to manage Switzerland's forests in an economically and ecologically sustainable way, so that the vitality and diversity of the forests are preserved for good.

The association supports forest owners in marketing timber products and other forest services to best effect. It offers vocational training and continuing education, as well as support with business management. It publishes the trade journals WALD UND HOLZ and LA FORÊT. The association runs the WaldShop trading platform, which sells the equipment needed for forest work. The members of WaldSchweiz are Switzerland's cantonal and regional forestry associations, which bring together cantons and individual forest owners. Around 30 staff work at the central office in Solothurn.

** The Council of States, or "small chamber", represents the cantons of Switzerland. It has 46 members, elected for four-year terms.