**Fish dying on the upper Sihl, 1971.** Dukas

Water protection from the bottom up

For a long time, Switzerland's watercourses were severely affected by wastewater, chemicals and hydropower. It was not until the 1950s that a water protection movement developed. How did it achieve its goals?

Noah Businger

Noah Businger is a historian and a PhD student in Early Modern Swiss History at the University of Bern.

The river Aa in Engelberg must have been a sorry sight in April 1935. Its source is higher up on the Engelberg plateau from where it flows down into Lake Lucerne. The river was used for waste disposal. Household and agricultural waste, rubbish from the spa centres and local workshops all ended up in the water.

**Postcard from the river Aa in Engelberg, postmark 11 September 1926.** e-pics

However, the conspicuous contamination hardly raised an eyebrow at the time. Only ‘Sportfischverein Obwalden’ (Obwalden fishing club) complained to the commune and canton, as it was concerned about the fish stocks in the river.

However, the commune of Engelberg didn’t see an issue as the waste was not deposited in trout territory, so it didn’t impact commercial fishing. The fact that the contaminants from the waste moved downriver into Lake Lucerne where they wiped out or decimated fish populations did not enter into the equation, at least as far as the commune was concerned.

This type of water contamination was widespread throughout Switzerland until the 1950s. The situation has improved markedly since then and the waters are now much cleaner and healthier. How did this come about and what actual steps were taken to improve water protection in Switzerland? Which actors took the lead in making this happen? And what did the recreational fishing community do, like the club in Obwalden, for example?

**Unimaginable today: besides municipal waste, private dumping was also allowed.** by courtesy

Taming and using the waters

During the first phase of water protection – from the 19th to mid-20th century – the emphasis was on protecting the public from the impact of water-related disasters. People built small dams, channelled rivers and regulated lakes to provide the maximum possible protection from water-related hazards. Economic and population growth after the Second World War complicated matters further. Growing volumes of waste, harmful industrial chemical substances and untreated wastewater ended up in the rivers. And rising demand for energy caused a massive increase in hydropower use.

Although the revised Act on Fisheries of 1888 banned the disposal of harmful substances and industrial waste in water bodies, many rivers and lakes in Switzerland were incapable of sustaining an ecosystem in the 1950s. Power plants and other structures prevented fish from migrating and fish were dying every day from toxic substances in the water.

**Instead of rubber boats, mountains of foam flowed down the Aare near Aarburg in 1962. The reason: unfiltered synthetic cleaning agents entered Swiss streams and rivers.** Eawag

It took tighter legislation, new political resolve, technological progress and a change in public opinion to continually improve, as of 1950, the ecological condition of the water bodies and their function as a habitat and recreational space.

The Federal Act on Fisheries […] had obliged the cantons for over 70 years to keep fishing waters clean. Unfortunately, the provisions of this law […] remained largely unfulfilled.

Alfred Matthey-Doret, head of the ‘Eidgenössisches Amt für Gewässerschutz,’ (federal water conservation department) reported on the history of the first Waters Protection Act in 1961.

Swimming in the lake was completely banned.

Fish dying in polluted Lake Neuchâtel in 1964. The influx of pollutants and nutrients led to a proliferation of algae, which upset the biological balance and lowered the oxygen content of the water. Swimming in the lake was completely banned. Keystone / Keystone

Technology-based water protection

In 1955, the Swiss parliament passed the first Waters Protection Act. This represented a significant paradigm shift as it transferred the onus for protecting Swiss waters from pollution to the Confederation. This did not make much difference initially, for example by 1963 only 14 per cent of people in Switzerland were connected to the wastewater system. However, the 1955 law did pave the way for the passing of other water protection laws.

The Nature and Cultural Heritage Act (1967), the second Waters Protection Act (1972) and the third Act on Fisheries (1975) conferred additional powers on the Confederation and facilitated the upgrading of wastewater treatment plants with massive subsidies. These measures significantly reduced water pollution. So, how did it come about that the Confederation suddenly assumed responsibility for water protection? Which actors pressed for more public money for clean and healthy waters?

Officials inspecting the experimental sewage treatment plant at Tüffenwies, circa 1953. The plant belonged to the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag), which from the 1940s worked closely with the media to educate the public about water protection. — Officials inspecting the experimental sewage treatment plant at Tüffenwies, circa 1953. The plant belonged to the *Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology* *(Eawag)*, which from the 1940s worked closely with the media to educate the public about water protection. Eawag

From the 1940s, the media, ‘Neue Zürcher Zeitung’ newspaper for example, worked to bring the issue of water conservation into the public eye. The newspapers reported on the pollution, gave a platform to the researchers advocating water protection and thus facilitated access to relevant information. By the early 1960s, water pollution was being widely reported in the Swiss media, which put pressure on the government to act.

**The situation in Obwalden was not resolved until 1978 when the ARA wastewater treatment plant was built in Alpnach.** State Archives of Obwalden

The recreational fishing community, which felt the direct impact of dirty waters, evolved into a powerful lobby from 1950 and helped to amplify the water protection debate. As regular visitors to the banks of rivers, lakes etc. they knew a lot about the issue and had long since warned against the dangers of water pollution. The Swiss Fisheries Association and its cantonal sections were especially active. They called for the implementation of the federal acts, worked to increase public awareness through the media and based their calls for more water protection on expert information combined with practical knowledge.

The fishing community received support from organisations for the protection of nature and cultural heritage. Led by the Swiss Federation for Nature Conservation (now Pro Natura), there was already a patriotic nature protection movement at the start of the 20th century. As a national asset, nature was to be protected against the negative aspects of modernisation. The purpose of water protection was solely to preserve the countryside’s natural beauty. Fishing was also seen as part of the country’s Swiss character and, as such, was considered relevant to the patriotic cultural heritage protection movement.

Just like our forests, our still and flowing waters are part of our homeland, which we must cherish and nurture and protect from harm with all the means available to us.

Annual report of ‘Sportfischerverein Obwalden’ (fishing club of Obwalden) 1941

Through constructive cooperation, the actors interested in water protection (fishing groups, nature protection organisations, research institutions, media) ensured far-reaching change in state water protection measures from the 1950s. The objective had changed by then to reducing pollution.

The ‘Aareschwumm’ (swimming in the Aare river) in Bern is now on Switzerland’s list of Living Traditions, an inventory of intangible cultural heritage compiled by the Federal Office of Culture. The Aare wasn’t always so inviting. Youtube

An integral approach to water protection

In the 1990s, the concept of water protection changed again. In addition to reducing incoming pollutants via technical means, a more holistic view of water emerged whereby it was seen as an almost endangered part of nature. The fourth Act on Fisheries (1991) as well as the third and fourth water protection acts (1991, 2011) incorporated more ecological aspects, which were to be achieved by revitalising the waters and by mitigating the negative effects of hydropower use. Ecological enhancement, residual water flows and fish ladders became the order of the day. Another example from Obwalden shows what these developments meant in practice.

Since 1955, there has been a hydropower plant at the Sarner Aa river between Sarnen and Alpnach, which cuts off the flow to Wichelsee lake. The plant’s hydropower generation dried up the river below the dam for ten to eleven months a year. Before the plant was built, ‘Sportfischerverein Obwalden’ demanded an adequate residual water flow and the construction of a fish ladder to enable the fish to migrate from the lake. All in vain, as the hydroecological demands of the fishing club came second to the commercial benefits of maximum utilisation. There was no residual water flow, the Sarner Aa was an ecological dead zone and the main migration route for the Obwalden fish was cut off.

**Lake Wichelsee and the almost dried out Sarner Aa river below the power plant, 2 April 1959.** Swissair-Photo AG

It wasn’t until the 1990s that the situation changed. In a hydroecological study, biologist Ueli Rippmann recommended a move away from the “unconditional 100% utilisation philosophy” and revitalising the river by means of a residual water flow and a fish ladder. The canton did indeed take up the recommendations of the report, and the Obwalden Fishing Association vigorously demanded their implementation. Today, the measures have been implemented and the once dried-up river is once again a living waterway.

Change through coordinated action

The Engelberger Aa and Sarner Aa in Obwalden exemplify the development of water protection in Switzerland. Policymakers and administrative bodies tended to favour a reactive approach to water protection up to the 21st century: initially due to ignorance of the issues involved, subsequently due to the prioritisation of the water’s commercial value. It took the coordinated actions of the science community, fishing community, nature protection and journalism to change the thoughts and actions of the state and society. Step-by-step, these actors initially successfully opposed the pollution of Switzerland’s water bodies and then proceeded to improve the water’s ecological quality.

How is Swiss water quality today? Youtube

More of: 20th / 21st century Society Education Nature

Further posts

King Albert I: the mountaineering monarch

Michael van Orsouw 10.04.2025 King Albert I of Belgium was a keen and experienced mountain climber. He scaled many Swiss peaks and even completed a first ascent in 1907. Tragically, despite his mountaineering skills, a climbing accident ended his life.

King Albert I enjoyed climbing in the Swiss Alps, where he went almost every year. The picture was coloured using AI by the National Museum.

Waser and Merian – two trailblazing female artists of the Baroque era

Michèle Seehafer 09.01.2023 The Baroque period saw increasing numbers of female artists begin to question the social structures of the age. The stories of Anna Waser and Maria Sibylla Merian demonstrate how these female artists fully bore comparison with their male contemporaries.

Anna Waser and Maria Sibylla Merian are among the foremost artists of the Baroque period. Illustrations from Johann Caspar Füssli's compendium of the best artists in Switzerland from 1769–1779.

The Iceman

Andrej Abplanalp 06.02.2020 He was a scientist and an explorer: Alfred de Quervain walked across Greenland in 1912, sparking a veritable ‘polar fever’ in Switzerland.