“Curiouser and curiouser!” said Alice, and many of us pondering the Ministry of Forestry and Silly Stuff’s contention that the latest plan to shoot grizzly bears isn’t a hunt. No, in the double-speak we have become accustomed to it is “Protection of life and property from problem wildlife.”
According to Todd Loewen, the minister of Silly Stuff, the government is “taking a proactive approach to help Albertans co-exist with wildlife” by shooting some of them. Just the bad grizzlies and elk, not the good ones.
They are doing this by providing “rapid conflict response times.” You might think this will be accomplished by the deployment of trained, competent Fish and Wildlife officers. No, the minister will draw the name of some trigger happy hunter out of a hat and they will rush out to protect a Threatened species like a grizzly by shooting it. What could go wrong with this novel approach?
Given the hype of unrelenting danger promoted in the press announcement, you might think it unsafe to go out into the woods today, for fear of encountering a rogue bear or a belligerent elk. Fear is a powerful motivator, except when the facts don’t support the contention and you propose something incredibly silly instead of thinking about rational ways to co-exist with wildlife. Adults in the room, like the Waterton Biosphere Reserve’s Carnivores and Communities Program and local Bear Smart groups are showing the way.
Yes, bears can be dangerous. But so too is failing to monitor and control greenhouse gas emissions, allowing unsustainable levels of logging in our headwaters, not adequately monitoring our essential water supplies and considering more coal mining with certain releases of selenium. Statistically you are far more likely to be injured or killed on your drive to grizzly habitat than ever seeing a grizzly or being attacked by one. Neither the minister nor the Alberta government have suggested any rapid response for any of these other risks.
Since the closure of a hunting season for grizzly bears in 2006 there has been a small, but vocal group of trophy hunters agitating for opportunities to shoot a bear. The minister seems to support this, without input from conservation groups or from experts in grizzly bear management. This has become one of those backward initiatives of, “The answer is a grizzly hunt, what was the question?” Before this hunt was made public the minister’s office was soliciting input from selected people to provide letters of concern about bear (and presumably elk) conflicts. How do you spell “disingenuous?”
If the Alberta government were serious about wildlife coexistence (and they should be) there needs be a deep dive into why there are conflicts. With our rapidly expanding and unsustainable land use footprint in the Eastern Slopes grizzlies are running out of room, out of quiet space and of connectivity to essential habitats. Every one of the 19 recent cumulative effects assessments done in the Eastern Slopes says so, including ones provided by the government of Alberta. As a result a few bears (very few) run afoul of us and lethal actions undertaken by wildlife professionals might be required.
A serious initiative of limiting the scope and scale of logging, of off-highway vehicle activity, of random camping, of proposed coal mining and of reclaiming the hundreds of kilometres of roads and trails that bisect grizzly habitat would be a rational step to giving wildlife secure habitat. This is wildlife coexistence, not sport hunting a few “bad” animals. “Problem” wildlife are ones of our own creation and of our inability to share the landscape.
“Where should I go?" asked Alice. "That depends on where you want to end up." replied the Cheshire Cat. It seems to me we need to protect wildlife from problem ministers.
Piece written by Lorne Fitch
Lorne Fitch is a professional Biologist, a retired Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a past Adjunct Professor with the University of Calgary. He is the author of 'Streams of Consequence: Dispatches From the Conservation World'.
