Time to eliminate hunter-centric wildlife policies

Conservation model is what’s needed, Emily Pickett writes.

British Columbians rejoiced Dec. 18 when, after years of public pressure, the provincial government finally put an end to the highly unpopular grizzly bear hunt.

The government’s decision appeared to signal a new chapter of wildlife management for the province — something that many independent scientists and conservationists have long been calling for. Its news release on the grizzly hunt stated: “The government will also be moving forward with a broader consultation process on a renewed wildlife management strategy for the province in the new year.”

Wildlife policy in B.C. is heavily influenced by the recreational hunting lobby and, as a result, treats wildlife as a resource to be exploited and controlled, instead of conserved. Many hoped a renewed wildlife-management strategy would mark a new era of transparent, science-based and conservation-minded decision-making, with genuine public consultation surrounding wildlife-management strategies.

The excitement was short-lived, as the day following the government’s historic grizzly bear hunt announcement the provincial government posted 68 proposed hunting regulations on its Angling, Hunting and Trapping Public Engagement website. With the distraction of the grizzly hunt announcement, not to mention the holiday season, the proposed rules got little attention and, with a closing date of Jan. 19, gave little time for public feedback.

The 2018-20 proposals range from allowing motor-vehicle exemptions for trappers, to increasing bag limits to creating new or extending existing hunting/trapping seasons and shortening or closing of others. Many British Columbians, if they were made aware of the regulations, would likely be shocked, not only by the nature of these proposals, but also by the rationale behind them.

For example, the government’s suggestion to lengthen the wolf-trapping season on Vancouver Island isn’t based on scientific evidence (as the government itself admits), but instead on anecdotal sightings and observations of an increased wolf population and a lack of ungulates (primarily deer). In fact, the proposed rule states that “much of the information the province’s wildlife managers obtain regarding wolf populations is anecdotal, with a reliance on public sightings and observations.” This wildly ill-informed proposal would subject wolves to two additional months per year of physical and mental suffering, and prolonged, painful deaths.

Another controversial hunting regulation is the suggested “Cougar Pursuit Only Season,” which the proposal justifies as “an opportunity for hunters, specifically hunters that use hounds, to continue pursuing cougar after they’ve reached their bag limit. The main rationale for the season is to provide houndsmen the opportunity to exercise and train their dogs.” This proposal comes in the midst of growing opposition to the practice of hound-hunting itself, as showcased by the recent public outcry following a TV-show host’s online post, posing with and bragging about a cougar he hound-hunted in Alberta last December. Many opponents argue the practice of hound-hunting is unethical in that it fails to meet the definition of “fair chase.” Meanwhile, this “pursuitonly” proposal amounts to nothing more than government-authorized harassment of wildlife. During pursuit-only seasons, adult cougars and kittens are sometimes attacked and injured by hounds, separated due to extensive chases and run down to exhaustion.

This quietly and quickly proposed list of hunting regulations seems less like a broadly consulted “renewed wildlife management strategy” and more like the special-interest policies of the past that have long plagued wildlife throughout B.C. It’s time for the provincial government to do away with this outdated, hunter-centric model of wildlife management and to implement a conservation model that isn’t only science-based, but also ecologically and ethically informed.

This ‘pursuit-only’ proposal amounts to nothing more than government-authorized harassment of wildlife.