Is Fish and Wildlife management headed to dark times?
By Lethbridge Herald on August 9, 2024.
LORNE FITCH
As a retired Alberta biologist (and a hunter and angler) I am witnessing the political dismantling of the science-based approach to fish and wildlife management. This should concern all of us whether we hunt, fish or appreciate wildlife in other ways.
It took a concerted effort to drag ourselves out of the biodiversity hole created by our rapacious pioneer era of settlement. Conservation of wildlife resources didn’t occur by chance, by edict or by random action. Stewardship happened (and still does) by the application of science, wielded by experienced biologists supported by citizens determined to put conservation values first.
The guiding principles of fish and wildlife stewardship are found in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, of which Alberta is a signatory. These are:
• Wildlife resources are conserved and held in trust for all citizens.
• Commerce in dead wildlife is eliminated.
• Wildlife is allocated according to democratic rule of law.
• Wildlife may only be killed for a legitimate, non-frivolous purpose.
• Wildlife is an international resource.
• Every person has an equal opportunity under the law to participate in hunting and fishing.
• Scientific management is the proper means for wildlife conservation.
As Richard Quinlan, a retired provincial fish and wildlife biologist, points out, “Underlying all seven is the allocation of adequate public resources to enable effective management according to these principles, and freedom of professionals to carry out scientific management for conservation. Political override eclipses that ability.”
Alberta had a stellar record of working on restoring populations and habitats for a large number of species. A short list includes peregrine falcon, swift fox, bison, trumpeter swan, whooping crane, pronghorn antelope, Canada goose, grizzly bear, ferruginous hawk, northern leopard frog, elk, northern pintail, mountain goat, bighorn sheep, white pelican, mountain bluebird, lake sturgeon, walleye, bull trout and prairie rattlesnake.
These successes happened because of biological staff working in the public interest, with public support.
The task is far from over with current risks to biodiversity. Future conservation efforts will require the application of more science, more experienced scientists and biologists, not less.
Alberta used to demonstrate how science-based conservation was supposed to work.
Today, what used to be management guided by experienced, professionally trained biologists has been sidelined, or worse, taken over by politicians and lobbyists who either don’t understand science or don’t want to, who don’t trust biologists and the data or who have a vested economic interest in pursuing their own agenda.
The evidence for this is expressed with the following examples:
In Alberta grizzly bears are a Threatened species. Despite this, in a politically directed, administrative sleight of hand, a hunt was initiated under the contrived guise of “Protection of life and property from problem wildlife.”
Hunters would be drawn to provide a rapid response of untrained vigilantes and will be able to keep the carcass. Grizzly bear experts are unanimous that sport hunting, contrary to assertions, will not minimize depredations against private property or human/bear conflicts.
Cougar hunting is managed based on strict regional quotas. This is a tightly regulated hunt, based on years of study. Near the end of a recent season there was political intervention to increase the quotas, even for female cats, and open up new areas to hunting, including a provincial park. All was contrary to the management plan and was a wild deviation from the scientific objectives.
Quotas for mule deer, mountain goat and moose hunting have also been manipulated to appease special interests. This is inconsistent with the way quotas should be derived from an evidence-based position based on aerial surveys.
Years of patient, evidence-based recovery of lake dwelling sport fish were nearly derailed by a politically motivated attempt to throw open harvest levels, the approach that had originally caused these populations to crash.
Despite no solid evidence that control measures work to protect game fish populations, a politically inspired cormorant season was opened, under the shield of a “damage control license.”
Other changes have been mused about including night hunting for predators, and hunts for mourning doves and whistling swans.
A retired wildlife biologist calls the rationale behind these “light on fact, heavy on political pressure.”
Hunters, conservationists and biologists are concerned recent changes in wildlife management are more about supporting business interests than about biology and conservation.
What is currently being played out is a template for serious deviations from publicly-supported, science-informed and professionally guided management practices. These are the tactics:
• Undermine and slash budgets and staffing making professional biologists and their actions seem ineffective.
• Separate functions, including allocation, research, enforcement, education and wildlife coexistence, into different departments with unrelated mandates.
• Discourage collaboration and cooperation between biological staff now in separate departments.
• Hinder communication with the public by gagging and isolating biologists from public engagement.
• Enforce a top-down, authoritarian decision-making process where ideas are to be blindly implemented and then defended.
• Punish any staff having objective concerns, displaying independent thinking or proposing alternate approaches.
• Promote public mistrust in professional biological staff by treating them as political servants instead of knowledgeable advisors.
• Deny or ignore empirical evidence in favour of advice by would-be experts with vested interests.
• Do not replace experienced staff and facilitate early retirement or resignation of committed biologists by frustrating their efforts.
• Disdain for the concept fish and wildlife are a public resource to be stewarded and treat them instead as fungible units, like oil, gas and timber, for financial gain by special economic interest groups.
• Narrow the focus of management to “game” species while undercutting work on species at risk and critical habitat conservation.
• Refuse to share, or delay the sharing of publicly funded data and reports with information contrary to the chosen political narrative.
Fish and wildlife management is an amalgam of biology, ecology and sociology, the last being the human element where a public voice is essential. However, in biology there are a suite of rules. You can tinker with them a bit but mostly they are inviolate.
Gut instincts, intuition, personal whims, crowd think, social media opinion and picking political favourites are poor substitutes for empirical evidence. There has always been the taint of politics in fish and wildlife management. Failure to listen to expert advice on game ranching now has chronic wasting disease crippling wild ungulate populations and wild boars running rampant. Inability to believe the data on caribou, native trout and sage grouse declines stymie recovery efforts.
What we are now seeing is a full blown contagion of political meddling in fish and wildlife management.
There is historical public support for science-based stewardship of our wild heritage because it serves the majority of Albertans.
To be driven politically in support of a few is retrogressive, taking us back to dark times for wildlife. When the public is excluded and biologists are cut out of and not allowed to employ their professional responsibilities (and ethics) due to political interference we run the risk of running out of wildlife.
Everyone—hunters, anglers and naturalists— benefits when we steward fish and wildlife using science and facts applied in a professional manner and refined through a balanced, fair and open public process. Stewardship fails when we don’t.
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.
48-47
Thanks again, Lorne Fitch, for this!
If we do not take care of wildlife and the environment, we are not taking care of ourselves. The human race needs biodiversity to survive.
What is it about a group of people and a UCP government who do not heed this? It really is the lowest of the low…..narcissism, anarchy, indifference, lack of intelligence….pathetic.
Yes, thank you for once again taking the time an effort to provide this important information to the public. The UCP are operating our province as their personal-come-private hunting association. Retrogressive? ABSOLUTELY. This government is hell bent on destroying science-based wildlife and environmental management. Their ignorance and partisan greed is appalling. Danielle Smith recently slyly lamented regarding a health oriented issue that the the lack of data for forming decisions was seriously lacking, yet her own government implemented chaos inducing polices to assure that will be the ongoing case. You offer further evidence that the UCP are operating with the same duplicitous and wilful ignorance on the province’s wildlife issues. Very sad times for the present and future of Alberta.
The UCP are preoccupied debating chem trails, vaccine mandates and replacing the CPP to concern themselves with anything real and important. How much longer can we tolerate letting the lunatic fringe run the province?
thanks for a comprehensive lay out of what is going on. by and large, the methods being used by the ucp with regards to wildlife seems pretty much the approach of all ogvts toward ensuring corp interests prevail over all that should matter far more.