A controversial decision last year to substantially increase the number of cougars that can be hunted in Alberta was not based on science, according to government documents obtained by The Narwhal.
Instead, expanded cougar hunting was “based on direction from [the] minister last year and input from stakeholders,” according to an internal email between senior staff at the Ministry of Forestry and Parks. Those stakeholders were limited to members of the Alberta Professional Outfitters Society and the Alberta Tree Hounds Association.
Internal emails obtained by The Narwhal through four freedom of information requests show senior staff within the ministry said “social interests, economic effects and departmental mandates” took precedence over “inventory and monitoring” data for a last-minute increase in cougar hunting quotas. “Inventory and monitoring information was not the primary element used to inform the process to trigger [the cougar quota] adjustment,” a senior staffer wrote in an email to colleagues.
That directly contradicts heated denials by Forestry and Parks Minister Todd Loewen, who lashed out at his Opposition critic in the legislature earlier this year when she suggested he was not taking science and data into account.
“When it comes to wildlife in this province, I would rather manage wildlife with common sense,” he said in response to accusation of political interference from NDP MLA Sarah Elmeligi. “I’d rather use biology than the ideology that they use.”
The internal emails reveal a scramble to change the quotas with little clarity on the process. “The normal process would be for [the Ministry of Environment and Protected Areas] to undertake an updated assessment of a wildlife species population,” then share that information with the Ministry of Forestry and Parks, one senior staff wrote. No new assessment of Alberta’s cougar population has been done since 2019. “I do not believe that we have agreed on a formal process, as of yet, to inform management changes,” the staffer wrote.
“I look forward to the formalization of process,” another staffer wrote in response.
“Me too……….” was the one-line reply.
They were reacting to a change that appeared suddenly just five days before the end of the 2023-24 cougar hunting season.
Staff were also directed to open new areas where hounds could be used to hunt cougars.
“This is a 97.6 per cent increase in area where cougars can be hunted with hounds,” a briefing note obtained by The Narwhal says. The report made it clear that the change was not because any data had shown an increase in the cougar population.
“Cougar density in these new areas is unknown but thought to be low.”
Then, in late 2024, new quotas were set for the 2024-25 season, based on the last-minute increases in March. Those changes represented an almost 40 per cent increase in the total number of cougars that could be hunted across the province as compared to the start of the previous season. At the same time, the province also quietly opened hunting in some protected areas, including Cypress Hills Provincial Park.
The changes also allowed outfitters to expand into new areas — specifically around Canmore, Alta. — with separate and specific licences for guided hunting trips. The move increased the number of cougars that could be killed in those areas, over and above the official quota.
The government referred to that change as the “Alberta Professional Outfitters Society extension.”
“Several” outfitters with that association, along with the Alberta Tree Hounds Association, are the only stakeholders mentioned as being consulted about the changes.
But even within that limited group, there was pushback on the government’s plans.
In the documents, the Alberta Tree Hounds Association expressed concerns the new quotas were “not based on science or the [cougar] management plans at hand,” and were made at the last minute.
The heavily redacted documents do not provide clarity on what the group’s specific concerns were or if any changes came from its objections.
The association’s president, Jason Martyn, did not respond to an interview request.
Minister Loewen has been travelling through the U.S. and Europe to promote hunting in Alberta and sell expanded special licences for hunting a range of animals.
Earlier this year, he lashed out at Elmeligi in the legislature for suggesting his ties to the hunting industry constituted a conflict of interest. The Opposition critic was forced to apologize for suggesting the minister was engaging in corruption.
Loewen previously ran Todd Loewen Outfitting Ltd., which changed its name to Red Willow Outfitters. Registry documents show it is now run by family members, including his wife, Teena Loewen.
Todd Loewen’s November 2024 public conflict of interest disclosure did not specify a financial interest in the business, saying only the company was “in a management arrangement approved by the Ethics Commissioner of Alberta.” A month later, following reporting by The Narwhal highlighting the company ownership, it was updated to list Red Willow as an asset of his wife.
Loewen’s office did not respond to an interview request or a set of emailed questions, but he has repeatedly pointed to a review by the provincial ethics commissioner clearing him of any conflicts.
A transcript from a June 2024 meeting of a committee reviewing the Conflicts of Interest Act shows the minister wanted clarity around what constitutes a conflict and that he engaged with the ethics commissioner on his specific portfolio and interests.
It also shows the situation was complex and that Loewen was initially barred from making some unspecified decisions and said he had to “try three times” to remove those restrictions.
The documents obtained by The Narwhal make it clear the ministry was actively seeking input from hunting groups. “The minister asked that you hold an online meeting of some houndsmen [he] is aware of (as soon as possible),” a senior staffer wrote to another in November 2024. “Please reach out to those folks and set up a meeting within a week’s time (or whatever is convenient for those guys during hunting season).”
The push to consult with hunting organizations contrasts with how another stakeholder whose emails to the government appeared in the documents says they were treated.
The Narwhal showed the documents to John Marriott, a wildlife photographer and advocate against cougar hunting. He said his emails were included in the correspondence with his name redacted.
“I didn’t get any responses from anybody,” he said.
Marriott says the documents make it clear the government was not following the science, or its own cougar management plan.
“These make it very clear that the quota increases for cougar harvest were not from the cougar biologists and the biologists that normally would be making this decision; this was a directive from above,” he said.
Ruiping Luo, a conservation specialist with the Alberta Wilderness Association who also reviewed the documents, echoed Marriott.
“They didn’t have any new scientific reasoning for changing the quotas and that is something that we suspected: that these quotas were not based on science and there were other factors, like economics, interfering,” she said.
“The other thing — that I think was, again, expected — was there didn’t seem to be a ton of consultation, or even consideration of consultation for other groups, for naturalists and recreation users and for Indigenous groups too. This does affect their Treaty Rights to hunt and trap.”
The increase in cougar quotas is just one of many changes to hunting regulations introduced by the current government. It has opened hunting of “problem” grizzly bears after a 20-year ban. It has also lifted quotas on trapping wolverines — citing the need to collect data on how many wolverines are left — and other species.
Marco Festa-Bianchet, a retired professor of animal ecology at the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec, said the decision to increase quotas on cougars without a good idea of the population numbers is troublesome.
“To me, as a scientist, what’s really bad about it is just, well, let’s just ignore years and years of research and wildlife biology and just say, ‘Potentially cougars are bad, let’s shoot some more,’ ” he said.
More broadly, Festa-Bianchet said the government is making decisions on what appears to be a whim.
“It’s just the whole approach,” he said. “It’s the same with mountain goats and grizzly bears: just, like, who cares about the science?”
You may have noticed Canadians are in a bit of a mood ever since a certain somebody threatened our sovereignty and economic well-being. The impact...
Continue reading
‘I took an oath that I would risk my life for what Canada stood for’:...
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. failed to deliver on a promise to deactivate thousands of inactive...
These companies say their tech could help engineer our way out of climate change. Will...
8 min. read