Grizzly bears and the Tahltan First Nation in northwest B.C. have coexisted since time immemorial. The Tahltan have always responsibly harvested the bears, using all parts of the animals for food, clothing, regalia, tools, medicine and ceremony. Hunting the apex predators also maintains balance in the ecosystem and ensures there’s ample caribou, moose and salmon to feed the community, according to Tahltan Central Government President Chad Day.

But when the B.C. government banned the grizzly bear trophy hunt in 2017, the system was thrown out of whack. While the Tahltan could still hunt for food, social and ceremonial purposes, sport hunting, which took about 100 bears a year from the territory, was strictly prohibited. 

Since the ban, members of the Tahltan have reported increasing numbers of grizzlies in their territory, which spans nearly 100,000 square kilometres, Day said. Community members have also reported that those bears are becoming more aggressive toward humans. More grizzlies also means fewer fish and ungulates, important food sources for the community, according to Day.

Day went out on grizzly hunt to gain a deeper understanding of the situation on a landscape. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

For decades, the Tahltan have been working with the province to establish a holistic, science-based wildlife management plan that respects their jurisdiction and knowledge, but have made little progress. So in September, the nation announced its own wildlife management plan through which it encourages and incentivizes Tahltan members to exercise their Aboriginal hunting rights. 

Members are now being paid to harvest grizzly bears, black bears and wolves in key areas of the territory to restore balance between predators and ungulates and decrease pressure on fish. They are guided by traditional Tahltan practices and required to make cultural use of every animal taken from the landscape.

The Narwhal spoke with Day about the decision, the details of the plan and how Indigenous communities can take leadership roles in land and wildlife stewardship.

A map of Tahltan territory in B.C. Map: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

You’ve been trying to work with the province to make changes to its wildlife management system. The Tahltan Nation has made its own plan now. Can you tell me a bit about that process?

We’ve been in discussion with the province for decades about improving wildlife management. In more recent years, we’ve definitely made more progress than in previous decades, but the progress is not nearly fast enough. And it’s not nearly robust enough to address the issue of dwindling populations [of ungulates] and to address the issues with the data gaps and a growing imbalance between predator and prey that we see on the landscape. 

The province doesn’t do wildlife counts and utilize best practices for wildlife management nearly enough, but for the limited counts that they have done over the years on species like moose and caribou, those so-called scientific studies are riddled with so many gaps. But they also confirm what we’re reporting on the ground, which is that there are less ungulates. They haven’t done the predator numbers, but we know what we see on the landscape and we’re extremely confident that the collective observations on the land are accurate and tell us that there are more predators than ever.

Tahltan hunters are not permitted to kill grizzly bears with cubs. Photo: Thomas Lipke / Unsplash

I’ve seen an increasing number of grizzlies. And for the people that live in the territory and for the backcountry users, both locals and other stakeholders like guide outfitters and hikers, there seems to be a general consensus that there are not only more than ever, but also their behaviour is becoming more desperate, more aggressive, which makes sense if they’re not being hunted and if there’s a lot more pressure and competition on the landscape.

The overarching goal of the plan is to manage apex predators, which then sustains other species, but what does that mean in a practical sense? How did you decide how many animals could be hunted and how much to pay for them?

I’ll tell you the numbers because even if we did everything in our power to try and keep it close to our chest, in my experience it’s always easier just to be upfront with these things so that rumours don’t get out of control.

We have a wildlife technical team. It’s made up of biologists and they have access to scientists and all the public data around wildlife management and counts. So they know the historical data around how many grizzly bears were taken out of Tahltan territory by guide outfitters and by resident hunters before the grizzly bear [hunting] ban. They also have scientific numbers around approximately how many wolves are within our territory, which is about the size of Portugal and 99 per cent wilderness, if not more.

Our wildlife technical team came back to us and said that our territory could easily sustain a harvest of at least 100 grizzlies [a year]. We had a choice to make around whether or not we wanted to make that sex specific and we said we’re not going to make it sex specific, which is going to be controversial. We will compensate our members for harvesting adult males or females, not with cubs. If you see a female grizzly on her own, then we would treat that the same as with a male grizzly. 

We’re going to be paying our members $1,000 for every grizzly that they harvest, and we’ll make sure that they utilize it properly, culturally, and they will be protected under Aboriginal law to practise those harvesting rights in a way that is compliant or that’s consistent with Tahltan cultural practices. We will have limits on how many bears would be incentivized for Tahltan hunters. What we decided was that we would incentivize two grizzly bears, two black bears and four wolves every calendar year for a Tahltan hunter.

Tahltan hunters are paid $500 to kill a black bear. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

We know that there are thousands of black bears and their population is not a conservation concern in our area. We’ve put a number of at least 150 black bears a year and they’ve got to be adults. No bears with cubs, but could be a female or a male. And you’ve got to utilize the bear properly. [The incentive for a black bear is $500.]

And then on wolves, this one even caught me by surprise, but it went back to the wildlife technical team and they suggest that it should be at least 250 a year. Again, after engaging with our hunters, we decided that we would incentivize up to four wolves per hunter at $500 a wolf.

The Tahltan wildlife department encourages hunters to target areas that have high concentrations of caribou. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

Once our hunters and our people figure out this policy, they basically have from today until the end of the Christmas season to harvest up to eight animals for those incentives. It doesn’t take a mathematician to figure out that that could equate to $5,000 and if they did that the following year, there would be another $5,000. 

We offered those incentives to help reimburse Tahltans for their time and effort. The reason why a grizzly incentive would be worth more [than a black bear or wolf incentive] is because hunting grizzlies takes far more effort. And quite frankly, grizzlies would in most cases have a far more significant impact on ungulate populations in certain areas. We’re definitely going to do what we can to encourage our wildlife department and our Tahltan hunters that are going to help us with this important initiative to try and manage it in a way so that we are targeting areas that have high concentrations of ungulates, particularly around the calving season.

Day hunts on Tahltan territory. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

Management of land and wildlife is something First Nations have practised for thousands of years based on traditional knowledge and observation. Do you think this plan sets an example for a different way to do things here in B.C.?

How we would manage wildlife, if we had control over all of the laws that the province has at their disposal, is obviously very different because clearly some of the decisions they made are highly politicized. And also, you know, you’ve got that famous phrase out there, “Don’t tell me about your priorities, show me your budget.” 

With this initiative, Tahltans are putting up a lot of our own money to make predator management and wildlife management a priority. And if you do the research, you’ll quickly learn that other jurisdictions that have a lot of wildlife like Alaska, Montana and Oregon spend significantly more money proportionally and the practices and the management tools that they use are far more robust than what we use in British Columbia. 

Tahltan territory spans 11 per cent of British Columbia. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

And that’s a big reason why British Columbia has done such a poor job not only managing wildlife in our territory but in many other portions of the province as well. And I’m not one to step on the toes of other First Nation territories, but the reality is that as the province manages wildlife, species like caribou and moose go extinct or become endangered or can no longer be hunted for conservation concerns. 

“If you take hunting moose, hunting caribou, fishing for salmon away from Tahltan people, we’re not Tahltan anymore.”

Where do those hunters go after that happens? They come north to Tahltan territory, where there are still populations of these animals. And at the end of the day, we’re trying to make sure that we have it there for future generations. One of the strongest cultural identity pieces that the Tahltan people still hold dear and practice consistently is hunting. If you take hunting moose, hunting caribou, fishing for salmon away from Tahltan people, we’re not Tahltan anymore. So this isn’t just a battle over hunting rights or fishing rights — it’s something we take extremely seriously, because we aren’t Tahltan if we can’t do those things in our culture. We need healthy moose, healthy caribou, healthy salmon and healthy ungulate populations.

Day hunts with his eldest child. Ensuring future generations can hunt and practise their culture is one of the main motivators behind the nation’s new wildlife management plan. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

Unfortunately, because the province has created practices that have so many different stakeholders having an impact on the ungulate population, we’re not balancing those harvest numbers by also harvesting predators carefully like Tahltans have been doing for thousands of years. It doesn’t take long for that imbalance to have really negative impacts on the land. That’s what we’re seeing and that’s what we’re trying to fight against.

It’s important if we as humans are going to compete for the same food sources that we have to manage all of these populations together.

I certainly think about all those things when we make a decision like this. I believe that other nations can help preserve their Aboriginal Rights and their fishing and hunting rights in the way that we’re trying to if they take some action. Maybe we serve as a good example for others. But at the end of the day, Tahltans can only try to solve our cultural rights in our territory and that’s our focus.

Tahltan territory is about 99 per cent wilderness. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

A lot of people are against the grizzly hunt and have a strong emotional reaction to the idea. What would you say to them?

It obviously starts with education and people being properly informed. First and foremost, it would be good if people understood that Tahltan territory is over 99 per cent wilderness. And in Tahltan territory, there are more grizzly bears than there are people, guaranteed. There are actually probably thousands more grizzly bears than there are people. So it’s an extremely different reality. And it’s very inappropriate, if you don’t have any firsthand knowledge of what it’s like to live in that vastly different environment, to be telling the people that have been stewards of those lands in that environment for thousands of years what they should do and what they shouldn’t do. 

Grizzly bears outnumber people in Tahltan territory, according to Day. Photo: Janko Ferlič / Unsplash

Day hunts on Tahltan territory. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

I think it’s also important for people to understand that even though we’re 11 per cent of the province, there has been no premier that has come out to our territory for over 30 years. Our MLA spends less than one per cent of his time in Tahltan territory, even though it’s probably over 50 per cent of the land base that he represents. We’re in a very vulnerable region of the province. And for the people that have never been here, they wouldn’t understand that. 

These are the types of facts that you share with people and they quickly understand that it’s very important to be properly informed before forming an opinion. 

“The people that think that bears and wolves are cute and cuddly animals from watching Disney movies are sadly mistaken.”

A lot of the people that admire grizzly bears are going to try to push arguments and say that not all grizzly bears eat ungulates. They’re probably going to try and downplay how many ungulates are eaten by grizzly bears. There have been some studies done in places like Alaska and other states as well that showcase just how devastating both grizzlies and black bears in certain areas can be on ungulates, particularly the calves during calving season. Those kinds of studies have never been done in Tahltan territory. So some of the anti-hunting groups will try to use that to discredit our initiative. 

Tahltan hunters have observed lower numbers of moose since B.C. implemented the grizzly bear hunting ban in 2017. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

We take the position that our Elders and our culture always made it a priority to harvest wolves and bears on purpose for predator management. And obviously when they harvested these animals, they also utilized them to the best of their ability. So wolves were never eaten, but their furs were certainly utilized, and some of the bones were utilized. And then with black bears, they were heavily utilized — the fur, the bones, the meat was eaten. And then with grizzly bears the same thing, but in the modern day not as many people will eat grizzly bears but it’s certainly possible if they wanted to.

The other thing that I think is important for people to understand is that there have been studies in jurisdictions that take wildlife management seriously that show grizzly bears can harvest up to 40 ungulate calves a month. So the people that think that bears and wolves are cute and cuddly animals from watching Disney movies are sadly mistaken. And they would understand how sadly mistaken they are if they lived amongst our people and see what we see with the devastation and the true character of predators in the wilderness.  

Why is it so important for Tahltans to exercise the right to manage your resources on your own territory?

This is one of those stories that can really resonate with so many other Indigenous Peoples in so many other portions of the province. The province is always quick to point out the efforts that they are making. But sometimes I feel like if you have a house that is burning down, when it comes to things like wildlife and fisheries, the province will send you a couple buckets of water and ask to get a big pat on the back for all the efforts that they’re making to bring these buckets of water. But if, at the end of the day, the house is still burning down and not getting rebuilt or if the fire doesn’t stop burning, then they’re failing — we’re all failing. 

Even though B.C. has made more efforts with us in the past few years than ever before, the ungulate numbers are still dwindling and the predator numbers are increasing. There’s still a significant amount of work to do. We didn’t take the decision lightly. We’re just doing what we feel we need to do to make sure that we address the safety concerns and that we stop the trend and then, God willing, we reverse it so that we can create more wildlife on the landscape, more ungulates and maybe less predators and just a better balance.

Caribou have been wiped out in some territories in B.C. The Tahltan people are taking action today so the same thing doesn’t happen in their territory, according to Day. Photo: Adam Amir / Tahltan Central Government

There were caribou on Haida Gwaii, probably for thousands of years, and they were wiped out in the ’30s. My children are Wet’suwet’en and it touches me in a tender place that they basically don’t have rights to hunt caribou anymore because either they’ve been completely wiped out or there are like 10 of them left. I don’t even like keeping track of it because it just makes me so sad. And then there are other areas like our neighbours in Treaty 8 territory that have caribou pens. We don’t want to wait until we are putting our caribou in pens like cattle and putting our salmon in fish farms. 

Up close with B.C.’s endangered baby caribou — and the First Nations trying to save them

If we can manage wildlife properly, then we can maintain healthy wildlife populations, which is not just good for us as Tahltan people. It’s good for ecotourism. It’s good for other industries as well, whether that’s guide outfitting or others. I know people have a lot of mixed feelings or bad feelings about guide outfitting. But truthfully, if we do this properly, my goal is to make sure that we have healthy wildlife populations and proper wildlife practices in place so that guide outfitters, resident hunters and Tahltan people can all hunt together every year in Tahltan territory moving forward. 

I think that’s a very important message to get across, that we believe that we can manage this so that we all can get a fair portion of the wildlife. For some of these people that don’t understand our position or don’t believe in Indigenous self-determination and co-management, I just don’t understand why you would put so much hope in the province when there’s been such a long track record of failures with wildlife management. 

We cannot fail at something like wildlife management because if we fail as Indigenous people, we don’t just lose hunting opportunities like the average resident hunter — we lose our culture. That’s a really important message to get across to people, and to the world.

In a perfect world, what would you like to see?

I want to see a world-class wildlife management regime in Tahltan territory that is co-managed with the province in true partnership that provides a sustainable, long-term wildlife management system that allows resident hunters, guide outfitters and Tahltans to hunt in our nation — forevermore. We can share the resources, but we can only share our abundance if we manage it properly. And we can do that, but it’s going to require robust changes to the way we’re doing it now.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The B.C. Cattlemen’s Association paid trappers more than $500,000 for killing nearly 700 wolves in just over four years under a provincially funded program designed to reduce livestock predation, according to a document obtained from the province. 

The association’s Livestock Protection Program allows trappers to kill entire wolf packs, including juveniles, if the predators kill, injure or harass even one cow or sheep.

“We are already seeing some positive results in the areas where we have had persistent predation issues,” according to the program’s latest status report. “Undeniably, targeting problem packs and eliminating them have reduced producer losses.”

A total of 684 wolves and 314 coyotes were killed on provincial Crown lands and private ranch lands between Jan. 1, 2016, when the program started, and March 31, 2020. 

Trappers typically receive $350 plus gas mileage to set their traps and $750 per wolf on the condition they take out the entire pack (typically five or six animals) and destroy the hides, according to Kevin Boon, the association’s Kamloops-based general manager. Coyotes, which hunt solo or in pairs, are worth $250 each. 

The Ministry of Agriculture contributed $450,000 to the program in the fiscal year ending March 2019 and slightly less in previous years, according to the report. 

“We are confident that we are providing a necessary service that is well developed, responsibly delivered, and, to the majority, socially acceptable,” the program manager wrote in the status report, which calls the program “very responsible and effective.” 

Not everyone agrees.   

News of the Livestock Protection Program came as a shock to a leading wolf advocate.

“The numbers are staggering, unbelievable,” said Ian McAllister, co-founder of Pacific Wild.

McAllister is calling for an immediate suspension of the program pending an independent review and the implementation of an education campaign.

“There is so much evidence and information that shows that education and best practices  and animal husbandry in the ranching community will allow wolves to coexist with livestock,” he said. “We know that’s the case.”

Province handed over livestock predator management due to time constraints

The B.C. Conservation Officer Service typically responds to public complaints about predators, including bears and cougars, but handed over wolf and coyote livestock predation issues to the B.C. Cattlemen’s Association in 2016.

“It didn’t rank high on their priority list of things to do,” Boon said. “It kind of got fit in if they could do it.”

According to the status report — which covers Jan. 1, 2016, to March 31, 2019 — 1,293 livestock were killed, injured or harassed by wild predators, including 819 calves, 170 beef cows, 138 lambs, 91 ewes and 59 beef yearlings. The majority of attacks happened in the Interior. 

In just over four years, 170 beef cows were killed, injured or harassed by wild predators in B.C. Photo: Amber Bracken

The report suggests declining deer and moose populations are driving predators to hunt livestock and says the program “does not address the much more serious problem of how wildlife is managed.” 

“There will be no successful recovery of the deer and moose, that are the traditional staples of the predator’s diet, until we do a better job of managing predators,” it says. “Until this is realized, the problem we face with livestock will continue and there will never be an opportunity for the other wildlife species to recover.”

‘Wildlife specialists’ typically dispatched within 48 hours to kill wolves

When ranchers discover livestock that has apparently been killed, injured or harassed by predators, they notify the B.C. Cattlemen’s Association’s Livestock Protection Program, kickstarting a process to verify if the livestock was indeed killed by a predator.

Ranchers can verify kills of their own livestock if they have completed a one-day training course offered by conservation officers. Almost 800 individuals are trained verifiers, according to the status report. Photos must be taken to help substantiate claims.  

More than 50 trappers working under contract with the Livestock Protection Program — known as “wildlife specialists” — can also verify kills. To earn a trapping licence in B.C., one must complete a three-day education course.

Once a predator kill is verified by a rancher or a wildlife specialist, the coordinator of the Livestock Protection Program, a representative of the Conservation Officer Service and a Ministry of Agriculture staffer review the file. The goal is to complete the multi-level case review within 48 hours. If everything checks out,  a trapper is assigned to take out the pack. 

Wildlife specialists bait their traps with meat the wolves would naturally eat, such as deer, and set them within a 500-metre radius of a kill site. They’re required to check them daily.

Padded leg-hold traps are mostly used because they allow for the potential release of wildlife accidentally captured, Boon said. Provincial conservation officers are often called to tranquilize and release larger animals. 

The report says 81 “non-target” animals were released or dispatched through March 2019, including bears, cougars, foxes, badgers, lynx, bobcats, deer, raccoons, eagles and even nine domestic dogs. Of 68 cases in which specifics are provided, 45 animals were released while 23 died.

In some cases, wolf trapping has been suspended due to grizzly activity in the Kootenay region. “One guy caught the same bear three times,” Boon said.

The B.C. government’s census of wolves estimates the population falls somewhere between 5,300 and 11,600. Photo: Ian McAllister / Pacific Wild

Ranchers are compensated for losses but must take preventative measures

As part of the program, ranchers are expected to be proactive about reducing predation on their livestock, adopting at least “one or two” of several best practice measures, according to Boon.

Those measures include: disposing of livestock carcasses where scavengers do not have access; bringing in injured livestock to discourage further attacks; riding the range to identify predator problems as soon as possible and using guard dogs, fencing and repellents such as bells, radios, night lighting and motion sensors.

Under a separate program, funded 60 per cent by the federal government and 40 per cent by the province, B.C. ranchers receive compensation for livestock lost to predators. More than $900,000 in government compensation was paid out from January 2016 to March 2020. 

But Boon said ranchers are typically only compensated for five to 10 per cent of actual losses because some animals can’t be found and some kills can’t be verified.

Province says program has measures to avoid conflict of interest

Doug Donaldson, minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, declined to be interviewed, but the ministry provided a statement saying most wolves avoid livestock, even in backcountry areas, so conflict is not inevitable but rather occasional.

B.C. ranchers frequently graze their cattle in the backcountry during the growing season to access forage, then return to their home ranches for winter. Last year, 57 wolf kills occurred on Crown land compared with 66 on private land. 

The ministry said taking out entire packs is the most effective strategy since packs are thought to “function as fully integrated units,” rather than just one or two members preying on livestock.

As for program oversight, the province points out that all files are reviewed to ensure “accurate evidence to support an attack by a predator.” 

The ministry statement said conservation officers may also conduct compliance inspections to ensure wildlife specialists are operating in accordance with permits. 

The province said the use of the “producers themselves to undertake verification is essential because they are the people who, in areas that are often remote, are positioned to collect evidence in a timely manner.”

It added: “To avoid conflict of interest, the verification process is just an application; government staff make the final decision based on available information.”

One way to distinguish a predator kill — as opposed to scavenging livestock that died of other causes — is to look for bruising, which suggests “the animal was alive when it happened,” Boon said.

Cattle may die on the range for various reasons unrelated to predation, including diseases, rustling or even lightning strikes. Ravens are also capable of killing newborn calves. 

Trappers are encouraged to kill entire wolf packs because they are thought to “function as fully integrated units,” rather than just one or two members preying on livestock, according to the B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Photo: Patricia van Casteren / Flickr

Scientist raises concerns with program oversight, ecological impact of taking out apex predators

 Paul Paquet is a senior scientist at Raincoast Conservation Foundation and adjunct professor at the University of Victoria who has studied wolves around the world, including in B.C., since 1979. 

His concerns with the cattlemen’s program are numerous: level of program compliance and oversight; the ability of individuals to distinguish between predation and scavenging; humaneness of trapping and the ecological impact of taking out apex predators.

Killing an entire pack may provide ranchers with temporary relief, he noted, but it opens up an area for colonization by a new pack. 

“Wolves, being resilient and looking for new areas, move in right away,” he said. “It keeps repeating and repeating.” 

Paquet added: “There is predation. It’s real. On the other hand, maybe that’s a cost of operation, a risk you face, particularly on public lands.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Brian Falconer is more than happy to admit that he and his colleagues at Raincoast Conservation Foundation have dismal records as guide outfitters.

In fact, in the 33,500 square kilometres of B.C.’s Great Bear Rainforest where Raincoast holds the commercial hunting licence — which gives the organization the right to escort foreign hunters into the area to shoot black bears, cougars, mountain goats and wolverines — the success rate has been zero.

Unless, that is, you count the wildlife photos.

“The only ones that can take anyone in for trophy hunting is Raincoast and we take a different type of hunter,” said Ross Dixon, Raincoast communications director.

Guide outfitters have exclusive rights in the area of their licence to take non-B.C. residents on hunting trips. Hunting for food by B.C. residents does not come under the purview of guide outfitters.

Raincoast is now raising funds for the $100,000 deposit needed to secure the commercial hunting tenure for the Kitlope, the world’s largest intact area of coastal temperate rainforest where the longest fjord in the world stretches into the heart of the province.

The site of an old cannery in the Kitlope at Wakasu. A Canadian Pacific Railway steamer used to bring tourists here. Pictured here is the vessel Maple Leaf of Maple Leaf Adventures. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

A swallowtail butterfly at M’Skusa, the final estuary before Kitlope Lake. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

Trophy hunting of wolves, black bears and cougars legal in B.C.

The Kitlope has been protected from logging since the Haisla Nation and the province signed a joint management agreement in 1994. The provincial government banned grizzly bear hunting in 2017, but trophy hunting for other species is still allowed.

Cecil Paul, hereditary chief of the Xenaxiala people, described the Kitlope and the species that live there as the bank of his people.

“They have been robbing our bank for years for no purpose other than to put a trophy on their wall,” Cecil told Raincoast.

“We don’t understand this and we want to stop it.”

It is a sentiment shared by many British Columbians who are surprised to learn that trophy hunting is still allowed in the Great Bear Rainforest and in most provincial parks, Falconer said.

Raincoast has until the end of July to raise the deposit, with about $85,000 already raised. Once the deposit has been paid, fundraising will start for the $550,000 needed to complete the purchase that will give Raincoast the hunting rights for another 5,300 square kilometres, including the Kitlope Conservancy and surrounding area. The deadline for raising the full amount is December 2020, but, with the support of the Haisla Nation, Raincoast aims to have the tenure secured by the end of this year.

It may seem expensive Falconer said but trophy hunters are willing to pay more than $35,000 to kill bears, wolves and cougars and more than $10,000 for mountain goats, bighorn sheep and moose, meaning the value of commercial hunting tenures has soared.

“And remember $550,000 can’t buy half a house in Vancouver,” said Falconer, who, almost 30 years after first visiting the Kitlope at the invitation of the Haisla and Xenaksiala Nations, remains awestruck at the beauty of the area.

A black bear in the Great Bear Rainforest. Despite a ban on the trophy hunting of grizzly bears, black bears can still legally be hunted in British Columbia. Photo: April Bencze / Raincoast

‘It’s like Yosemite on steroids’

“It’s breathtaking and overwhelming. I have never seen a place like it,” he said describing glacial, milky water, trees more than 1,000 years old and granite walls stretching up thousands of feet.

“It’s like Yosemite on steroids. There’s a waterfall every 100 yards —it’s the land of waterfalls — and when you get to the head of (the fjord)  there’s a gigantic, beautiful estuary with willow and alder and sedge meadows so you have all the river species and birds. It’s the highway of the north coast for wildlife,” Falconer said.

Which is exactly what makes it so attractive for trophy hunters.

One of many waterfalls in Gardner Canal. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

A river flows through an area of the Great Bear Rainforest known as the Kitlope. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

The ultimate goal of Raincoast is to buy all commercial hunting licences in the 64,000 square kilometres of the Great Bear Rainforest, so the area will be protected not only from trophy hunters, but also political whims. In 2002, for instance, the Liberal government scrapped the short-lived ban on grizzly hunting brought in by the former NDP government.

The organization also hopes that, by eliminating the need for governments to compensate tenure holders, it will remove a major disincentive to restrict trophy hunting of other species.

However, everything depends on Raincoast’s capacity to fundraise and, unless there is a massive cash donation, not all offers to sell tenures can be immediately accepted

“Other guide outfitters have approached us, because they see the writing on the wall. … There’s certainly more potential. It’s the new economy. It’s the non-extractive economy of B.C. that isn’t wasteful or extractive,” Falconer said.

A grizzly bear in an intertidal area in the Great Bear Rainforest. Grizzly bear trophy hunting is now banned in British Columbia, but hunters can still kill black bears, wolves and cougars. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

An estuary at Wakasu in the Great Bear Rainforest. Photo: Alex Harris / Raincoast

From hunting guides to wildlife viewing operators

There is no better illustration of the changing economy than in the Kitlope where the tenure has been held since 2015 by Angus Morrison of Wild Coast Outfitters, who is now transitioning his business to wildlife viewing.

Morrison, who also works as a helicopter pilot, said his primary motive in selling the tenure to Raincoast is conservation.

“They probably have the best plan for preserving what is left. I love the wilderness and I travel quite a bit and there is a definite decline. It’s not that I think the hunting, as we were doing it, was wiping out the animals, but the motivation behind some of it is a bit murky,” Morrison told The Narwhal.

“If the animals are already under pressure, I don’t see the point in continuing to hunt them. I think we need to slow down resource extraction and commercial fishing and I know that’s easier said than done.”

Hunting trips booked through Wild Coast Outfitters were conducted on foot and were tough going, which weeded out clients who simply wanted a quick kill, a big head on the walls and bragging rights, but there is that element in the industry, Morrison said.

“I like the idea of seeing people going out there and showing them grizzly bears and things without killing the animals,” he said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

In January, Craig Comstock did what he’s done many times over the years — loaded his two dogs into his vehicle and drove from his home in Calgary to the backcountry for a day hike.

Comstock, 44, is an avid outdoorsman — he hikes, fishes and hunts pheasants and partridges — but none of that prepared him for what he found in the bush.

First, he came across two dead foxes and a dead wolf.

“Their heads had been cut off, their feet had been cut off and they had been skinned,” he told The Narwhal, noting that he also saw “several piles of bait meat.”

Then, as he walked on, he felt the prickly sensation of being watched. His eyes met those of a wolf, just 10 metres away. It was huge, he said — much, much bigger than his own dogs.

He froze.

Then he noticed that the wolf was trapped in a wire snare. Comstack and the wolf stared at each other.

“I wish there was something I can do to help,” Comstack remembers thinking.

“I can’t cut you loose, buddy,” he thought.

The wolf lay back down in the snow.

Comstock would find six other dead wolves caught on the same trapline.

When John Marriott, a local wildlife photographer and conservationist in Canmore, Alta., first heard word about the live wolf found in a snare, he set out to check the traplines himself.

What he found, he says, was a “scene of carnage.” He told The Narwhal he found three dead wolves, nine dead coyotes and four dead foxes — all of which had been skinned.

All, he says, were “just laying there with the meat in various stages of decomposition.”

Craig Comstock came across several skinned dead animals on a recent hike along the front ranges of the Rocky Mountains. Photo: Craig Comstock

Comstock says he found several piles of bait meat near the decaying bodies of skinned wolves on a recent hike along the front ranges of the Rocky Mountains. Photo: Craig Comstock

Parks Canada confirms radio-collared wolves killed

Comstock and Marriott’s findings are just a small part of the annual wolf kill in Alberta, but wilderness advocates fear recent similar killings may have all but wiped out two of the three wolf packs whose home territory is largely inside Banff National Park.

When wolves leave the protection of the park, they are fair game for hunters and trappers — a practice scientists and advocates say is threatening the park’s ability to protect the wide-ranging species that call it home.

Alberta has no restrictions on baiting wolves for trapping on public lands, including right next to national parks.

Parks Canada confirmed to The Narwhal last week that in recent months a trapper killed two radio-collared wolves just outside of Banff National Park, saying there is “anecdotal information” that 11 wolves have been killed in total, a number that can’t be confirmed until the spring.

Jesse Whittington, a wildlife ecologist with Parks Canada, told The Narwhal that the two wolves were killed by the same trapper less than a kilometre apart, just six kilometres outside of the boundary of Banff National Park. A third radio-collared wolf hasn’t been seen since December and may have been baited and trapped as well.

The movements, starting in February of 2018, of two radio-collared wolves in the Red Deer and Panther-Cascade packs. Both wolves were eventually trapped and killed just outside of the boundary of Banff National Park. Image: Parks Canada

11 wolves killed by single trapper: wildlife photographer

Three wolf packs travel in Banff National Park as part of their home territory: the Cascade-Panther, Red Deer and Bow Valley packs. Wolves naturally recolonized the Bow Valley area in the 1980s, having been driven out of the park entirely roughly 30 years earlier.

According to Marriott, 11 wolves were killed by the same trapper just outside of the park boundary, on public land.

Wolves can legally be hunted on public land by anyone with a licence to keep livestock on that land at any time of the year, but trappers must stick to the trapping season (winter) and are often after pelts.

Marriott says trapping these particular wolves has significantly depleted the population of wolves that roam through Banff National Park. The Red Deer pack consisted of eight wolves at last count in December; the Cascade-Panther pack had just one wolf remaining.

“Whether there’s still one wolf left in [the pack], or whether they’re gone altogether, nobody really knows at this point,” Marriott says.

“But given the number of wolves that the trapper has taken out, there’s a really high likelihood that the pack is just gone altogether.”

Wildlife photographer John Marriott often captures images of wild wolves in Banff National Park, but on a recent outing he found a “scene of carnage.” Photo: John Marriott, wildernessprints.com

No buffer zones, ‘no chance’

Marriott advocates for buffer zones to be established around the periphery of national parks, to limit the hunting and trapping of wide-ranging species.

Mark Hebblewhite, a professor of ecology at the University of Montana, told The Narwhal by email that buffer zones have been established outside other parks. “Yellowstone and Glacier Parks in Montana have established zones outside of their national parks with a reduced quota of two wolves that can be trapped,” he noted.

“This policy was adopted by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks to specifically reduce negative effects of trapping on Yellowstone and Glacier.”

But no such buffer zone exists around Canada’s Rocky Mountain national parks, and trappers and hunters can often collect financial rewards in the form of bounties for their kills. (A Parks Canada communications representative did not respond to a question about buffer zones by press time.)

“Parks Canada requires that parks are managed for ecological integrity,” Jodi Hilty, president and chief scientist of the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, told The Narwhal.

“Most national parks are too small to really sustain populations like wolves by themselves so parks really need to think about how adjacent lands and activities can inadvertently affect ecological integrity in parks.”

A 2002 study on wolf mortality in Banff National Park found that humans were responsible for three quarters of wolf deaths between 1987 and 2001 — and 67 per cent of those deaths were from hunting and trapping outside the park’s boundaries.

The study cites the “edge effect” of protected areas as being largely responsible for wolf mortality.

“It’s generally accepted that it’s good to have buffer zones of less human disturbance and pressure on wildlife around core protected areas,” Carolyn Campbell, conservation specialist with the Alberta Wilderness Association, told The Narwhal.

Wolves often baited

At 6,641 square kilometres, Banff National Park encompasses a large portion of Alberta’s Rockies — part of the Yellowstone to Yukon wildlife corridor and crucial habitat for wide-ranging species which require ample habitat to find food and mates.

“It’s an enormous park,” Marriott says. “But it’s still is not big enough to protect very many wolf packs from the persecution that they face as soon as they leave the protected areas.”

Wolves can range over an area up to roughly 2,600 square kilometres according to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. A 2002 study in Banff found wolves’ average home range is 1,709 square kilometres.

“For these wider-ranging species where the park is not big enough to protect them…there really needs to be a bigger zone where they are protected from hunting and trapping,” Marriott told The Narwhal.

“Wolves, cougars, lynx, bobcat, wolverines — all of those animals are still either trapped or hunted if they step one foot out of a national park.”

Whittington echoed that risk. When “wolves travel outside of the park, they’re at risk of hunting and trapping,” he said.

“They spend 80 per cent of their time in Banff National Park,” he said. “But when they travel out of the park they encounter… different hazards.”

Whittington noted that wolves travel in tight packs in the winter. When a tight pack of wolves is drawn to an area — they are often baited — and encounters a trap line, many wolves may be trapped all at once.

“If all the animals are traveling together,” Whittington said, “they have a higher risk.”

Bait hanging as part of a neck snare near the spot Craig Comstock found several wolf carcasses while on a hike in January. Photo: Craig Comstock

Parks Canada not able to confirm total wolves killed

The wolf packs that mostly travel in Banff National Park are small.

In December, the Red Deer pack had eight wolves, Whittington of Parks Canada said. One of those wolves — a breeding female — is among the two confirmed to have been trapped and killed. Another wolf in the pack was radio-collared, but that wolf hasn’t been spotted since December, when it was captured on remote camera.

And in the Panther Pack, after the death of the other radio-collared wolf, there was likely only one wolf left in the pack.

Whittington told The Narwhal that Parks Canada will not be able to confirm “anecdotal information” that 11 wolves have been killed until the spring, when park staff can check remote cameras and estimate the populations.

“It can be difficult to keep tabs,” Whittington said. “When wolves are caught in snares, we’re not notified.”

“Certainly trapping is a common cause of mortality in the eastern slopes,” he said.

Marriott says he confirmed with a representative of the Government of Alberta that 11 wolves had been killed on one trapline just outside of the park so far this winter. Reached by email, Olav Rokne, a spokesperson for Alberta Environment and Parks, could only confirm to The Narwhal that 11 wolves had been reported as killed by trappers in the larger trapping area since the start of the trapping season.

Rokne noted that trapping records showing the number of wolves killed will not be released until the end of the trapping season in the spring.

The Narwhal attempted to contact local trappers and outfitters, but did not receive a response.

A wolf pack spotted near the town of Banff. Photo: John Marriott, wildernessprints.com

700 wolves trapped each year in Alberta

According to Rokne, there are roughly 7,000 wolves in the province.

“We are seeing signs of growing populations of wolves provincially,” he noted by email. “Many of these animals are being observed on settled portions of the landbase.”

Wolves are not listed as a species at risk in Canada, though some populations in the U.S. are classified as endangered or threatened. Wolves were first protected under the federal Endangered Species Act in the U.S. in 1973.

“Canada has no such designation for the wolf despite the fact that it has been extirpated from much of its former habitat,” according to the Alberta Wilderness Association.

An average of 700 wolves are trapped and killed annually in Alberta, Rokne said. On average, 52 wolves are killed adjacent to Banff and Jasper each year.

No limits on number of wolves killed

Many fur-bearing animals are trapped for their pelts. In the 2016/2017 season, 823 wolf pelts were sold according to data from the Alberta Trappers Association — each fetched an average of $146.09.

A trapper can obtain a fur management licence — a licence to trap —  for around $40. Many trappers and outfitters bait their traps with meat to attract predators.

While trapping has long been a way of living off the land for some Indigenous people, it has also become popular with tourists, with some guide outfitters offering baited “trapline adventures” for $3,500 or combined wolf hunts and trapline adventures for $6,950. As one guide outfitter website puts it, “a wolf [is] one of the most sought after trophies in the world.”

Alberta does not put limits on the number of wolves a trapper can kill in a season, and “individual trappers are not subject to a quota on wolves,” Rokne of the Government of Alberta said in an email, adding that the province monitors the overall wolf population and the annual harvest.

Currently, he said, the province sees “no need to impose a quota.”

Trapping is allowed on much of Alberta’s public land, including in most provincial parks, according to Rokne. There is no limit on the number of wolves that can be trapped adjacent to national parks.

On the province’s trapping regulation website, a message from Minister of Environment and Parks Shannon Phillips reads, “Trappers play an important role in helping manage Alberta’s furbearer populations and minimize human wildlife conflict related to furbearers.”

The Alberta Trapping Association (which did not respond to request for comment) writes on its website that, “when it comes to wildlife management, trapping is right up there with hunting as far as effectiveness and necessity for the promotion of local ecosystems and population maintenance.”

But the Alberta Wilderness Association’s websites notes that “wolves play a valuable role in keeping wild ecosystems healthy.” Wolves are considered a keystone species, meaning their presence is essential for the functioning of a healthy ecosystem.

Campbell of the Alberta Wilderness Association told The Narwhal the association respects the work some hunting and trapping groups do in habitat conservation, but also notes that “wolves are really valuable top predators.”

A lone black wolf in a winter snowstorm. Photo: John Marriott, wildernessprints.com

The debate over neck snares

Government regulations require that non-killing snares need to be checked every 24 or 48 hours depending on the type of licence, meaning animals can legally be left for up to two days.

But advocates worry that animals are also left to struggle in neck snares that are supposed to kill animals immediately, sometimes strangling to death over hours or even days. Marriott recently documented these concerns in an episode of his video series, Exposed.

The Alberta Trappers Association makes it clear on its website that it does not condone the suffering of trapped animals.

The association concedes that “larger predators like wolves, coyotes, lynx and foxes are usually taken in live-holding traps,” noting that devices that kill such large animals immediately “would be dangerous to use.”

But it also claims that, “the specialized and extremely-regulated traps were designed with the animals in mind. As many as 90% of all trapped animals in Canada are killed instantly.”

“It is imperative that we do not let radical animal-rights extremists ruin the image of such a beneficial practice,” it states.

Devices like killing neck snares are considered in Canada to be “non-commercial” devices, and are therefore not subject to the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards, which dictate that an animal trapped in a killing device should be “irreversibly unconscious” in less than five minutes.

Marriott said he’s seen a wide variety of species caught in traps — wolverines, cougars and others. He’s concerned that national parks are supposed to be protecting wide-ranging predators, but with trappers set up on their peripheries, possibly with heaps of bait, the animals face significant threat.

“When you consider this is a UNESCO world heritage site, it’s supposed to be the No. 1 priority of Parks Canada to protect the ecological integrity of the park,” Marriott said.

“But if they’re not getting any partnership with agencies working outside of the park, you can see that wide-ranging predators like wolves really have no chance.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

B.C. will continue to kill wolves for at least a decade in an attempt to save endangered caribou according to government documents released this week — but new research re-confirms that caribou declines are primarily caused by industrial development.

The province recently finished the first year of its province-wide wolf cull, which resulted in the killing of 84 animals. But documents released to the Globe and Mail indicate the B.C. government is aware habitat destruction is at the root of declining caribou populations.

“Ultimately, as long as the habitat conditions on and adjacent to caribou ranges remain heavily modified by industrial activities, it is unlikely that any self-sustaining caribou populations will be able to exist in the South Peace [region],” the document says.

New research published in the journal Biological Conservation re-enforces that view.

In their paper, “Witnessing Extinction,” Chris Johnson and Libby Ehlers from the University of Northern B.C. and Dale Seip from the B.C. Ministry of Environment found that the cumulative impacts of roads, mining, oil and gas development and forestry have resulted in a 65.9 per cent loss of caribou habitat.

The study concludes that in B.C. this level of habitat restoration and protection is unlikely.

“At current rates of habitat loss and population decline, these caribou, a significant component of Canada’s biodiversity, are unlikely to persist. Although the factors leading to extinction are complex, the cumulative impacts of industrial development are a correlative if not causative factor,” the authors conclude.

According to the federal government’s caribou recovery strategy, provinces are expected to meet a target of 65 per cent undisturbed caribou habitat in all ranges by 2017.

Wolf Cull Ignores Main Drivers of Caribou Decline

Experts say the wolf cull program is a band-aid solution, which overlooks the real drivers of caribou decline.

The real problem is much less exciting than wolves — it’s shrubs, according to Robert Serrouya, of the Columbia Caribou Research Project and researcher with the University of Alberta.

Shrubs — left to grow in areas that have been logged — provide prime habitat for species such as moose and deer, which in turn compete for habitat with caribou and inflate wolf populations. These species are referred to as “alternate prey.”

Serrouya is advancing research that could minimize the killing of wolves and transform caribou recovery in the province: alternate prey management.

By suppressing moose and deer populations, wolf numbers may naturally decline, Serrouya said. He added that killing more populous species that are commonly hunted for food, such as moose, deer and elk, may be received more favourably by the public than the wolf cull, which has received widespread criticism.

“The thing about prey reduction is you have to do much less predator control because you’ve reduced their food source, they won’t breed as much or colonize an area as much because you’ve reduced their resource,” he said.

Industrial Impacts in B.C. Growing

But other experts argue even killing off other prey species such as moose or deer won’t help much if the B.C. government doesn’t slow the province’s industrialization.

Paul Paquet, a wolf biologist with the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, said the killing of wolves or other prey species to save caribou while ignoring habitat loss is not only misguided, but unethical.

“It’s really frustrating, the wolf cull really creates a moral dilemma for people,” he said. “It’s useless to pursue without aggressive measures to protect habitat.”

“Habitat, habitat. That’s been repeated since the ’70s and ’80s,” he said.

Paquet said the B.C. government put a “totally arbitrary time frame” on the wolf cull, while contributing to the rapid industrialization of the north.

He pointed to the recent study showing a strong correlation between caribou declines and industrial development in B.C.’s South Peace region.

“At Raincoast, that’s been our primary point — to protect what we have, hold the line on what habitat remains.”

‘I Want To Eat a Caribou Before I Die’

Roland Willson, chief of the West Moberly First Nation in northeast B.C., said caribou declines have transformed his traditional way of life.

Speaking at a recent event in Victoria, Willson said the proposed Site C dam will mean further damage to caribou herds, which his tribe is working hard to protect.

“I want to eat a caribou before I die,” he said, talking about a book he wrote with the same title.

“We’ve put together a study on what we’re losing by not being able to harvest caribou any more,” he said, noting caribou is essential to traditional practices involving food preparation, tool and cloth making and art.

Willson said his people have had to go to court to fight against industrial development, especially mining, in caribou habitat.

“Canada has a Species at Risk Act that B.C. isn’t listening to,” he said. “B.C. isn’t following its own best practices.”

Willson said he isn’t against the province’s wolf cull in principle, adding the West Moberly people have long “managed the number of wolf packs.”

Willson added he isn’t opposed to industry, but wants the province to find a way to balance development with treaty rights that protect his nation’s right to traditional hunting practices.

“We don’t want to just look at the caribou. We want to eat them.”

The West Moberly First Nation is located in Treaty 8 territory in B.C. where there are thousands of oil and gas wells. The Treaty 8 Tribal Association is currently working on a strategic assessment of the cumulative impacts of development in the territory, which covers 279,000 square kilometres in B.C.

Too Late for Habitat Focus?

For Serrouya, the opportunity to focus solely on habitat protect might have been missed years ago.

“We used to do so much forestry in this province,” he said. “It’s much better now with large protected areas.”

He added that protection of old-growth forests has helped limit habitat loss and he argued B.C.’s caribou decline “isn’t necessarily being led by sprawling oil and gas activity.”

“It’s the legacy of intensive logging,” he said. “Unfortunately we can’t speed up the regrowth of deforested areas.”

“The key factor with all of this is, if you don’t do anything with the population side — the caribou, moose, deer, wolves — and you just focus on habitat protection, you’ll lose the caribou,” he said.

Paquet disagrees, however.

“Habitat protection has always been the most important part of this story,” he said, adding the removal of top predators, such as wolves, can be damaging for complex ecosystems in the long term.

“I think a lot of it is solvable,” Paquet said. “But it means full protection of their critical habitat, to hold the line there and reestablish them as their populations increase.”

“For that you need more critical habitat and less rampant industrial development. But will that ever happen in B.C.?”

Image Credit: B.C. wolf by John E. Marriott

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Culling Alberta’s wolves without prioritizing caribou habitat protection and restoration is like “shoveling sand,” according to Mark Hebblewhite, associate professor of ungulate habitat biology at the University of Montana.

Hebblewhite says the Alberta government is sponsoring a wolf cull without doing the one thing that could possibly scientifically justify it: conserving and restoring critical caribou habitat.

“That’s the tragedy here: the Alberta government blew the opportunity to do the right thing,” he said.

“It’s all shoveling sand without real commitment to habitat conservation.”

Scientists have warned of Alberta’s caribou losses for decades and in recent years have argued the majority of the herds are endangered with some facing an imminent risk of local extinction. Provinces have until 2017 to formulate provincial caribou recovery plans under the new federal caribou recovery strategy released in 2012.

The goal for each province is to maintain 65 per cent undisturbed habitat in all caribou ranges, according to Duncan MacDonnell, public affairs officer for Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD).

“It is ESRD’s responsibility to implement recovery plans,” for Alberta, MacDonnell said, adding that since 2004 the province has had a wolf cull in place “to hold the line while the habitat recovery plans take place and are implemented.”

Since 2006 more than 1,000 wolves have been shot in the Little Smokey and A La Peche caribou ranges.

The province’s use of predator management has generated serious controversy, especially in light of continuing sales of oil and gas leases in caribou ranges, a move experts say undermines the scientific integrity of the wolf cull.

“There are all kinds of ethical problems in this mess,” Hebblewhite told DeSmog Canada.

“It’s unethical to sell oil and gas leases in endangered caribou critical habitat.”

Hebblewhite recently published a paper, Managing Wolves to Recover Threatened Woodland Caribou in Alberta, that demonstrated the wolf cull in the Little Smoky and A La Peche regions helped stabilize local caribou herds, but won’t contribute to their long-term survival without habitat recovery and protection.

“If we had started killing wolves 10 years ago, stopped all development, and started restoration, we might actually be somewhere,” he said.

Hebblewhite is preparing to release additional research that shows that since the release of the federal recovery strategy, the federal and provincial governments have allowed significant oil and gas activity to continue in caribou ranges.

“This is where it is most egregious: on the one hand, the Alberta government is saying they are doing habitat conservation while on the other I have proprietary oil and gas industry data that shows there have been hundreds of wells drilled in the Little Smoky herd, and 1,500 wells drilled in the Cold Lake herd range on the border with Saskatchewan. And that herd is the second most rapidly declining herd in the country.”

“And this is just since 2012 when the federal caribou recovery plan, including the delineation of critical habitat, was adopted,” he said.

“We are still destroying caribou habitat…it shows quite clearly that we’re killing wolves and we are not doing anything to recover caribou or the boreal forest.”

Habitat Destruction, Seismic Lines a Costly Lack of Foresight

Oilsands companies are in a “mad rush” to restore seismic lines in Alberta’s caribou ranges before the province reveals its caribou recovery plan — mandated under the Federal Caribou Recovery Strategy — by 2017.

With tens of thousands of kilometres of seismic lines, their restoration is critical for reducing the mobility of wolves in caribou ranges.

Scott Nielsen, a University of Alberta professor who is studying seismic line restoration, said now that restoration on these legacy lines is happening, industry should work with scientists to ensure it’s done right. At a cost of roughly $10,000 per kilometre Nielsen says prioritizing the most critical areas for caribou and other species is critical.

“A lot of companies are grouping together and doing restoration projects, but if each company is doing a little bit here and a little bit there, the scale at which the disturbances occur at and the scale at which caribou and wolves move at are big. We need to think big when we’re thinking of the restoration or the offsets.”

“It would be even better if the work could be coordinated from the stand point of objectively trying to identify areas with the best bang for our buck both from the perspective of biodiversity and cost benefits,” he said.

And now, Nielsen said, even with aggressive restoration in place, “from a caribou perspective there has to be some form of zoning or restriction in development for at least certain herds for them to persist.”

But the government of Alberta, in lieu of enforcing habitat protection — which would require limiting new leasing for oil and gas companies — has relied on predator control as a means to keep caribou herds alive.

Predator control, Nielsen said, “tends to be a favourite tool used when you’re desperate and you have a population or a species that is critically endangered and threatened.”

The wolf cull is “one tool the managers are using for a short-term solution,” Nielsen said. “And if they aren’t working towards a long-term solution then it should be abandoned.”

Real Issue is Habitat Conservation

For Raincoast Conservation Foundation biologist and wolf expert Paul Paquet, the continued destruction of caribou habitat demonstrates the Alberta government is working at cross-purposes.

“The whole issue around oil and gas leases is it shows the government working at cross-purposes,” Paquet said. “I think it undermines their credibility.”

He added the negative effects of unrestored seismic lines on caribou habitat has been known for decades, but both government and industry have failed to take meaningful action.

“They don’t seem intent on doing what needs to be done,” Paquet said, adding the failure to protect caribou habitat throws the province’s ongoing wolf cull into a “moral dilemma.”

Research recently published by Hebblewhite and his colleagues shows that while the killing of wolves in some areas has stabilized populations, aggressive predator control was unable to put caribou back on a path to self-sustaining populations.

“All of this is useless if the primary reasons for caribou decline isn’t addressed and that primary one now is loss of habitat and degraded habitat,” Paquet said.

Hebblewhite agrees.

Predator control “has to be against the template of real commitment to habitat conservation. But if we’re just doing it in small little parts of the habitat and destroying other parts, it’s probably not going to have a very good effect.”

The wolf cull “reminds us we’ve screwed up the entire ecosystem,” Hebblewhite said. “Killing wolves is a short-term response to that. It buys us time.”

Image Credit: John E. Marriott

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Companies in Alberta’s oilsands are scrambling to find a way to reclaim tens of thousands of kilometres of seismic lines cut into the boreal forest before regulations that mandate the recovery of endangered caribou habitat are implemented in late 2017.

But while crews experiment with planting black spruce in piles of dirt during minus-25 degree weather in a bid to repair the forest, the Alberta government continues to lease massive segments of the region for further exploration and still hasn’t mandated reclamation of seismic lines.  

The controversy over caribou habitat and wolf culls in Alberta has stewed for years, but the issue of seismic lines has been largely overlooked. It’s these linear corridors cut through the forest (used to set off explosive charges to locate oil and gas deposits) that encourage predators like wolves to infiltrate what remains of fragmented caribou habitat.

“I don’t think a lot of people thought these seismic lines were a big deal,” said Scott Nielsen, an Alberta Biodiversity Conservation Chair and University of Alberta professor. “But … there are these cascading effects that you can’t anticipate.”

In a century of oil and gas development, hundreds of thousands of kilometres of these wolf freeways have been cut through Alberta’s forest. In one section of the Lower Athabasca region alone, south of Fort McMurray and extending out to Cold Lake, there are 53,000 kilometres of seismic lines.

“We still face the legacy of a tremendous amount of linear disturbances from the initial phases of exploration in the oilsands,” Nielsen said. “So it’s become a major conservation concern — or crisis — really.”

In 2012, the federal government released a recovery strategy for endangered caribou that demands that 65 per cent of their ranges be “undisturbed.” Right now, some Alberta caribou herds have as little as five per cent of their ranges left undisturbed.

“Trying to recover things after they’ve happened is a heck of a lot harder than preventing habitat disturbance in the first place,” Nielsen said.

Restoration Costs Estimated $10,000 Per Kilometre

Some industry players are already voluntarily putting their minds to finding a way to piece the fragmented forest back together — even though restoration costs roughly $10,000 per kilometre.

“With caribou being listed [as endangered] and these areas being defined as critical habitat — that’s why there’s a bit of a mad rush to deal with the legacy of disturbances that we have,” Nielsen said.

Companies Push Ahead with Restoration Despite Lack of Government Requirement

Devon Energy, an oilsands company involved in seismic line restoration since 2011, is trying to make it harder for wolves to move around in caribou ranges.

“Seismic lines, not just seismic lines but roads and trails out in northern Alberta, make it easier for wolves to travel and hunt more efficiently,” Amit Saxena, senior lands and biodiversity manger with Devon, told DeSmog Canada. “They are increasing the spatial overlap between wolves and caribou, more than pre-disturbance levels.”

Saxena said while most companies are doing what they can to ensure new seismic lines come with a lighter footprint — by reducing their width and straightness — there is still a lot of work to do to inhibit wolf movement on the thousands of kilometres of legacy lines crisscrossing the province.

“Sometimes we actually put up wooden or snow fences at 500 metre intervals along the line, and sometimes we’ll do log rollback and brush clearing, making big piles,” he said. “That not only impacts wolf movement on the line but also human movement on the line so that limits the amount of ATVs and quads that go down those lines that will ultimately negatively impact the recovery of the line.”

Devon is working toward the federal government’s target of 65 per cent undisturbed habitat in caribou ranges and prioritizes line recovery based on their habitat value for caribou. The company is also working to offset disturbance in new ranges with conservation in others.

But Saxena pointed out that since there is “no carte blanche requirement” from the province for seismic line restoration, companies are trying to find ways to balance the restoration with other priorities.

“We have to be realistic about it also,” Saxena said. “Industry priorities do play a role in there.”

Tree planting along seismic lines in the ALGAR historic restoration project area. Image from COSIA.

COSIA Pilot Project Tests Caribou Habitat Reclamation Techniques

Kris Geekie, director of community consultation and regulatory affairs for Nexen, said his company is exploring new seismic line restoration techniques in caribou habitat through the Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA) as part of the Algar Historic Restoration Project.

“We’re looking at an area nobody is currently active in. There are no oilsands leases within that area and what we’re testing is how can we restore [seismic lines] faster, what are the appropriate treatments, and what are the tactical plans specifically for managing forest fragmentation from seismic lines,” Geekie said.  

Geekie said Nexen, along with other oilsands companies like Statoil, Shell and ConocoPhillips, are working on 390 kilometres of seismic lines throughout the Algar region.

“The pilot is specifically designed to find out if we can improve the sustainability [of caribou] in that area. Basically, the less linear disturbance in the area, and the less access for wolves, is one way we can improve the sustainability of caribou herds.”

Caribou Recovery Plan Still to Come: Province

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD) is currently formulating the province’s caribou recovery plan, according to public affairs officer Duncan MacDonnell — although it’s too early to tell what role seismic line restoration will play in the plan.

“We must have caribou recovery plans ready to go by the end of 2017,” MacDonnell said. “It’s our responsibility to meet those plans according to the [federal] criteria.”

None of the provinces have filed their caribou recovery plans yet, he said, adding the variety of caribou ranges in Alberta alone has contributed to the delays in the draft plan’s release.

“How far [ESRD goes] in terms of restoration schedules or plans, we have no idea yet,” MacDonnell said.

He added ESRD is carrying out a wolf cull in the Little Smoky and A La Peche caribou ranges as an interim measure while the province prepares its recovery plans. Those plans are expected to include some restriction on new development in caribou ranges. 

Nexen seismic line replanting. Photo from Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship via Youtube.

Alberta Government Continues to Sell Energy Leases in Caribou Range

Yet the Alberta government’s recent sale of energy leases in caribou range has onlookers concerned not enough is being done to protect caribou habitat despite government promises.

Carolyn Campbell from the Alberta Wilderness Association said the government is “sending mixed messages” when it comes to caribou recovery.

In early March, the province came under fire for putting 21,000 hectares of energy leases in caribou habitat up for auction. Campbell said the day after her organization issued a news release on the auction, the government quietly announced the sale would be delayed.

Since then, several new small lease sales in that range have been announced.

“Alberta is being highly inconsistent right now,” Campbell said.

“The problem with new leasing is it creates new rights holders — energy companies — who have a time limit to prove up those leases and under weak rules that enables them to put down new well-sites, new roads, new pipeline infrastructure.”

Campbell said new energy lease sales continue while the government is perpetually delaying the release of range-specific recovery plans. She said Alberta initially committed to releasing the first plan, for the Little Smoky and A La Peche herds, in 2014.

“Time is running out for these caribou. It would be pretty inappropriate to try to run the clock out to 2017,” she said.

She added the current rules for habitat disruption are “unacceptably weak for an endangered species” even when paired with recent efforts to restore disturbed land.

“Even though some companies are getting interested in reclamation, the net effect with all the new leases and activity is ongoing degradation,” Campbell said.

“New lease sales should be totally deferred until there are strong range plans in effect.”  

Image Credit: Alex MacLean

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.