Human-Driven Extraction Has Doomed Caribou. So Why Are Wolves Paying Deadly Price?
Province engages in controversial wolf-killing to help caribou numbers, but humans 'stay the course with the unsustainable industrial scale fossil fuel extraction'
Alberta's attempt to boost caribou numbers by killing wolves is an inhumane approach that fails to target the root of the problem--the extractivist industries--says a group of scientists.
Explaining how the wolves came to be seen as the problem, Kaleigh Rogers writes at Vice:
See, roads and industrial development built to take advantage of Alberta's rich natural resources has impacted the woodland habitat, in part allowing wolves to more easily gain access to the caribou herds. While the wolves aren't to blame, they have been contributing to the diminishing caribou population and nearly wiped them out in some areas, so the government decided to introduce a systematic wolf cull to address the immediate problem.
Controversy erupted in November following the publication of an analysis in the Canadian Journal of Zoology, which, as CBC News reported at the time, assessed
the effect of a seven-year wolf cull in the northwestern Alberta range of the Little Smoky caribou herd -- roughly 70 animals scratching out a living on land 95 per cent disturbed by forestry and energy development. Seismic lines and cutblocks from that development allow wolves deep into the undisturbed portions of the forest, adding further pressure.
In an attempt to keep caribou from disappearing, Alberta began an annual cull of about 45 per cent of the wolves on that range in 2005. By 2012, 841 wolves had been poisoned or shot from helicopters.
The wolf killing managed to keep the caribou population stable, but was just buying time for the caribou, the study found. As Emma Marris wrote in the journal Nature, the caribou population did not show an increase. "Such an increase would require placing new limits on industrial development in Alberta, a conclusion that adds fuel to an ongoing debate about the ecological consequences of human activity in the boreal forest," she wrote of the study.
Scientists from the Raincoast Conservation Foundation and the Universities of Saskatchewan and Victoria say the study puts the spotlight on wolf-killing methods considered inhumane by the Canadian Council of Animal Care (CCAC).
In commentary published this week in the journal Canadian Wildlife Biology and Management, the scientists write:
This study did not meet the CCAC's guidelines and did not adhere to the Canadian Journal of Zoology's requirement that all research must be approved by an institutional animal care committee. More broadly, and regardless of the failure of formal safeguards and implicit justifications offered by authors, we should be concerned when researchers impose suffering on wild animals and advocate for such programs to continue. Based on an apparent lack of compliance with CCAC's guidelines, we believe that this controversial study should never have taken place and should not have been published by the Canadian Journal of Zoology.
"Expedient but inadequate emergency 'fixes' have been experimentally implemented to arrest the impending loss of caribou," said co-author Dr. Ryan Brook of the University of Saskatchewan, "but no context can justify methods that impose such suffering."
Dr. Chris Darimont, Hakai-Raincoast Professor at the University of Victoria and science director for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, added, "Proponents of resource extraction can now announce that a 'solution' to the caribou crisis is in hand, enabling additional habitat destruction that harms caribou and wolves. So despite intentions otherwise, wolf control creates greater long-term harm than good to animals and ecosystems, failing a simple test of ethics."
Their commentary follows that of the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA), which similarly stated that the November analysis failed to address the root cause of caribou decline: "Forestry and energy footprint in caribou range."
The organization has also criticized the province's continued selling of leases to the fossil fuel industry in areas critical to the caribou's survival.
Raincoast Conservation Foundation executive director Chris Genovali summarized the heart of the problem thusly:
The slaughter of wolves in Alberta is emblematic of an anachronistic and harmful wildlife management paradigm all too prevalent across Canada. It also reflects and is the result of our society's choice to stay the course with the unsustainable industrial scale fossil fuel extraction that is the root cause of the Alberta wolf cull.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Alberta's attempt to boost caribou numbers by killing wolves is an inhumane approach that fails to target the root of the problem--the extractivist industries--says a group of scientists.
Explaining how the wolves came to be seen as the problem, Kaleigh Rogers writes at Vice:
See, roads and industrial development built to take advantage of Alberta's rich natural resources has impacted the woodland habitat, in part allowing wolves to more easily gain access to the caribou herds. While the wolves aren't to blame, they have been contributing to the diminishing caribou population and nearly wiped them out in some areas, so the government decided to introduce a systematic wolf cull to address the immediate problem.
Controversy erupted in November following the publication of an analysis in the Canadian Journal of Zoology, which, as CBC News reported at the time, assessed
the effect of a seven-year wolf cull in the northwestern Alberta range of the Little Smoky caribou herd -- roughly 70 animals scratching out a living on land 95 per cent disturbed by forestry and energy development. Seismic lines and cutblocks from that development allow wolves deep into the undisturbed portions of the forest, adding further pressure.
In an attempt to keep caribou from disappearing, Alberta began an annual cull of about 45 per cent of the wolves on that range in 2005. By 2012, 841 wolves had been poisoned or shot from helicopters.
The wolf killing managed to keep the caribou population stable, but was just buying time for the caribou, the study found. As Emma Marris wrote in the journal Nature, the caribou population did not show an increase. "Such an increase would require placing new limits on industrial development in Alberta, a conclusion that adds fuel to an ongoing debate about the ecological consequences of human activity in the boreal forest," she wrote of the study.
Scientists from the Raincoast Conservation Foundation and the Universities of Saskatchewan and Victoria say the study puts the spotlight on wolf-killing methods considered inhumane by the Canadian Council of Animal Care (CCAC).
In commentary published this week in the journal Canadian Wildlife Biology and Management, the scientists write:
This study did not meet the CCAC's guidelines and did not adhere to the Canadian Journal of Zoology's requirement that all research must be approved by an institutional animal care committee. More broadly, and regardless of the failure of formal safeguards and implicit justifications offered by authors, we should be concerned when researchers impose suffering on wild animals and advocate for such programs to continue. Based on an apparent lack of compliance with CCAC's guidelines, we believe that this controversial study should never have taken place and should not have been published by the Canadian Journal of Zoology.
"Expedient but inadequate emergency 'fixes' have been experimentally implemented to arrest the impending loss of caribou," said co-author Dr. Ryan Brook of the University of Saskatchewan, "but no context can justify methods that impose such suffering."
Dr. Chris Darimont, Hakai-Raincoast Professor at the University of Victoria and science director for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, added, "Proponents of resource extraction can now announce that a 'solution' to the caribou crisis is in hand, enabling additional habitat destruction that harms caribou and wolves. So despite intentions otherwise, wolf control creates greater long-term harm than good to animals and ecosystems, failing a simple test of ethics."
Their commentary follows that of the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA), which similarly stated that the November analysis failed to address the root cause of caribou decline: "Forestry and energy footprint in caribou range."
The organization has also criticized the province's continued selling of leases to the fossil fuel industry in areas critical to the caribou's survival.
Raincoast Conservation Foundation executive director Chris Genovali summarized the heart of the problem thusly:
The slaughter of wolves in Alberta is emblematic of an anachronistic and harmful wildlife management paradigm all too prevalent across Canada. It also reflects and is the result of our society's choice to stay the course with the unsustainable industrial scale fossil fuel extraction that is the root cause of the Alberta wolf cull.
Alberta's attempt to boost caribou numbers by killing wolves is an inhumane approach that fails to target the root of the problem--the extractivist industries--says a group of scientists.
Explaining how the wolves came to be seen as the problem, Kaleigh Rogers writes at Vice:
See, roads and industrial development built to take advantage of Alberta's rich natural resources has impacted the woodland habitat, in part allowing wolves to more easily gain access to the caribou herds. While the wolves aren't to blame, they have been contributing to the diminishing caribou population and nearly wiped them out in some areas, so the government decided to introduce a systematic wolf cull to address the immediate problem.
Controversy erupted in November following the publication of an analysis in the Canadian Journal of Zoology, which, as CBC News reported at the time, assessed
the effect of a seven-year wolf cull in the northwestern Alberta range of the Little Smoky caribou herd -- roughly 70 animals scratching out a living on land 95 per cent disturbed by forestry and energy development. Seismic lines and cutblocks from that development allow wolves deep into the undisturbed portions of the forest, adding further pressure.
In an attempt to keep caribou from disappearing, Alberta began an annual cull of about 45 per cent of the wolves on that range in 2005. By 2012, 841 wolves had been poisoned or shot from helicopters.
The wolf killing managed to keep the caribou population stable, but was just buying time for the caribou, the study found. As Emma Marris wrote in the journal Nature, the caribou population did not show an increase. "Such an increase would require placing new limits on industrial development in Alberta, a conclusion that adds fuel to an ongoing debate about the ecological consequences of human activity in the boreal forest," she wrote of the study.
Scientists from the Raincoast Conservation Foundation and the Universities of Saskatchewan and Victoria say the study puts the spotlight on wolf-killing methods considered inhumane by the Canadian Council of Animal Care (CCAC).
In commentary published this week in the journal Canadian Wildlife Biology and Management, the scientists write:
This study did not meet the CCAC's guidelines and did not adhere to the Canadian Journal of Zoology's requirement that all research must be approved by an institutional animal care committee. More broadly, and regardless of the failure of formal safeguards and implicit justifications offered by authors, we should be concerned when researchers impose suffering on wild animals and advocate for such programs to continue. Based on an apparent lack of compliance with CCAC's guidelines, we believe that this controversial study should never have taken place and should not have been published by the Canadian Journal of Zoology.
"Expedient but inadequate emergency 'fixes' have been experimentally implemented to arrest the impending loss of caribou," said co-author Dr. Ryan Brook of the University of Saskatchewan, "but no context can justify methods that impose such suffering."
Dr. Chris Darimont, Hakai-Raincoast Professor at the University of Victoria and science director for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, added, "Proponents of resource extraction can now announce that a 'solution' to the caribou crisis is in hand, enabling additional habitat destruction that harms caribou and wolves. So despite intentions otherwise, wolf control creates greater long-term harm than good to animals and ecosystems, failing a simple test of ethics."
Their commentary follows that of the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA), which similarly stated that the November analysis failed to address the root cause of caribou decline: "Forestry and energy footprint in caribou range."
The organization has also criticized the province's continued selling of leases to the fossil fuel industry in areas critical to the caribou's survival.
Raincoast Conservation Foundation executive director Chris Genovali summarized the heart of the problem thusly:
The slaughter of wolves in Alberta is emblematic of an anachronistic and harmful wildlife management paradigm all too prevalent across Canada. It also reflects and is the result of our society's choice to stay the course with the unsustainable industrial scale fossil fuel extraction that is the root cause of the Alberta wolf cull.