SOME BRIEFING NOTES CONCERNING SASKATCHEWAN'S ILL-CONCEIVED COYOTE BOUNTY
March 18, 2010
To date, about 22,000 Coyotes have been killed and nearly a million dollars paid in bounties by the Rural Municipalities that participated.
1. Many of the problems with ecosystem collapse and species declines can be traced back to the 1960s when the snowmobile revolution brought about a drastic decimation of the Great Plains Coyote ( a large sub-species adapted to the prairies). The resultant niche space was rapidly filled by an invasive predator, the Red Fox ( a "meso-predator"). The Red Fox lives in higher densities, has a more eclectic diet ( it's has been called the cat-like canine), and it preyed on ground-dwelling, ground-nesting species including Burrowing Owls, Sage Grouse, Sharp-tailed Grouse etc.
2. Science did not, and has not, recognized the Red Fox invasion of the prairies because scientists weren't there in rural areas to witness the impact and, besides, science typically operates over limited time frames. Also, scientists tend not to see the forest for the trees because it is a reductive process. Until recently science has ignored the value of so-called "local traditional knowledge" or "old-fashioned natural history" ( an integrative process) in which knowledge of processes is passed down over generations ( be they First Nations, farmers, fishermen or whatever).
3. The problem of endangered species conservation is that it tends to focus on the components of the ecosystem rather than the processes. One of the most important processes is that the apex predators control the structure and integrity of ecosystems through "top-down" effects. Recent research from around the world has demonstrated this effect time and time again through the effects of so-called "meso-predator release" and "trophic cascades" - that is, the smaller predators fill the void and due to higher densities and reproductive rates cause major and unexpected shifts in the food web.
4. The Red Fox has been shown to be one of the worst invasive species in the world, when apex predators ( wolves, coyotes, lynx, dingos) have been removed. A researcher in Australia has shown that where dingos were decimated and the Red Fox invaded, it caused the extinction of 16 marsupial species. This researcher has suggested that the Coyote vs Red Fox situation on the great plains is a close ecological equivalent.
5. Ecosystem-based management recognizes the critical processes of meso-predator release etc. If we are going to manage / protect "birds of prey" we must also recognize the importance of "mammals of prey". Endangered species programs tend to tinker with the components of ecosystems rather than the processes, and tend to employ more lawyers than ecologists (although many biologists make their living by focusing on endangered species).
6. So why, might anyone wonder, has science not recognized this phenomena and why have conservation organizations been so resistant to the proven concepts ? This is an important question and does not have a simple answer. In part its because of our ingrained prejudice against predators like the Coyote. In part because of the way in which science operates ( as noted above). In part because it rocks the status quo and threatens jobs. Increasingly, I've become more convinced that a lot of it may be due to "professional pride" and reluctance to accept what has operated under their noses for decades.
James K. Finley,
Biologist
Box 8, Luseland, SK
= = =
PRODUCER COMPENSATION FOR LIVESTOCK PREDATION
http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=c96dd54a-f6ee-4694-a361-db93b60f9a8d
News Release - March 11, 2010
Crop Insurance's Wildlife Damage Compensation Program Further Enhanced
Today, Federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and Saskatchewan Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced producers will be compensated for livestock killed or injured by predators, as part of overall enhancements to the Wildlife Damage Compensation Program.
Producers will be compensated for 100 per cent of the market value of their livestock killed by predators and up to 80 per cent of the market value for injured livestock requiring veterinary services.
MORE: http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=c96dd54a-f6ee-4694-a361-db93b60f9a8d
= = = = = =
Redirect coyote kill budget, say Greens
http://www.leaderpost.com/technology/
Redirect+coyote+kill+budget+Greens/2589587/story.html
By Angela Hall, Leader-PostFebruary 20, 2010
The $360,000 of public money spent so far on Saskatchewan's coyote bounty could be put to better use, says the leader of the provincial Green Party.
Larissa Shasko criticized the $20-per-animal bounty as ineffective, saying coyotes adapt to reduced numbers by having larger litters of pups.
The government could instead put more money into prevention measures, such as programs that subsidize the cost of farm fencing or guard dogs, or more targeted programs, said Shasko.
"I think what's really important at this point is to call for alternative solutions," Shasko said Friday, the same day the provincial government issued a news release saying the coyote bounty is helping to address livestock predation.
"It's a lot of money and I'm wondering if this money could be spent in a better way. I think it can," Shasko said.
MORE:
http://www.leaderpost.com/technology/
Redirect+coyote+kill+budget+Greens/2589587/story.html
= = = = =
Coyote Bounty Counter-Productive
From: James K. Finley
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 9:17 AM
Subject: Letter to Editor re: Coyote Bounty
Coyote Bounty Counter-Productive
Re: Coyote Bounty Harmful, Star Phoenix, Nov 17, 2009 (see below)
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/environment/
Coyote+bounty+impact+harmful/2231442/story.html
The structure and integrity of an ecosystem is determined by its top predator. That is a basic tenant of ecology. On the prairies this means that the top predator, the coyote, is essential to the health of the ecosystem and must be managed as an integral part of it.
Recent research from around the world has amply demonstrated the phenomenon of “meso-predator release” following decimation of the top predator, resulting in “trophic cascades”. What this means is that elimination of the top predator allows many more smaller predators to fill the niche, causing major, and often catastrophic impacts on prey species. Such a massive ecological impact occurred in the 1960s when the coyote population was severely decimated during the snowmobile revolution, bringing about an invasion of the red fox. This caused a huge impact on many species, including burrowing owls, sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse etc., many of which never recovered and are still on the endangered species list. A parallel situation happened in Australia where elimination of the top predator, the dingo, and invasion of the red fox, resulted in the extinction of many marsupial mammals.
The prairies have more endangered species than any place in Canada. Blame has been laid on various human practices but none compare in magnitude to the ecological imbalance caused by decimation of the top predator. But no one dares stand up for the “wily” one.
The government of Saskatchewan is living in the dark ages. Time and time again, bounties on predators have proven wasteful and counter-productive. In this case, the government will be causing significant environmental damage, and may well push several species over the brink.
James K. Finley
==========================================
Background Documentation
Ecology Letters Vol 10 (3): 197-206
Trophic control of mesopredators in terrestrial ecosystems: top-down or bottom-up?
Bodil Elmhagen and Stephen P. Rushton
School of Biology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Devonshire Building NE1 7RU, UK
Abstract
It has been argued that widespread extinctions of top predators have changed terrestrial ecosystem structures through mesopredator release, where increased abundances of medium-sized predators have detrimental effects on prey communities. This top-down concept has received much attention within conservation biology, but few studies have demonstrated the phenomenon. The concept has been criticized since alternative explanations involving bottom-up impacts from bioclimatic effects on ecosystem productivity and from anthropogenic habitat change are rarely considered. We analyse the response of a mesopredator (the red fox) to declines in top predators (wolf and Eurasian lynx) and agricultural expansion over 90 years in Sweden, taking bioclimatic effects into account. We show a top-down mesopredator release effect, but ecosystem productivity determined its strength. The impacts of agricultural activity were mediated by their effects on top predator populations. Thus, both top-down and bottom-up processes need to be understood for effective preservation of biodiversity in anthropogenically transformed ecosystems.
Rarity of a top predator triggers continent-wide collapse of mammal prey : dingoes and marsupials in Australia.
Christopher N. Johnson, Joanne L. Isaac and Diana O Fisher
School of Tropical Biology, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland 4811, Australia
Top predators in terrestrial ecosystems may limit populations of smaller predators that could otherwise become over abundant and cause declines and extinctions of some prey. It is therefore possible that top predators indirectly protect many species of prey from excessive predation. This effect has been demonstrated in some small-scale studies, but it is not known how general or important it is in maintaining prey biodiversity. During the last 150 years, Australia has suffered the world's highest rate of mammal decline and extinction, and most evidence points to introduced mid-sized predators ( the red fox and the feral cat) as the cause. Here, we test the idea that the decline of Australia's largest native predator, the dingo, played a role in these extinctions. Dingoes were persecuted from the beginning of Europeon settlement in Australia and have been eliminated or made rare over large parts of the continent. We show a strong positive relationship between the survival of marsupials and the geographical overlap with high-density dingo populations. Our results suggest that the rarity of dingoes was a critical factor which allowed smaller predators to overwhelm marsupial prey, triggering extinction over much of the continent. This is evidence of a crucial role of top predators in maintaining prey biodiversity at large scales in terrestrial ecosystems and suggests that many remaining Australian mammals would benefit from the positive management of dingoes.
Keywords: mesopredator release; trophic cascade; extinction; predation; Canis lupus dingo.
STRING UP THE DINGOES, AND OTHER SPECIES PAY THE PRICE
The eastern hare-wallaby is gone. The lesser bilby is no more. In the past two centuries, these and 16 other mammals have become extinct in Australia - almost half the mammalian species lost worldwide over that time.
Changes in how people use fire to clear land, the introduction of rabbits and disease, and sheep farming have in the past been blamed for the extinctions. Now a team led by Chris Johnson of James Cook University in Townsville, Queensland, says the cause is far simpler: the persecution of mainland Australia's only top predator, the dingo. " Where there are no dingoes, introduced predators are rife, and up to 65 per cent of ground-dwelling mammal species have disappeared, " Johnson says. " If dingoes hadn't been so savagely persecuted, we wouldn't have had this total catastrophe."
By mapping habitat type and the range of ground-dwelling marsupials, rabbits, foxes, dingoes and sheep, Johnson's team has shown that wherever dingo populations have slumped, prey species such as the lesser bilby have become extinct ( Proceedings of the Royal Society B, DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3711). That adds to circumstantial and historical evidence that dingos protect small marsupials by reducing numbers of introduced predators, such as the fox, whose numbers explode in the dingo's absence." NewScientist, 11 November 2006.
........
Finley, J.K. 2005. The fox that stole the apex of Palliser’s Triangle: a correction. Blue Jay 63(3) : 135-138. My father shot the first fox ever seen on the prairies which I initially thought to have occurred in 1964 or 65, and reported in the Blue Jay in 1996. However, by fortuitous circumstance, the event was documented in my Grade 4 scribbler. It occurred on December 5, 1960, five years earlier than previously thought, and prior to the introduction of the snowmobile. Thus the niche space was already opened somewhat by poisoning and other eradication programs however the main invasion took place after severe decimation of coyotes by snowmobiles occurred in the mid 1960s. On February 28, 2005, my brother shot another fox just 4.5 km from where the first fox was shot in the same broad treeless valley. This coincidence, at the beginning and at the end of the invasion, is explicable because the foxes were surviving in a neutral zone, a heavily-cultivated area where there was no suitable coyote habitat remaining. It is my contention that removal of the apex predator brought about an ecological collapse, beginning in the late 1960s, due to the invasion of an exotic species.
Finley J.K. 2006. The rise and fall of the Red Fox beneath the apex of Palliser’s Triangle. Blue Jay 64(3): 155 - 159. Christmas mammal counts were initiated by Nature Saskatchewan in 1974 to complement Christmas bird counts. Preliminary analyses of occurrence and abundance of selected species in the short-grass prairie region indicate that foxes have declined in abundance over the last two decades as coyotes have increased. The inverse relationship between coyote and fox abundance is plotted for one locality, projected back from local knowledge, before the fox invasion of the 1960s. The rise of the Red Fox, five decades ago, was due to the creation of a vacant niche, brought about by the snowmobile revolution and decimation of the Great Plains Coyote. The fall of the Red Fox, over the past two decades, is due to the rise of the Coyote population, brought about by a combination of socio-economic circumstances. The phenomenon of the red fox invasion is unrecognized by science but has very important implications in wildlife and endangered species management. This exercise points to the critical role of top predators in maintaining the structure and integrity of ecosystems, and the importance of adopting ecosystem management practices that recognize this dynamic.
======================
Bounty on coyote kills a bad idea: groups
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/environment/
Bounty+coyote+kills+idea+groups/2227259/story.html
Saskatchewan News Network; Regina Leader-PostNovember 16, 2009
Nature and wildlife conservation groups say the provincial government is barking up the wrong tree in its solution to Saskatchewan's coyote problem.
"I think it caught everybody off guard," Nature Saskatchewan president Lorne Scott said about the province's decision to offer a bounty on coyote kills.
Scott said his organization wasn't consulted prior to last week's introduction of the Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program, which will offer $20 per kill. Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud said the program was established to help producers deal with the loss of their livestock to coyotes, which are numerous this year.
Had it been consulted, Scott said Nature Saskatchewan would have noted similar control programs didn't work in the past and won't work now.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/environment/
Bounty+coyote+kills+idea+groups/2227259/story.html
=======================
Coyote bounty impact harmful
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/environment/
Coyote+bounty+impact+harmful/2231442/story.html
The StarPhoenix November 17, 2009
Just more than a year after Saskatchewan caught the nation's attention as the bastion of backwardness by organizing a gopher derby, it's back in the news -- this time for placing a bounty on coyotes.
It may have escaped the notice of Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud that coyotes are much more adept than are .22s at dealing with a problem of excessive gophers, but this misplaced priority didn't escape the notice of those who actually study wildlife in this province.
Lorne Scott, head of Nature Saskatchewan, was taken by surprise when he heard of the new bounty. Darrell Crabbe, executive director of the Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation, suggests coyotes are probably much less of a problem than what the minister suspects.
"Coyotes play a very important role in the health of the ecosystem out there in many places," he said.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/environment/
Coyote+bounty+impact+harmful/2231442/story.html
= = = = =
Nature Saskatchewan feels bounty on coyotes not correct solution
http://www.swbooster.com/Living/Environ ... solution/1
Published on November 16th, 2009
Nature Saskatchewan believes that the recently-announced bounty on coyotes in Saskatchewan is not the right way to help livestock producers deal with depredation.
Countless studies have proven bounties to be ineffective in stopping problem coyotes from taking livestock according to Lorne Scott, President of Nature Saskatchewan. The focus should be on ridding areas of problem coyotes not a wide-scale program.
“What our producers need is an adequately-funded, aggressive control program in areas where depredation is a problem. The focus should be on eliminating problem animals and not a province-wide bounty."
Nature Saskatchewan says that many farmers and ranchers view the coyote as an ally, helping to control rodent populations, including gophers (ground squirrels). They also say the coyote is a native species and a key predator in prairie ecosystems and it makes little sense to promote poison campaigns to reduce ground squirrel numbers and at the same time, launch a province-wide bounty program to eliminate a main predator of ground squirrels.
MORE: http://www.swbooster.com/Living/Environment/2009-11-16/
article-193871/Nature-Saskatchewan-feels-bounty-on-coyotes-not-correct-solution/1
= = = = =
BJORNERUD ANNOUNCES SASKATCHEWAN COYOTE CONTROL PROGRAM
http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=c533b51a-71ad-4e88-a940-370a0670e9d0
News Release - November 10, 2009
Today, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced the Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program.
The program is intended to help the many farmers and ranchers who are having trouble with coyotes killing their livestock. The provincial government will pay hunters a bounty of $20 per coyote killed.
"Many Saskatchewan farmers and ranchers are struggling to protect their livestock from coyotes," Bjornerud said. "I hope this program helps address this serious issue and I appreciate SARM and its members working with us to deliver the program."
The Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program is a pilot program that will run until March 31, 2010, at which point the provincial government will consider extending it.
MORE: http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=c533b51a-71ad-4e88-a940-370a0670e9d0
= = = = = =
GOPHER CONTROL REBATE DEADLINE APPROACHING
http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=91a0895a-a303-4376-b688-d18c61bf2021
News Release - January 22, 2010
Saskatchewan also approved for emergency registration of strychnine in 2010
Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud reminds producers the deadline for applications under the 2009 Gopher Control Rebate is January 29, 2010.
Producers and Rural Municipalities (RMs) can receive a 50 per cent rebate on eligible gopher control products purchased and used between August 1, 2007 and October 1, 2009.
"Gophers continue to be a serious issue affecting the bottom line of farmers and ranchers in Saskatchewan," Bjornerud said. "This rebate is intended to help ease the financial pressures producers are facing when dealing with this problem."
In addition, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) has approved the provincial government's application to extend the emergency registration of strychnine to July 31, 2010.
MORE: http://www.gov.sk.ca/
news?newsId=91a0895a-a303-4376-b688-d18c61bf2021
= = = = =
SASKATCHEWAN'S ILL-CONCEIVED COYOTE BOUNTY
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
SASKATCHEWAN'S ILL-CONCEIVED COYOTE BOUNTY
by Oscar » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:15 pm
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
UPDATE: Saskatchewan Saga: Coyote - Gopher - Coyote . . .
by Oscar » Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:12 pm
UPDATE: Saskatchewan Saga: Coyote - Gopher - Coyote . . . .
PROVINCE ANNOUNCES EXTENSION TO GOPHER CONTROL REBATE PROGRAM
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=0e3556 ... 994314def5
News Release - March 23, 2010
Today, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced the Gopher Control Rebate Program will be extended for 2010. Bjornerud also announced richardson ground squirrels, commonly known as gophers, have been declared a pest under the provincial Pest Control Act.
"These changes are another step in our efforts to improve our programs and support producers," Bjornerud said. "RMs and producers have requested this support to help them deal with the damage caused by gophers."
The Gopher Control Rebate Program was first introduced in October 2008 and was also continued in 2009. The program provides a 50 per cent rebate to producers and RMs for the cost of gopher control products.
The decision to declare gophers a pest, under the Pest Control Act, was made following a request by Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) at their Midterm Convention in November 2009. By declaring gophers a pest, RMs now have the option through bylaws, to enforce prevention and control measures.
Gophers are a problem in many municipalities, particularly in southern and western regions of the province. The most severe damage is normally in areas experiencing dry conditions.
"Gophers can cause extensive damage to crop and pasture land, costing producers significant dollars," SARM President David Marit said. "By continuing the Gopher Control Rebate Program and now declaring gophers as a pest, the provincial government is helping RMs and producers address this problem."
"The Gopher Control Rebate Program has benefited producers and we are pleased to see it is continuing," Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan President Greg Marshall said. "The provincial government is taking another positive step forward by declaring gophers as a pest under the Pest Control Act."
Additionally, the provincial government provides support through Crop Insurance compensation and research funding to help address the damage caused by gophers. The Pest Management Regulatory Agency has also approved the provincial government's application to extend the emergency registration of strychnine to July 31, 2010.
For more information on the Gopher Control Rebate Program, producers and RMs can call
1-866-947-9113 or visit www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/gopher-rebate. -30-
For more information, contact:
Tyler Hopson, Agriculture Regina
Phone: 306-787-2359
Email: tyler.hopson@gov.sk.ca
= = = = = =
Province's bounty reversal is coyote ugly
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Province+bounty+reversal+coyote+ugly/2679414/story.html
By Les Macpherson, The StarPhoenix March 13, 2010
You cannot help but admire the wily coyote, not only for defying the provincial government but for twisting it up in knots.
Without actually admitting that its bounty on coyotes was a futile waste of money, the province this week announced plans to end the scheme. Instead, it will now pay producers the full cost of any livestock lost to coyotes. The change in direction is 180 degrees.
Producers who until this week were shooting coyotes for the bounty now will have an incentive to protect them. Every calf, lamb or chicken henceforth taken by coyotes is money in the bank, and without the hassle or expense of getting the animal to market. Coyotes that until recently were hunted, trapped and poisoned as vermin now are more like valued customers:
"Pa, there's a coyote in the henhouse. Shall I get the shotgun?"
"Hell no. Get the invoice book."
The province, which last week was paying a $20 bounty on coyotes, now is fully subsidizing their predations. Coyotes will be howling with laughter. They could not come up with a more coyote-friendly policy if they wrote it themselves.
Of course, there won't be any laughing from 23,000 or so coyotes killed over the last five months while the bounty was in effect. According to the experts, however, these losses will quickly be replaced. In the meantime, gophers, which coyotes will eat when veal or lamb is not readily available, are expected to multiply in the absence of predators. Crops devoured by the booming gopher population might well exceed the value of losses inflicted on livestock by coyotes.
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Province+bounty+reversal+coyote+ugly/2679414/story.html
= = = = = = =
Sask. coyote-gopher hunts redundant, wildlife expert says.
http://www.globalsaskatoon.com/technology/
Sask+coyote+gopher+hunts+redundant+wildlife+expert+says/
2668334/story.html
Jeremy Warren, Saskatoon StarPhoenix: Wednesday, March 10, 2010
SASKATOON — The Saskatchewan government is wasting time and resources by running concurrent government-sponsored hunts for coyotes and gophers — predator and prey — a wildlife expert says.
"We're paying to kill gophers and paying to kill coyotes, which already kill gophers," said Rebecca Grambo, a natural history writer and author of several books on predators.
"(The province) is subsidizing both ends of the problem. If you are going to take out the predators, assume you'll have a gopher-control problem. If you're trying to control the gophers, then you shouldn't be wiping out the predators — or at least not paying for both."
About 22,000 coyotes have been killed under the coyote-control program, which was established in November a provincewide $20 bounty on coyotes. The program ends March 31, but could be renewed later this year.
The province also funds a gopher-control program, which rebates rural municipalities and producers for products such as poison. To date, about $900,000 has been paid out.
MORE:
http://www.globalsaskatoon.com/technology/
Sask+coyote+gopher+hunts+redundant+wildlife+expert+says/
2668334/story.html
= = = = = =
Green Party upset with Saskatchewan's coyote bounty program
http://communities.canada.com/REGINALEADERPOST/blogs/
bestfromthenewsroom/archive/2010/02/20/green-party-upset-with-saskatchewan-s-coyote-bounty-program.aspx
By Kevin Blevins Sat, Feb 20 2010
The $360,000 of public money spent so far on Saskatchewan's coyote bounty could be put to better use, says the leader of the provincial Green Party.
Larissa Shasko criticized the $20-per-animal bounty as ineffective, saying coyotes adapt to reduced numbers by having larger litters of pups.
MORE:
http://communities.canada.com/REGINALEADERPOST/
blogs/bestfromthenewsroom/archive/2010/02/20/
green-party-upset-with-saskatchewan-s-coyote-bounty-program.aspx
= = = = =
Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program
http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Coyote-Control
On Tuesday, November 10, 2009, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced the Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program, a pilot project aimed at reducing coyote predation on Saskatchewan's agricultural land.
Under the program, the provincial government will pay hunters a bounty of $20 per coyote killed. To qualify for this bounty, hunters will have to present evidence to local municipalities to verify the kill, and then submit a declaration to the Ministry of Agriculture in order to receive compensation.
MORE: http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Coyote-Control
PROVINCE ANNOUNCES EXTENSION TO GOPHER CONTROL REBATE PROGRAM
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=0e3556 ... 994314def5
News Release - March 23, 2010
Today, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced the Gopher Control Rebate Program will be extended for 2010. Bjornerud also announced richardson ground squirrels, commonly known as gophers, have been declared a pest under the provincial Pest Control Act.
"These changes are another step in our efforts to improve our programs and support producers," Bjornerud said. "RMs and producers have requested this support to help them deal with the damage caused by gophers."
The Gopher Control Rebate Program was first introduced in October 2008 and was also continued in 2009. The program provides a 50 per cent rebate to producers and RMs for the cost of gopher control products.
The decision to declare gophers a pest, under the Pest Control Act, was made following a request by Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) at their Midterm Convention in November 2009. By declaring gophers a pest, RMs now have the option through bylaws, to enforce prevention and control measures.
Gophers are a problem in many municipalities, particularly in southern and western regions of the province. The most severe damage is normally in areas experiencing dry conditions.
"Gophers can cause extensive damage to crop and pasture land, costing producers significant dollars," SARM President David Marit said. "By continuing the Gopher Control Rebate Program and now declaring gophers as a pest, the provincial government is helping RMs and producers address this problem."
"The Gopher Control Rebate Program has benefited producers and we are pleased to see it is continuing," Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan President Greg Marshall said. "The provincial government is taking another positive step forward by declaring gophers as a pest under the Pest Control Act."
Additionally, the provincial government provides support through Crop Insurance compensation and research funding to help address the damage caused by gophers. The Pest Management Regulatory Agency has also approved the provincial government's application to extend the emergency registration of strychnine to July 31, 2010.
For more information on the Gopher Control Rebate Program, producers and RMs can call
1-866-947-9113 or visit www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/gopher-rebate. -30-
For more information, contact:
Tyler Hopson, Agriculture Regina
Phone: 306-787-2359
Email: tyler.hopson@gov.sk.ca
= = = = = =
Province's bounty reversal is coyote ugly
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Province+bounty+reversal+coyote+ugly/2679414/story.html
By Les Macpherson, The StarPhoenix March 13, 2010
You cannot help but admire the wily coyote, not only for defying the provincial government but for twisting it up in knots.
Without actually admitting that its bounty on coyotes was a futile waste of money, the province this week announced plans to end the scheme. Instead, it will now pay producers the full cost of any livestock lost to coyotes. The change in direction is 180 degrees.
Producers who until this week were shooting coyotes for the bounty now will have an incentive to protect them. Every calf, lamb or chicken henceforth taken by coyotes is money in the bank, and without the hassle or expense of getting the animal to market. Coyotes that until recently were hunted, trapped and poisoned as vermin now are more like valued customers:
"Pa, there's a coyote in the henhouse. Shall I get the shotgun?"
"Hell no. Get the invoice book."
The province, which last week was paying a $20 bounty on coyotes, now is fully subsidizing their predations. Coyotes will be howling with laughter. They could not come up with a more coyote-friendly policy if they wrote it themselves.
Of course, there won't be any laughing from 23,000 or so coyotes killed over the last five months while the bounty was in effect. According to the experts, however, these losses will quickly be replaced. In the meantime, gophers, which coyotes will eat when veal or lamb is not readily available, are expected to multiply in the absence of predators. Crops devoured by the booming gopher population might well exceed the value of losses inflicted on livestock by coyotes.
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Province+bounty+reversal+coyote+ugly/2679414/story.html
= = = = = = =
Sask. coyote-gopher hunts redundant, wildlife expert says.
http://www.globalsaskatoon.com/technology/
Sask+coyote+gopher+hunts+redundant+wildlife+expert+says/
2668334/story.html
Jeremy Warren, Saskatoon StarPhoenix: Wednesday, March 10, 2010
SASKATOON — The Saskatchewan government is wasting time and resources by running concurrent government-sponsored hunts for coyotes and gophers — predator and prey — a wildlife expert says.
"We're paying to kill gophers and paying to kill coyotes, which already kill gophers," said Rebecca Grambo, a natural history writer and author of several books on predators.
"(The province) is subsidizing both ends of the problem. If you are going to take out the predators, assume you'll have a gopher-control problem. If you're trying to control the gophers, then you shouldn't be wiping out the predators — or at least not paying for both."
About 22,000 coyotes have been killed under the coyote-control program, which was established in November a provincewide $20 bounty on coyotes. The program ends March 31, but could be renewed later this year.
The province also funds a gopher-control program, which rebates rural municipalities and producers for products such as poison. To date, about $900,000 has been paid out.
MORE:
http://www.globalsaskatoon.com/technology/
Sask+coyote+gopher+hunts+redundant+wildlife+expert+says/
2668334/story.html
= = = = = =
Green Party upset with Saskatchewan's coyote bounty program
http://communities.canada.com/REGINALEADERPOST/blogs/
bestfromthenewsroom/archive/2010/02/20/green-party-upset-with-saskatchewan-s-coyote-bounty-program.aspx
By Kevin Blevins Sat, Feb 20 2010
The $360,000 of public money spent so far on Saskatchewan's coyote bounty could be put to better use, says the leader of the provincial Green Party.
Larissa Shasko criticized the $20-per-animal bounty as ineffective, saying coyotes adapt to reduced numbers by having larger litters of pups.
MORE:
http://communities.canada.com/REGINALEADERPOST/
blogs/bestfromthenewsroom/archive/2010/02/20/
green-party-upset-with-saskatchewan-s-coyote-bounty-program.aspx
= = = = =
Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program
http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Coyote-Control
On Tuesday, November 10, 2009, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud announced the Saskatchewan Coyote Control Program, a pilot project aimed at reducing coyote predation on Saskatchewan's agricultural land.
Under the program, the provincial government will pay hunters a bounty of $20 per coyote killed. To qualify for this bounty, hunters will have to present evidence to local municipalities to verify the kill, and then submit a declaration to the Ministry of Agriculture in order to receive compensation.
MORE: http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Coyote-Control
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
IS BOUNTY HUNTING JUSTIFIED?
by Oscar » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:00 pm
IS BOUNTY HUNTING JUSTIFIED? BY Jim Harding
Saskatchewan Sustainability Published in United Newspapers of Saskatchewan April 2, 2010
The bounty on coyotes was announced last November as a pilot project. It was launched by the province because coyotes are a “perennial problem” for farmers and ranchers and are becoming a danger to rural families. There are no limits to the number of coyote that can be killed; bounty hunters just have to turn in all four paws, which they cut off the dead animal, as proof of the kill. At $20 a coyote that’s $5 a paw.
The government said it wanted as many as 36,000 coyotes killed. There’s inconsistent information, but after four months, the paws from 15,000 (Leader Post) to 18,000 (CBC) coyotes had been turned in. Only about 860 people have benefitted, with an average kill of 18 coyotes, with one hunter killing 90. The 360 paws from these 90 coyotes would be worth $1,800, which some might say is “a hell of a way to make a living”. Estimates of the average coyote kill in Saskatchewan range from 21,000 to 25,000 a year, though with the low price of fur, the number killed last year was 16,000. So it looks like the kill is going to be in the same range as before the bounty was declared.
RURAL COMMON SENSE
Most farmers and ranchers have apparently voted by not getting out their guns. This doesn’t surprise me after looking at what has been reported during this controversy. Rural people likely have a better grasp of the balance of nature and the probability of program effectiveness than do Regina politicians and bureaucrats. Some know that a strategy that targets coyotes that are actually threatening livestock is better than a broad-brush approach. As one farmer said, coyotes are “smart buggers”, explaining that he was able to keep them away from his livestock by killing four or six a year.
Others commented that coyotes help them by keeping gopher and rat populations in check. Some have even said that they think that chronic wasting disease in local deer has shifted coyote hunting behavior. Some critics argue that the $720,000 the government was prepared to spend (36,000 times $20) would be better spent beefing-up the much cheaper livestock guard dog program, which others argue that compensation for lost livestock would be cheaper and more humane. Some argue that coyote control would be better left with RM’s, who could use a diversity of strategies. Agriculture Minister Bjornerud rebutted that with 241 of 296 RM’s enrolled the bounty clearly has grass-roots support.
In the balance, is this bounty a progressive, effective and humane solution to human/wildlife conflict? The weaker animals might be disproportionately culled, and, as a similar program in Nova Scotia discovered, we could just see bigger coyote litters in the aftermath of the killing. Unlike many government programs, nature isn’t one-dimensional. But the program doesn’t seem to have entertained much thought, either in terms of the workings of nature or program objectives. When Minister Bjornerud was challenged about this, his retort was, should we “…sit back until some little kid out of some family in rural Saskatchewan gets attacked by six or seven coyotes”. This is more “politics of fear”, not assessing whether the program will actually reduce the risks to families.
When he announced the bounty, the Minister sounded more goal-oriented, saying “This is the only thing really that we felt would keep the numbers down and try to put a little fear in the coyotes again.” And how has this view stood up? One critic quoted in the Medicine Hat Prairie Post noted that there was no evidence at all that a pack of magnificent, white-coated coyotes killed in the Swift Current area had anything to do with killing livestock. They were no threat to farmer’s animal property and there was no justification for killing them. But hunting coyotes that are killing livestock is different than bounty hunting. Bounty hunting targets all coyotes and inevitably leads to indiscriminate killing, which doesn’t necessarily address the problem.
PROGRAM EVALUATION NEEDED
Minister Bjornerud’s own figures show this. His goal was the indiscriminate killing of 36,000 coyotes, but it seems that a little over half of this will occur. Even if the target of 36,000 dead coyote had been met (and an astounding 144,000 coyote paws submitted), this would only be about 12% to 18% of the estimated 200,000 to 300,000 total population in Saskatchewan. The actual kill to February amounted to only 6% to 9% of this.
The Minister rightly rejects the impracticality of barriers to keep the coyote away from all livestock; some ranches would need 14 or 15 miles of fencing. And anyway we don’t want to see the prairies inundated with more fencing that further interferes with wildlife habitat. We will therefore have to look in other directions for a sustainable way for humans and wildlife to co-exist.
But indiscriminate killing of coyotes makes no more sense than massive fencing projects. The bounty doesn’t target coyotes that are endangering livestock or humans. And even with the bounty incentive, “only” 6% to 9% of the coyote population has been killed. According to the Minster’s own broad-brush logic, that leaves 91% to 94% of the threat remaining. And you’d have to kill 100,000 to 150,000 coyotes to reduce these risks by just one-half. This approach is untenable and the bounty mentality is obsolete. Using this “hit and miss” approach, how many dead coyote are required to save just one sheep or cow? Compensation for livestock clearly makes more sense.
When I say “only” 6% to 9% of the estimated coyote population has been killed, I don’t intend to show disrespect for the thousands of creatures destroyed. The idea of cutting off paws of a canine, much like our farm dog, and perhaps leaving the creatures to rot, is unsettling. The protection of habitats and biodiversity, which is in humanity’s fundamental interest, will require many methods including legal. But common sense already shows the coyote bounty has failed. So let’s get on with finding effective and humane ways to learn to better share the land. Do we really have any alternative?
Next time I’ll consider why our ideas about wildlife management are changing.
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies living in the Qu'Appelle Valley.
His website is http://jimharding.brinkster.net
Saskatchewan Sustainability Published in United Newspapers of Saskatchewan April 2, 2010
The bounty on coyotes was announced last November as a pilot project. It was launched by the province because coyotes are a “perennial problem” for farmers and ranchers and are becoming a danger to rural families. There are no limits to the number of coyote that can be killed; bounty hunters just have to turn in all four paws, which they cut off the dead animal, as proof of the kill. At $20 a coyote that’s $5 a paw.
The government said it wanted as many as 36,000 coyotes killed. There’s inconsistent information, but after four months, the paws from 15,000 (Leader Post) to 18,000 (CBC) coyotes had been turned in. Only about 860 people have benefitted, with an average kill of 18 coyotes, with one hunter killing 90. The 360 paws from these 90 coyotes would be worth $1,800, which some might say is “a hell of a way to make a living”. Estimates of the average coyote kill in Saskatchewan range from 21,000 to 25,000 a year, though with the low price of fur, the number killed last year was 16,000. So it looks like the kill is going to be in the same range as before the bounty was declared.
RURAL COMMON SENSE
Most farmers and ranchers have apparently voted by not getting out their guns. This doesn’t surprise me after looking at what has been reported during this controversy. Rural people likely have a better grasp of the balance of nature and the probability of program effectiveness than do Regina politicians and bureaucrats. Some know that a strategy that targets coyotes that are actually threatening livestock is better than a broad-brush approach. As one farmer said, coyotes are “smart buggers”, explaining that he was able to keep them away from his livestock by killing four or six a year.
Others commented that coyotes help them by keeping gopher and rat populations in check. Some have even said that they think that chronic wasting disease in local deer has shifted coyote hunting behavior. Some critics argue that the $720,000 the government was prepared to spend (36,000 times $20) would be better spent beefing-up the much cheaper livestock guard dog program, which others argue that compensation for lost livestock would be cheaper and more humane. Some argue that coyote control would be better left with RM’s, who could use a diversity of strategies. Agriculture Minister Bjornerud rebutted that with 241 of 296 RM’s enrolled the bounty clearly has grass-roots support.
In the balance, is this bounty a progressive, effective and humane solution to human/wildlife conflict? The weaker animals might be disproportionately culled, and, as a similar program in Nova Scotia discovered, we could just see bigger coyote litters in the aftermath of the killing. Unlike many government programs, nature isn’t one-dimensional. But the program doesn’t seem to have entertained much thought, either in terms of the workings of nature or program objectives. When Minister Bjornerud was challenged about this, his retort was, should we “…sit back until some little kid out of some family in rural Saskatchewan gets attacked by six or seven coyotes”. This is more “politics of fear”, not assessing whether the program will actually reduce the risks to families.
When he announced the bounty, the Minister sounded more goal-oriented, saying “This is the only thing really that we felt would keep the numbers down and try to put a little fear in the coyotes again.” And how has this view stood up? One critic quoted in the Medicine Hat Prairie Post noted that there was no evidence at all that a pack of magnificent, white-coated coyotes killed in the Swift Current area had anything to do with killing livestock. They were no threat to farmer’s animal property and there was no justification for killing them. But hunting coyotes that are killing livestock is different than bounty hunting. Bounty hunting targets all coyotes and inevitably leads to indiscriminate killing, which doesn’t necessarily address the problem.
PROGRAM EVALUATION NEEDED
Minister Bjornerud’s own figures show this. His goal was the indiscriminate killing of 36,000 coyotes, but it seems that a little over half of this will occur. Even if the target of 36,000 dead coyote had been met (and an astounding 144,000 coyote paws submitted), this would only be about 12% to 18% of the estimated 200,000 to 300,000 total population in Saskatchewan. The actual kill to February amounted to only 6% to 9% of this.
The Minister rightly rejects the impracticality of barriers to keep the coyote away from all livestock; some ranches would need 14 or 15 miles of fencing. And anyway we don’t want to see the prairies inundated with more fencing that further interferes with wildlife habitat. We will therefore have to look in other directions for a sustainable way for humans and wildlife to co-exist.
But indiscriminate killing of coyotes makes no more sense than massive fencing projects. The bounty doesn’t target coyotes that are endangering livestock or humans. And even with the bounty incentive, “only” 6% to 9% of the coyote population has been killed. According to the Minster’s own broad-brush logic, that leaves 91% to 94% of the threat remaining. And you’d have to kill 100,000 to 150,000 coyotes to reduce these risks by just one-half. This approach is untenable and the bounty mentality is obsolete. Using this “hit and miss” approach, how many dead coyote are required to save just one sheep or cow? Compensation for livestock clearly makes more sense.
When I say “only” 6% to 9% of the estimated coyote population has been killed, I don’t intend to show disrespect for the thousands of creatures destroyed. The idea of cutting off paws of a canine, much like our farm dog, and perhaps leaving the creatures to rot, is unsettling. The protection of habitats and biodiversity, which is in humanity’s fundamental interest, will require many methods including legal. But common sense already shows the coyote bounty has failed. So let’s get on with finding effective and humane ways to learn to better share the land. Do we really have any alternative?
Next time I’ll consider why our ideas about wildlife management are changing.
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies living in the Qu'Appelle Valley.
His website is http://jimharding.brinkster.net
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND THE CALL OF THE WILD
by Oscar » Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:45 am
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND THE CALL OF THE WILD
BY Jim Harding
Sometimes we avoid clarifying our thoughts on controversial topics. We’re not even aware of our inclinations until we contact our deeper feelings. Recently I awoke at 4 am to the howling of coyotes on the hills to the east of our home. Our Akita-Shepherd dog, still lonely from the death of his sidekick dog, found his primordial canine voice and joined in. The choir before sunrise was entrancing, but it was also unsettling, for the day before I’d heard that 23,000 coyotes had been killed since the bounty was declared.
I had a dream a few nights before that our dog and I were up in the hills, where the coyotes now howled. I had gone over the crest of one hill but my dog hadn’t followed. When I retraced my steps I found him, bearing his fangs, with one paw on the chest of a large dog-like creature with a head like a horse, lying on its side in complete surrender. There were about ten of them all lying on their sides stretched out in a row. As my dog realized there was no threat to us, and relaxed his jaw, I coaxed him to come away. I’d gone through so many emotions – loss, apprehension, startle, fear, relaxation and security – so far in my dream. But it wasn’t over, for as my dog and I left the hills, I glanced up, and there were hundreds of these creatures on the horizon contently watching us depart.
Perhaps this dream was simply about having faith that unexpected future challenges don’t have to derail us. But I wondered if it was “telling me” that if we truly committed to co-existing with other creatures they wouldn’t give us trouble.
THE MAGNITUDE OF KILLING
Human rights assert that each person has inalienable dignity and deserves respect and protection. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a large number of humans being slaughtered, such as in Cambodia or Rwanda, to get international attention. However, the term “genocide”, or the slaughtering of a people, carries far more weight than does the term “murder”.
Is there any number of coyotes killed in a bounty that will touch our conscience? Or are we able to successfully demonize them, saying they deserve this indiscriminate killing because a few of them have killed our sheep or livestock? Isn’t this a form of scape-goating? And underneath all this, the question remains: should protecting owned-animals always trump the needs of wildlife?
I know this touches many nerves. When we lived north of Thunder Bay, I had a 22 rifle to protect our range-free chickens from being snapped up by a very smart fox. Once I successfully predicted the fox’s behavior and had the creature in my sights, but at the moment of reckoning I shot to the side. Nevertheless, the fox never returned. I also had a 303 gauge rifle available when a neighbor with livestock was dealing with a rowdy black bear. I wasn’t out to cull the foxes and black bears as a pre-emptive strike on creatures that may or may not threaten my livelihood. There’s a difference, and we have a different relationship to the killing.
One morning I heard a First Nations women on CBC radio saying how hard it was to come across a coyote carcass, with its paws cut off, left lying on the ground. “What about the fur, the meat and the spirit that was left behind”, she asked. But bounty hunting doesn’t encourage us to acknowledge what we’re doing. It makes the object of our destruction into something so alien or nasty that we can justify indiscriminate killing. It’s a little like what we do when we dehumanize, and we know where this can lead.
HABITAT PROTECTION
But even larger questions remain. Unbeknown to many, the prairie eco-region is already the most transformed in Canada. This is mostly due to massive agriculture; we all know this when we see the seemingly endless patchwork of fields as we fly in and out of southern Saskatchewan airports. Smaller farmers are more prone to plant their crops around sloughs, small hills and bush, while sustaining more diversity and habitats. Mammoth equipment for larger-scale agribusiness, however, levels more land for production, and wildlife is left to survive through more desperate actions. As human activity spreads we inevitably end up in more conflict with the creatures that were here before the land was broken.
Sometimes these indigenous creatures are decimated. Only a few generations ago, millions of bison inhabited the Great Plains. Often these magnificent herds couldn’t even be seen as they wandered through the long-grasses that grew from the rich, inter-glacial lake-bed soil that is the prairies. The steady decline of prairie biodiversity continues to deplete the song birds that come here.
Are we going to continue on this path, and expropriate even more land for agribusiness, coal mining, or whatever, while continuing to encroach on habitats of other creatures? This surely isn’t sustainable; and, as the car oil filter ad says, “pay me now or pay me later”. The limits to growth are real. They are limits in space, limits on land and water; limits on the viability of human intervention in natural systems. Until we get this sorted out we’ll remain confused about wildlife management, including the coyote.
A marine biologist was recently talking on The Nature of Things about New Zealand’s success in restoring endangered fish populations in protected marine areas. The diversity of aquatic life is returning as humans withdraw from destructive activities in the eco-system. When the interviewer asked whether this was a success in wildlife management, the elderly biologist smiled and said these species don’t need our management as “they were here one million years before us”. He continued that their well-being depends on us better managing ourselves.
Is the “call of the wild” perhaps beckoning us to reconsider our views of wildlife management? The quest for sustainability will surely require a major shift in perspective.
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies living in the Qu'Appelle Valley.
http://jimharding.brinkster.net
BY Jim Harding
Sometimes we avoid clarifying our thoughts on controversial topics. We’re not even aware of our inclinations until we contact our deeper feelings. Recently I awoke at 4 am to the howling of coyotes on the hills to the east of our home. Our Akita-Shepherd dog, still lonely from the death of his sidekick dog, found his primordial canine voice and joined in. The choir before sunrise was entrancing, but it was also unsettling, for the day before I’d heard that 23,000 coyotes had been killed since the bounty was declared.
I had a dream a few nights before that our dog and I were up in the hills, where the coyotes now howled. I had gone over the crest of one hill but my dog hadn’t followed. When I retraced my steps I found him, bearing his fangs, with one paw on the chest of a large dog-like creature with a head like a horse, lying on its side in complete surrender. There were about ten of them all lying on their sides stretched out in a row. As my dog realized there was no threat to us, and relaxed his jaw, I coaxed him to come away. I’d gone through so many emotions – loss, apprehension, startle, fear, relaxation and security – so far in my dream. But it wasn’t over, for as my dog and I left the hills, I glanced up, and there were hundreds of these creatures on the horizon contently watching us depart.
Perhaps this dream was simply about having faith that unexpected future challenges don’t have to derail us. But I wondered if it was “telling me” that if we truly committed to co-existing with other creatures they wouldn’t give us trouble.
THE MAGNITUDE OF KILLING
Human rights assert that each person has inalienable dignity and deserves respect and protection. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a large number of humans being slaughtered, such as in Cambodia or Rwanda, to get international attention. However, the term “genocide”, or the slaughtering of a people, carries far more weight than does the term “murder”.
Is there any number of coyotes killed in a bounty that will touch our conscience? Or are we able to successfully demonize them, saying they deserve this indiscriminate killing because a few of them have killed our sheep or livestock? Isn’t this a form of scape-goating? And underneath all this, the question remains: should protecting owned-animals always trump the needs of wildlife?
I know this touches many nerves. When we lived north of Thunder Bay, I had a 22 rifle to protect our range-free chickens from being snapped up by a very smart fox. Once I successfully predicted the fox’s behavior and had the creature in my sights, but at the moment of reckoning I shot to the side. Nevertheless, the fox never returned. I also had a 303 gauge rifle available when a neighbor with livestock was dealing with a rowdy black bear. I wasn’t out to cull the foxes and black bears as a pre-emptive strike on creatures that may or may not threaten my livelihood. There’s a difference, and we have a different relationship to the killing.
One morning I heard a First Nations women on CBC radio saying how hard it was to come across a coyote carcass, with its paws cut off, left lying on the ground. “What about the fur, the meat and the spirit that was left behind”, she asked. But bounty hunting doesn’t encourage us to acknowledge what we’re doing. It makes the object of our destruction into something so alien or nasty that we can justify indiscriminate killing. It’s a little like what we do when we dehumanize, and we know where this can lead.
HABITAT PROTECTION
But even larger questions remain. Unbeknown to many, the prairie eco-region is already the most transformed in Canada. This is mostly due to massive agriculture; we all know this when we see the seemingly endless patchwork of fields as we fly in and out of southern Saskatchewan airports. Smaller farmers are more prone to plant their crops around sloughs, small hills and bush, while sustaining more diversity and habitats. Mammoth equipment for larger-scale agribusiness, however, levels more land for production, and wildlife is left to survive through more desperate actions. As human activity spreads we inevitably end up in more conflict with the creatures that were here before the land was broken.
Sometimes these indigenous creatures are decimated. Only a few generations ago, millions of bison inhabited the Great Plains. Often these magnificent herds couldn’t even be seen as they wandered through the long-grasses that grew from the rich, inter-glacial lake-bed soil that is the prairies. The steady decline of prairie biodiversity continues to deplete the song birds that come here.
Are we going to continue on this path, and expropriate even more land for agribusiness, coal mining, or whatever, while continuing to encroach on habitats of other creatures? This surely isn’t sustainable; and, as the car oil filter ad says, “pay me now or pay me later”. The limits to growth are real. They are limits in space, limits on land and water; limits on the viability of human intervention in natural systems. Until we get this sorted out we’ll remain confused about wildlife management, including the coyote.
A marine biologist was recently talking on The Nature of Things about New Zealand’s success in restoring endangered fish populations in protected marine areas. The diversity of aquatic life is returning as humans withdraw from destructive activities in the eco-system. When the interviewer asked whether this was a success in wildlife management, the elderly biologist smiled and said these species don’t need our management as “they were here one million years before us”. He continued that their well-being depends on us better managing ourselves.
Is the “call of the wild” perhaps beckoning us to reconsider our views of wildlife management? The quest for sustainability will surely require a major shift in perspective.
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies living in the Qu'Appelle Valley.
http://jimharding.brinkster.net
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Nature Saskatchewan RESOLUTION 2010-05 - Coyote Bounty
by Oscar » Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:32 pm
Nature Saskatchewan RESOLUTION 2010-05 - Coyote Bounty
A resolution adopted by Nature Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Natural History Society), September 25th, 2010. Indian Head, Sask.
NATURE SASKATCHEWAN ( www.Naturesask.ca )
Resolution 2010-05: Saskatchewan’s bounty on the Great Plains Coyote : recognizing the ecological impact of meso-predator release on endangered species and in wildlife management in general.
WHEREAS during the winter of 2009-2010 the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture undertook a province-wide "pilot" bounty program that resulted in the elimination of over 71,000 Coyotes from the prairie ecosystem,
AND WHEREAS during the 1960's, decimation of the Great Plains Coyote during the snowmobile revolution brought about a province-wide invasion of the Red Fox, causing significant ecological and economic damage to the prairie ecosystem,
AND WHEREAS the structure and integrity of many ecosystems are maintained in large part by apex predators and evolutionary process through limitation of intermediate "meso-predators" such as the Red Fox,
AND WHEREAS predator bounty programs have proven to be economically inefficient, counter-productive and ecologically damaging, as demonstrated in various studies throughout the world,
AND WHEREAS the conservation of many endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators (in today's prairie ecology, the Coyote),
BE IT RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Government of Saskatchewan that it strongly objects to the use of public funds in a bounty program on Coyptes that has the potential to cause serious ecological damage, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Ministry of Agriculture that predator bounty programs cause both economic and ecological damage in the long run, due to demonstrable ecological principles, and that anti-predator policies, dictated entirely by monocultural economic practices, are incompatible with sound ecological management, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan urge the Government of Saskatchewan to empower the Ministry of Environment to follow its mission of protecting the environment by monitoring predator populations with a wider effort to maintain key ecological and evolutionary processes, particularly in fragmented landscapes such as our remnant grasslands, beginning with an environmental impact study of the "pilot" bounty program of 2009-2010, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan continue to advance Resolution 97-1, recognizing that predation is a key factor shaping ecosystems, and that species at risk are merely components of the ecosystem subject to the ecological processes of predation, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan recognize that decimation of the Coyote in the winter of 2009-2010 is a significantly disruptive ecological event that will have repurcussions for wildlife populations, including rodents and species at risk, and that it will undertake to address this issue in its policies and practices, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan encourage the Government of Canada, through the Minister of the Environment, to recognize that the prairies are one ecosystem within Palliser's Triangle, and that endangered species management requires a national ecosystem-based conservation strategy that recognizes the essential role and critical value of the Great Plains Coyote as the remaining apex predator in an altered system.
- - - -
E-mail from James K. Finley, Sidney B.C.
A resolution adopted by Nature Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Natural History Society), September 25th, 2010. Indian Head, Sask.
NATURE SASKATCHEWAN ( www.Naturesask.ca )
Resolution 2010-05: Saskatchewan’s bounty on the Great Plains Coyote : recognizing the ecological impact of meso-predator release on endangered species and in wildlife management in general.
WHEREAS during the winter of 2009-2010 the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture undertook a province-wide "pilot" bounty program that resulted in the elimination of over 71,000 Coyotes from the prairie ecosystem,
AND WHEREAS during the 1960's, decimation of the Great Plains Coyote during the snowmobile revolution brought about a province-wide invasion of the Red Fox, causing significant ecological and economic damage to the prairie ecosystem,
AND WHEREAS the structure and integrity of many ecosystems are maintained in large part by apex predators and evolutionary process through limitation of intermediate "meso-predators" such as the Red Fox,
AND WHEREAS predator bounty programs have proven to be economically inefficient, counter-productive and ecologically damaging, as demonstrated in various studies throughout the world,
AND WHEREAS the conservation of many endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators (in today's prairie ecology, the Coyote),
BE IT RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Government of Saskatchewan that it strongly objects to the use of public funds in a bounty program on Coyptes that has the potential to cause serious ecological damage, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Ministry of Agriculture that predator bounty programs cause both economic and ecological damage in the long run, due to demonstrable ecological principles, and that anti-predator policies, dictated entirely by monocultural economic practices, are incompatible with sound ecological management, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan urge the Government of Saskatchewan to empower the Ministry of Environment to follow its mission of protecting the environment by monitoring predator populations with a wider effort to maintain key ecological and evolutionary processes, particularly in fragmented landscapes such as our remnant grasslands, beginning with an environmental impact study of the "pilot" bounty program of 2009-2010, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan continue to advance Resolution 97-1, recognizing that predation is a key factor shaping ecosystems, and that species at risk are merely components of the ecosystem subject to the ecological processes of predation, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan recognize that decimation of the Coyote in the winter of 2009-2010 is a significantly disruptive ecological event that will have repurcussions for wildlife populations, including rodents and species at risk, and that it will undertake to address this issue in its policies and practices, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan encourage the Government of Canada, through the Minister of the Environment, to recognize that the prairies are one ecosystem within Palliser's Triangle, and that endangered species management requires a national ecosystem-based conservation strategy that recognizes the essential role and critical value of the Great Plains Coyote as the remaining apex predator in an altered system.
- - - -
E-mail from James K. Finley, Sidney B.C.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Nature Saskatchewan Passes Resolution Condemning Coyote Boun
by Oscar » Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Nature Saskatchewan Passes Resolution Condemning Coyote Bounties
http://www.projectcoyote.org/newsreleas ... hewan.html
For immediate release: October 14, 2010
Contacts: Contacts: Paul Paquet, Project Coyote & Raincoast Conservation Foundation, 306-376-2015
Trevor Herriot, Nature Saskatchewan, 306-777-2395 (day)/ 306-585-1674 (eve.)
Camilla Fox, Project Coyote & Animal Welfare Institute, 415-690-0338 (cell)/ 415-945-3232 (office)
Nature Saskatchewan Passes Resolution Condemning Coyote Bounties
Scientists call on Nova Scotia to Stop Coyote Bounty
Saskatchewan — Scientists and conservationists praised Nature Saskatchewan’s membership for passing a groundbreaking resolution recognizing coyotes’ critical role in prairie ecosystems and condemning bounties and other mass coyote killing programs.
“We are concerned that the bounty Saskatchewan piloted last year could have wider ecological consequences so we wanted to speak out strongly,” said Trevor Herriot, Conservation Director, Nature Saskatchewan, a provincial affiliate of Nature Canada. “This resolution not only acknowledges the critical role coyotes play in maintaining species diversity and ecosystem health but it also makes a clear statement that the conservation of endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators – which in today’s prairie ecology, is the Coyote. The members and board of Nature Saskatchewan are also concerned that the bounty could be reinstituted or suddenly applied to wolves in the northern half of the province.”
The resolution comes on the heels of a large-scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty that resulted in the killing of at least 71,000 coyotes between November 2009 and March 2010. Saskatchewan’s agriculture minister defended the bounty as an effective way to reduce coyote populations and agricultural conflicts despite the lack of critical scientific evidence to support his claims.
“Considering that one coyote will eat at least 5 rodents per day, the removal of 71,000 coyotes means there are at a minimum 130 million more rodents on the landscape that farmers have to contend with that would have been controlled naturally by coyotes,” said Dr. Paul Paquet, Scientific Advisory Board member of Project Coyote and Senior Scientist of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation. “If we also consider the sheer number of insects coyotes eat, the sick animals they remove from the gene pool, and carrion they clean up, it’s not a stretch to say we’re clearly working against ourselves when we kill coyotes in mass numbers.” Astounding scientists and conservationists throughout North America, Nova Scotia’s Natural Resource Minister John MacDonell then declared that the province would initiate its own coyote bounty- to commence October 15. Guised as a “pelt incentive plan” the bounty would provide $20 per coyote pelt. Acknowledging that coyote bounties “don’t work to control the population,” (CBC News 4.22.10) MacDonell told the CBC News (4.22.10) that the aim of the bounty is to “to change coyote behaviour and reduces a problem wildlife population.”
Four days later, New Brunswick declared that it would not enact a coyote bounty stating that, “New Brunswick prefers to let nature to take its course,” as reported by the CBC News (4.26.10).
“We have known for decades that random killing of coyotes can actually be counterproductive resulting in increased coyote and rodent populations,” stated Paquet. “Let this progressive resolution passed by Nature Saskatchewan be a clarion call to Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions that bounties and other mass killings of coyotes are ethically indefensible, ecologically reckless, and counter to sound scientific wildlife conservation.”
###
Project Coyote is a national non-profit charitable organization that fosters educated coexistence between people and coyotes and advocates on behalf of America’s Song Dog and all native carnivores. For information, visit: www.ProjectCoyote.org
Nature Saskatchewan promotes the appreciation and understanding of our natural environment through education, conservation and research. For information, visit: www.naturesask.ca
Raincoast Conservation Foundation is a Canadian science-based research and education non-profit organization with a focus on large carnivore conservation; visit: www.raincoast.org
The Animal Welfare Institute is a non-profit charitable organization founded in 1951 to reduce the sum total of pain and fear inflicted on animals by humans. More information: www.awionline.org
= = = = =
Saskatchewan's Coyote Bounty counter-productive and dangerous to endangered species
October 14, 2010
The following resolution concerning decimation of the Great Plains Coyote last winter was passed by the Saskatchewan Natural History Society (Nature Saskatchewan) at its AGM in Indian Head, Saskatchewan on September 25th, 2010. It reveals a critical flaw in the Federal endangered species management policy with respect to provincial jurisdiction over apex predators.
Natural predation is one of the most important factors in determining the structure and integrity of ecosystems. You can't begin to protect rare, declining and endangered species, if you don't maintain the apex predators. The Species at Risk Act is a waste of time and resources until there is a coherent, ecosystem-based policy in place, based on the principles of predation and the proven concept of "meso-predator" release.
Project Coyote, with its board of respected carnivore biologists, strongly supports Nature Saskatchewan in its efforts to educate the public on the intrinsic value of the Great Plains Coyote in helping maintain a healthy prairie ecosystem.
Following is their press release :
Coyote Bounty Condemned
http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28097&Itemid=421
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Nature Saskatchewan has passed a resolution condemning coyote bounties.
The resolution comes on the heels of a large scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty which resulted in 71,000 coyotes being culled in 250 rural municipalities between November 2009 and March 2010.
The provincial government paid $20 for each animal in hopes of reducing the number of domestic livestock killed by the predators.
Dr. Paul Paquet with Project Coyote says one coyote will eat at least 5 rodents per day which means with the removal of 71,000 coyotes, there are a minimum of 130 million more rodents for farmers to contend with.
The coyote bounty has been replaced by the Wildlife Compensation Program. Farmers and ranchers receive 100 percent of the market value of livestock killed by predators and up to 80 percent of market value for injured animals.
Nature Saskatchewan passed the resolution as Nova Scotia announced it will commence its own coyote bounty on October 15th. {vmf (with archive files) Oct 14/10}
http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28097&Itemid=421
_________________________
Camilla H. Fox, Executive Director
Project Coyote
P.O. Box 5007, Larkspur, CA 94977
ph: 415.945.3232
Join the conversation!
<twitter_64.png> <facebook_64.png> <payapbutton.gif>
= = = = =
2010 RESOLUTION: NATURE SASKATCHEWAN ( www.Naturesask.ca )
Resolution 2010-05: Saskatchewan’s bounty on the Great Plains Coyote: recognizing the ecological impact of meso-predator release on endangered species and in wildlife management in general.
A resolution adopted by Nature Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Natural History Society), September 25th, 2010. Indian Head, Sask.
WHEREAS during the winter of 2009-2010 the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture undertook a province-wide "pilot" bounty program that resulted in the elimination of over 71,000 Coyotes from the prairie ecosystem, ......
- - - - -
FULL TEXT:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1904#1904- - - - - -
E-mail from James K. Finley, Sidney B.C.
= = = = =
Kill for Cash ~ Coyotes Targeted in Nova Scotia's "Pelt Incentive" Program
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/camilla-fox/
kill-for-cash-coyotes-tar_b_763593.html
Camilla Fox and Chris Genovali
Posted: October 14, 2010 10:00 PM
Tomorrow coyotes throughout the Province of Nova Scotia will be snared and trapped in a government-sponsored bounty spree. The killing, euphemistically called "a pelt incentive plan," will pay $20 per coyote pelt with the intent of reducing Nova Scotia's coyote population in half. Paradoxically, the number of coyotes that live in the Province is unknown. According to, Nova Scotia's Natural Resource Minister John MacDonell, the killing incentive is aimed at "changing coyote behavior" and "reducing a problem wildlife population" (CBC News 4.2.10). In seemingly contradictory comments, however, MacDonnell has acknowledged publicly that coyote bounties "don't work to control the population," (CBC News 4.22.10). And there is no scientific evidence that killing coyotes changes the behavior of the coyote's that survive.
At the same time that Nova Scotia has chosen to pursue a coyote bounty, the highly esteemed - Nature Saskatchewan (a provincial affiliate of Nature Canada) passed a groundbreaking resolution on September 26th that explicitly condemns predator bounties as "economically inefficient, counter-productive and ecologically damaging, as demonstrated in various studies throughout the world."
The resolution comes on the heels of a large-scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty that resulted in the killing of at least 71,000 coyotes between November 2009 and March 2010. Saskatchewan's agriculture minister initially defended the bounty as an effective way to reduce coyote populations and agricultural conflicts; this despite the lack of scientific evidence to support his claims. The Ministry was less defensive of the bounty after it shelled out more than $1.4 million dollars to participants and a CBC investigation revealed that coyote body-parts were being laundered in from surrounding provinces. The story, which made national headlines, showed 37 maimed coyote carcasses in an Alberta park with their paws cut off near the Alberta-Saskatchewan border. Coyote paws were the required body part to obtain the $20 bounty in Saskatchewan.
In a news release issued today by Project Coyote, Dr. Paul Paquet- Scientific Advisory Board member of Project Coyote and Senior Scientist of the ." Dr. Paquet further states that "If we also consider the large number of insects coyotes eat, the sick animals they remove from the environment, and the carrion they clean up, it's not an overstatement to say we're clearly working against ourselves when we indiscriminately kill mass numbers of coyotes."
Echoing Dr. Paquet's concerns, Trevor Herriot- Conservation Director of Nature Saskatchewan - said, "We are concerned that the bounty Saskatchewan piloted last year could have wider ecological consequences so we wanted to speak out strongly. This resolution not only acknowledges the critical role coyotes play in maintaining species diversity and ecosystem health but it also makes a clear statement that the conservation of endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators - which in today's prairie ecology, is the Coyote. The members and board of Nature Saskatchewan are also concerned that the bounty could be re-instituted or suddenly applied to wolves in the northern half of the province."
Nature Saskatchewan's resolution states,
BE IT RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Government of Saskatchewan that it strongly objects to the use of public funds in a bounty program on Coyotes that has the potential to cause serious ecological damage, and ......
- - - - - -
FULL TEXT:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1904#1904
- - - - - -
While Nova Scotia begins what will undoubtedly be an ineffectual coyote slaughter, New Brunswick has publicly declared that it will not enact a coyote bounty stating that, "New Brunswick prefers to let nature to take its course," as reported by the CBC News (4.26.10).
"We have known for decades that random killing of coyotes can actually be counterproductive resulting in increased coyote and rodent populations," Dr. Paquet stated. "Let this progressive resolution passed by Nature Saskatchewan be a wake up call to Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions that bounties and other mass killings of coyotes are ethically indefensible, ecologically reckless, and counter to sound scientific wildlife conservation."
Like lynching, predator bounties are an archaic and brutal thing of the past that have no place in civilized society- especially when it is well documented that they are ineffective and counterproductive. It is time for all to speak out against such unconscionable brutality against wildlife.
Email Minister of Natural Resources John MacDonell at premier@gov.ns.ca and the Nova Scotia Department of Tourism, Culture & Heritage and tell them you will not be spending your tourist dollars in Nova Scotia until they stop predator bounties:
Tourism Division
E-mail: tns@gov.ns.ca
Phone: (902) 424-5000
= = = =
LETTER: HUGHES: No more visits to Nova Scotia
https://www.gov.ns.ca/tch/thanks.asp
Thank you for your report submission on 10-10-15 7:04:38 PM
Your Name #: Elaine Hughes
Inquiry: How sad and disgusting that Nova Scotia government has seen fit to follow in the archaic footsteps of the Saskatchewan government with this unspeakable, unnecessary and ineffective way of 'controlling' coyotes!
This needless slaughter won't work any better for Nova Scotia than it did for Saskatchewan and indicates incompetence, ignorance, and lack of willingness or ability on your part to learn how to deal with this situation in an intelligent and meaningful way.
I have enjoyed many visits to Nova Scotia but, until you stop this brutal genocide, I'll not be back!
= = = = =
2009 Press Release
A coyote bounty is an ineffective blanket approach to a problem that demands focussed, local solutions
http://www.naturesask.ca/?s=news&p=pressreleases&id=450
Press Releases November 19th, 2009
Regina, Saskatchewan – November 12, 2009 - Nature Saskatchewan, a non-profit conservation organization and advocate for harmony between nature and human culture, believes that the recently-announced bounty on coyotes in Saskatchewan is not the right way to help livestock producers deal with depredation.
Countless studies have proven bounties to be ineffective in stopping problem coyotes from taking livestock. “What our producers need,” Lorne Scott, President of Nature Saskatchewan said, "is an adequately-funded, aggressive control program in areas where depredation is a problem. The focus should be on eliminating problem animals—not a province-wide bounty."
Many farmers and ranchers view the coyote as an ally, helping to control rodent populations, including gophers (ground squirrels). The coyote is a native species and a key predator in prairie ecosystems. It makes little sense to promote poison campaigns to reduce ground squirrel numbers and at the same time, launch a province-wide bounty program to eliminate a main predator of ground squirrels.
Research has proven repeatedly that coyote bounties simply weed out the weak and less wary individuals, leaving the survivors to increase the size of their litters and thereby make up for any short-term or local dip in their numbers. As well, if coyotes are hunted out of a local area, their counterparts from adjacent regions rapidly move in to fill the void.
Scott concluded by saying that “tax dollars would be far better spent by providing resources directly to assist producers where coyote depredation on domestic livestock is a problem."
About Nature Saskatchewan
Nature Saskatchewan is one of Saskatchewan’s most respected conservation organizations. Its membership includes amateur naturalists, biologists, ecologists, ranchers and farmers from around the province. As a non-profit, we promote the
appreciation and understanding of our natural environment through education, conservation and research. Founded in 1949, Nature Saskatchewan has been observing, documenting and protecting the province's biological diversity for 60 years. Nature Saskatchewan provides the cultural link by which people are inspired, gain knowledge of and ultimately enjoy and protect the natural world around them. -30-
For media inquiries, please contact:
Lorne Scott, Nature Saskatchewan President
Ph: 306 695-2047 Cell: 306 695-7458
Email: lorne.scott@sasktel.net
Nature Saskatchewan
206, 1860 Lorne Street
Regina, SK S4P 2L7
Phone: (306) 780-9273 or 1-800-667-4668 (Sask only)
Fax: (306 780-9263; Email: info@naturesask.ca
www.naturesask.ca
http://www.projectcoyote.org/newsreleas ... hewan.html
For immediate release: October 14, 2010
Contacts: Contacts: Paul Paquet, Project Coyote & Raincoast Conservation Foundation, 306-376-2015
Trevor Herriot, Nature Saskatchewan, 306-777-2395 (day)/ 306-585-1674 (eve.)
Camilla Fox, Project Coyote & Animal Welfare Institute, 415-690-0338 (cell)/ 415-945-3232 (office)
Nature Saskatchewan Passes Resolution Condemning Coyote Bounties
Scientists call on Nova Scotia to Stop Coyote Bounty
Saskatchewan — Scientists and conservationists praised Nature Saskatchewan’s membership for passing a groundbreaking resolution recognizing coyotes’ critical role in prairie ecosystems and condemning bounties and other mass coyote killing programs.
“We are concerned that the bounty Saskatchewan piloted last year could have wider ecological consequences so we wanted to speak out strongly,” said Trevor Herriot, Conservation Director, Nature Saskatchewan, a provincial affiliate of Nature Canada. “This resolution not only acknowledges the critical role coyotes play in maintaining species diversity and ecosystem health but it also makes a clear statement that the conservation of endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators – which in today’s prairie ecology, is the Coyote. The members and board of Nature Saskatchewan are also concerned that the bounty could be reinstituted or suddenly applied to wolves in the northern half of the province.”
The resolution comes on the heels of a large-scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty that resulted in the killing of at least 71,000 coyotes between November 2009 and March 2010. Saskatchewan’s agriculture minister defended the bounty as an effective way to reduce coyote populations and agricultural conflicts despite the lack of critical scientific evidence to support his claims.
“Considering that one coyote will eat at least 5 rodents per day, the removal of 71,000 coyotes means there are at a minimum 130 million more rodents on the landscape that farmers have to contend with that would have been controlled naturally by coyotes,” said Dr. Paul Paquet, Scientific Advisory Board member of Project Coyote and Senior Scientist of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation. “If we also consider the sheer number of insects coyotes eat, the sick animals they remove from the gene pool, and carrion they clean up, it’s not a stretch to say we’re clearly working against ourselves when we kill coyotes in mass numbers.” Astounding scientists and conservationists throughout North America, Nova Scotia’s Natural Resource Minister John MacDonell then declared that the province would initiate its own coyote bounty- to commence October 15. Guised as a “pelt incentive plan” the bounty would provide $20 per coyote pelt. Acknowledging that coyote bounties “don’t work to control the population,” (CBC News 4.22.10) MacDonell told the CBC News (4.22.10) that the aim of the bounty is to “to change coyote behaviour and reduces a problem wildlife population.”
Four days later, New Brunswick declared that it would not enact a coyote bounty stating that, “New Brunswick prefers to let nature to take its course,” as reported by the CBC News (4.26.10).
“We have known for decades that random killing of coyotes can actually be counterproductive resulting in increased coyote and rodent populations,” stated Paquet. “Let this progressive resolution passed by Nature Saskatchewan be a clarion call to Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions that bounties and other mass killings of coyotes are ethically indefensible, ecologically reckless, and counter to sound scientific wildlife conservation.”
###
Project Coyote is a national non-profit charitable organization that fosters educated coexistence between people and coyotes and advocates on behalf of America’s Song Dog and all native carnivores. For information, visit: www.ProjectCoyote.org
Nature Saskatchewan promotes the appreciation and understanding of our natural environment through education, conservation and research. For information, visit: www.naturesask.ca
Raincoast Conservation Foundation is a Canadian science-based research and education non-profit organization with a focus on large carnivore conservation; visit: www.raincoast.org
The Animal Welfare Institute is a non-profit charitable organization founded in 1951 to reduce the sum total of pain and fear inflicted on animals by humans. More information: www.awionline.org
= = = = =
Saskatchewan's Coyote Bounty counter-productive and dangerous to endangered species
October 14, 2010
The following resolution concerning decimation of the Great Plains Coyote last winter was passed by the Saskatchewan Natural History Society (Nature Saskatchewan) at its AGM in Indian Head, Saskatchewan on September 25th, 2010. It reveals a critical flaw in the Federal endangered species management policy with respect to provincial jurisdiction over apex predators.
Natural predation is one of the most important factors in determining the structure and integrity of ecosystems. You can't begin to protect rare, declining and endangered species, if you don't maintain the apex predators. The Species at Risk Act is a waste of time and resources until there is a coherent, ecosystem-based policy in place, based on the principles of predation and the proven concept of "meso-predator" release.
Project Coyote, with its board of respected carnivore biologists, strongly supports Nature Saskatchewan in its efforts to educate the public on the intrinsic value of the Great Plains Coyote in helping maintain a healthy prairie ecosystem.
Following is their press release :
Coyote Bounty Condemned
http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28097&Itemid=421
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Nature Saskatchewan has passed a resolution condemning coyote bounties.
The resolution comes on the heels of a large scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty which resulted in 71,000 coyotes being culled in 250 rural municipalities between November 2009 and March 2010.
The provincial government paid $20 for each animal in hopes of reducing the number of domestic livestock killed by the predators.
Dr. Paul Paquet with Project Coyote says one coyote will eat at least 5 rodents per day which means with the removal of 71,000 coyotes, there are a minimum of 130 million more rodents for farmers to contend with.
The coyote bounty has been replaced by the Wildlife Compensation Program. Farmers and ranchers receive 100 percent of the market value of livestock killed by predators and up to 80 percent of market value for injured animals.
Nature Saskatchewan passed the resolution as Nova Scotia announced it will commence its own coyote bounty on October 15th. {vmf (with archive files) Oct 14/10}
http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28097&Itemid=421
_________________________
Camilla H. Fox, Executive Director
Project Coyote
P.O. Box 5007, Larkspur, CA 94977
ph: 415.945.3232
Join the conversation!
<twitter_64.png> <facebook_64.png> <payapbutton.gif>
= = = = =
2010 RESOLUTION: NATURE SASKATCHEWAN ( www.Naturesask.ca )
Resolution 2010-05: Saskatchewan’s bounty on the Great Plains Coyote: recognizing the ecological impact of meso-predator release on endangered species and in wildlife management in general.
A resolution adopted by Nature Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Natural History Society), September 25th, 2010. Indian Head, Sask.
WHEREAS during the winter of 2009-2010 the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture undertook a province-wide "pilot" bounty program that resulted in the elimination of over 71,000 Coyotes from the prairie ecosystem, ......
- - - - -
FULL TEXT:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1904#1904- - - - - -
E-mail from James K. Finley, Sidney B.C.
= = = = =
Kill for Cash ~ Coyotes Targeted in Nova Scotia's "Pelt Incentive" Program
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/camilla-fox/
kill-for-cash-coyotes-tar_b_763593.html
Camilla Fox and Chris Genovali
Posted: October 14, 2010 10:00 PM
Tomorrow coyotes throughout the Province of Nova Scotia will be snared and trapped in a government-sponsored bounty spree. The killing, euphemistically called "a pelt incentive plan," will pay $20 per coyote pelt with the intent of reducing Nova Scotia's coyote population in half. Paradoxically, the number of coyotes that live in the Province is unknown. According to, Nova Scotia's Natural Resource Minister John MacDonell, the killing incentive is aimed at "changing coyote behavior" and "reducing a problem wildlife population" (CBC News 4.2.10). In seemingly contradictory comments, however, MacDonnell has acknowledged publicly that coyote bounties "don't work to control the population," (CBC News 4.22.10). And there is no scientific evidence that killing coyotes changes the behavior of the coyote's that survive.
At the same time that Nova Scotia has chosen to pursue a coyote bounty, the highly esteemed - Nature Saskatchewan (a provincial affiliate of Nature Canada) passed a groundbreaking resolution on September 26th that explicitly condemns predator bounties as "economically inefficient, counter-productive and ecologically damaging, as demonstrated in various studies throughout the world."
The resolution comes on the heels of a large-scale Saskatchewan government sanctioned bounty that resulted in the killing of at least 71,000 coyotes between November 2009 and March 2010. Saskatchewan's agriculture minister initially defended the bounty as an effective way to reduce coyote populations and agricultural conflicts; this despite the lack of scientific evidence to support his claims. The Ministry was less defensive of the bounty after it shelled out more than $1.4 million dollars to participants and a CBC investigation revealed that coyote body-parts were being laundered in from surrounding provinces. The story, which made national headlines, showed 37 maimed coyote carcasses in an Alberta park with their paws cut off near the Alberta-Saskatchewan border. Coyote paws were the required body part to obtain the $20 bounty in Saskatchewan.
In a news release issued today by Project Coyote, Dr. Paul Paquet- Scientific Advisory Board member of Project Coyote and Senior Scientist of the ." Dr. Paquet further states that "If we also consider the large number of insects coyotes eat, the sick animals they remove from the environment, and the carrion they clean up, it's not an overstatement to say we're clearly working against ourselves when we indiscriminately kill mass numbers of coyotes."
Echoing Dr. Paquet's concerns, Trevor Herriot- Conservation Director of Nature Saskatchewan - said, "We are concerned that the bounty Saskatchewan piloted last year could have wider ecological consequences so we wanted to speak out strongly. This resolution not only acknowledges the critical role coyotes play in maintaining species diversity and ecosystem health but it also makes a clear statement that the conservation of endangered species, and wildlife in general, is dependent on ecological policies that recognize the central role of apex predators - which in today's prairie ecology, is the Coyote. The members and board of Nature Saskatchewan are also concerned that the bounty could be re-instituted or suddenly applied to wolves in the northern half of the province."
Nature Saskatchewan's resolution states,
BE IT RESOLVED that Nature Saskatchewan reaffirms its position with the Government of Saskatchewan that it strongly objects to the use of public funds in a bounty program on Coyotes that has the potential to cause serious ecological damage, and ......
- - - - - -
FULL TEXT:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1904#1904
- - - - - -
While Nova Scotia begins what will undoubtedly be an ineffectual coyote slaughter, New Brunswick has publicly declared that it will not enact a coyote bounty stating that, "New Brunswick prefers to let nature to take its course," as reported by the CBC News (4.26.10).
"We have known for decades that random killing of coyotes can actually be counterproductive resulting in increased coyote and rodent populations," Dr. Paquet stated. "Let this progressive resolution passed by Nature Saskatchewan be a wake up call to Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions that bounties and other mass killings of coyotes are ethically indefensible, ecologically reckless, and counter to sound scientific wildlife conservation."
Like lynching, predator bounties are an archaic and brutal thing of the past that have no place in civilized society- especially when it is well documented that they are ineffective and counterproductive. It is time for all to speak out against such unconscionable brutality against wildlife.
Email Minister of Natural Resources John MacDonell at premier@gov.ns.ca and the Nova Scotia Department of Tourism, Culture & Heritage and tell them you will not be spending your tourist dollars in Nova Scotia until they stop predator bounties:
Tourism Division
E-mail: tns@gov.ns.ca
Phone: (902) 424-5000
= = = =
LETTER: HUGHES: No more visits to Nova Scotia
https://www.gov.ns.ca/tch/thanks.asp
Thank you for your report submission on 10-10-15 7:04:38 PM
Your Name #: Elaine Hughes
Inquiry: How sad and disgusting that Nova Scotia government has seen fit to follow in the archaic footsteps of the Saskatchewan government with this unspeakable, unnecessary and ineffective way of 'controlling' coyotes!
This needless slaughter won't work any better for Nova Scotia than it did for Saskatchewan and indicates incompetence, ignorance, and lack of willingness or ability on your part to learn how to deal with this situation in an intelligent and meaningful way.
I have enjoyed many visits to Nova Scotia but, until you stop this brutal genocide, I'll not be back!
= = = = =
2009 Press Release
A coyote bounty is an ineffective blanket approach to a problem that demands focussed, local solutions
http://www.naturesask.ca/?s=news&p=pressreleases&id=450
Press Releases November 19th, 2009
Regina, Saskatchewan – November 12, 2009 - Nature Saskatchewan, a non-profit conservation organization and advocate for harmony between nature and human culture, believes that the recently-announced bounty on coyotes in Saskatchewan is not the right way to help livestock producers deal with depredation.
Countless studies have proven bounties to be ineffective in stopping problem coyotes from taking livestock. “What our producers need,” Lorne Scott, President of Nature Saskatchewan said, "is an adequately-funded, aggressive control program in areas where depredation is a problem. The focus should be on eliminating problem animals—not a province-wide bounty."
Many farmers and ranchers view the coyote as an ally, helping to control rodent populations, including gophers (ground squirrels). The coyote is a native species and a key predator in prairie ecosystems. It makes little sense to promote poison campaigns to reduce ground squirrel numbers and at the same time, launch a province-wide bounty program to eliminate a main predator of ground squirrels.
Research has proven repeatedly that coyote bounties simply weed out the weak and less wary individuals, leaving the survivors to increase the size of their litters and thereby make up for any short-term or local dip in their numbers. As well, if coyotes are hunted out of a local area, their counterparts from adjacent regions rapidly move in to fill the void.
Scott concluded by saying that “tax dollars would be far better spent by providing resources directly to assist producers where coyote depredation on domestic livestock is a problem."
About Nature Saskatchewan
Nature Saskatchewan is one of Saskatchewan’s most respected conservation organizations. Its membership includes amateur naturalists, biologists, ecologists, ranchers and farmers from around the province. As a non-profit, we promote the
appreciation and understanding of our natural environment through education, conservation and research. Founded in 1949, Nature Saskatchewan has been observing, documenting and protecting the province's biological diversity for 60 years. Nature Saskatchewan provides the cultural link by which people are inspired, gain knowledge of and ultimately enjoy and protect the natural world around them. -30-
For media inquiries, please contact:
Lorne Scott, Nature Saskatchewan President
Ph: 306 695-2047 Cell: 306 695-7458
Email: lorne.scott@sasktel.net
Nature Saskatchewan
206, 1860 Lorne Street
Regina, SK S4P 2L7
Phone: (306) 780-9273 or 1-800-667-4668 (Sask only)
Fax: (306 780-9263; Email: info@naturesask.ca
www.naturesask.ca
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Re: SASKATCHEWAN'S ILL-CONCEIVED COYOTE BOUNTY
by Oscar » Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:50 am
BC’s Prophet: The Ghost of Roderick Haig-Brown Speaks
[ https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/12/19/R ... ign=191216 ]
New series revisits the famed writer’s eerily apt warnings on today’s big issues.
By Andrew Nikiforuk , | TheTyee.ca December 19, 2016
Andrew Nikiforuk is an award-winning journalist who has been writing about the energy industry for two decades and is a contributing editor to The Tyee. Find his previous stories here: [ https://thetyee.ca/Bios/Andrew_Nikiforuk/ ]
QUOTE: "The experience helped Haig-Brown collect all the research he needed for his remarkable book Panther. It also convinced him of the absurdity of predator control. He later wrote that “sportsmen who elect to assume responsibility for controlling predators seem to be enormously presumptuous. They are saying in effect that the natural world is theirs and all that is in it.” Still later he asked how is it that seals, salmon, bears, sea lions and whales all managed to live together for millions of years before humans presumed to save them from themselves. By 1935, he had already given up cougar and deer hunting."
MORE:
[ https://thetyee.ca/Bios/Andrew_Nikiforuk/ ]
[ https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/12/19/R ... ign=191216 ]
New series revisits the famed writer’s eerily apt warnings on today’s big issues.
By Andrew Nikiforuk , | TheTyee.ca December 19, 2016
Andrew Nikiforuk is an award-winning journalist who has been writing about the energy industry for two decades and is a contributing editor to The Tyee. Find his previous stories here: [ https://thetyee.ca/Bios/Andrew_Nikiforuk/ ]
QUOTE: "The experience helped Haig-Brown collect all the research he needed for his remarkable book Panther. It also convinced him of the absurdity of predator control. He later wrote that “sportsmen who elect to assume responsibility for controlling predators seem to be enormously presumptuous. They are saying in effect that the natural world is theirs and all that is in it.” Still later he asked how is it that seals, salmon, bears, sea lions and whales all managed to live together for millions of years before humans presumed to save them from themselves. By 1935, he had already given up cougar and deer hunting."
MORE:
[ https://thetyee.ca/Bios/Andrew_Nikiforuk/ ]
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9966
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests