These practices and any incentives to kill wolves are archaic, expensive, ineffective and unethical.

 

Read this paper by Gilbert Proulx and Dwight Rodtka about how Predator Bounties in Western Canada Cause Animal Suffering and Compromise Wildlife Conservation Efforts. 

 

 

Backgrounder on Wolf Bounty Programs & Reasoning for Smarter Options

 

In Alberta, there are several regions where people are rewarded financlially, from $50 to $500, for bringing in a dead wolf (or evidence thereof).  There are both public and provate bounties underway in this province.  Often, the public bounties that use taxpayer dollars, are done under the guise of prevention of livestock depredations.  Below are some reasons WHY this practice needs to change:

 

Increased depredation rates following the indiscriminate killing of wolves:

This may be due to more wolves present in these areas following a disruption of their social structure or possibly wolves avoiding traps had learned to prey on livestock, and become more dependent upon domesticated animals as a food source as pack mates are removed.  Similar research on Dingo’s in Australia also documented pack disintegration (loss of social stability regardless of population size) following indiscriminate lethal control methods.  In this research there appeared to be an increase in attack rates on livestock when using poison baits.

 

 

Aldo Leopold described this basic principal in the following way,

“A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community.  It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”  Local sustainability is not just about taking care of the people in our community; it also requires stewardship of the plants, animals, land and water around us.

______________________________________________________________________________

 

Provinces could invest in  education about husbandy techniques that prevent conflicts with wolves and other large carnivores and provide incentives for coexistence, such as awarding individuals who practice "Predator-Friendly Ranching".

 

DOWNLOAD A COPY OF OUR RANCHERS TOOLKIT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT METHODS FOR COEXISTENCE.  Click HERE

 

 ACTION ALERT !    Big Lakes Alberta Wolf Bounty. Put an end to this misguided cruelty!!

 

Problem:

Rural Municipality of Big Lakes Alberta began offering a $300 bounty on wolves as of  September 2010.  Click HERE to read about the initiation of Big Lakes 2010 hunting incentive program. This is only one of sevaral bounty programs that are occurring across the province of Alberta. 

                            

Why is this a problem?: 

Because not all of these wolves have killed livestock, and many likely never would have.

Because the executives of the Big Lakes rural municipality has refused to respond to concerns and recommendations, or even those of Fish and Wildlife who presented to the council about alternative solutions.

 

In just three years, Big Lakes MD had spent approximately $87,000 on wolves claimed through their bounty program. 

Big Lakes is one example of numerous programs across the province, providing $300 for each wolf turned in since 2010.  Other bounties offer $500 per wolf.

 

Local residents of Big Lakes as well as people across the country are justifiably concerned that this is not an ecologically sustainable practice, nor ethically sound.  Many wolves killed had never killed livestock, many of them never would have.

 

The real shame is that the situation is being portrayed as having two sides; those who want to protect livestock and those who want to protect wolves.  The irony is that both of these objectives could be met simultaneously through working together.  A large amount of money has been invested within Big Lakes to kill wolves.  If preventing livestock losses is the goal, that money could have been better used.  See WOLVES AND LIVESTOCK.

 

Marco Musiani, a biologist who has studied wolf-livestock interactions extensively,  has described the approach of killing wolves indescriminately as:

            “a short-term response to depredation that does not decrease wolf-depredation at a           

              regional scale nor over long-term”.

 

In fact, in certain parts of North America, killing wolves indiscriminately through trapping may have lead to increased depredation rates on livestock the next year. 

 

Residents of Big Lakes have indicated that the elk population in the area may be increasing, and wreaking havoc on canola fields.  This is just one other agricultural concern that may arise when tinkering with the natural system begins. 

 

Council members of Big Lakes MD have stated that preventative measures would be extremely expensive.  A cost comparison will show that investing $87,000 into a carcass removal program, livestock guardian dogs, flagging systems called “Fladry”, or various other verified options would prove more effective at deterring depredations and last longer in terms of prevention.

It becomes necessary to identify that wolves account for approximately 1 – 3 % of livestock losses on a large scale in North America, with weather, calving, and digestive problems a far larger concern for producers.

 

Within a short time (after 7 months) bounty payments amounted to  $18,900; paid out in tax dollars.  This money  could have gone to prevention through improved husbandry practices, education about how to reduce conflicts between predators and livestock, or many other areas in need of funding.

 

Will the bounty work? No! Because decades of research show that bounties are not effective in the long term for reducing livestock losses to predators, so wolves are being killed needlessly.  Other wolves will move in to fill vacant territories.  Remember that not all wolves kill livestock.

Issues: What right does this municipality have to disrupt a top predator that is a natural resource to You?  The ecological role of wolves as top predators and keystone species means they help maintain biodiversity and healthy ecosystems. 

 

• This unethical act in the name of livestock protection is NOT being supported by Alberta Agriculture.

• Livestock producers need to take some responsibility and promote responsible husbandry practices.

• Many of the wolves being claimed are not even by livestock producers!  This is a cash grab. 

 

Alberta’s Fish and Wildlife program had been mitigating for losses in this region to the satisfaction of their experts in this area.  This management involved the removal of problem wolves that had been identified as depredating on livestock.  Not all wolves kill domestic animals, and it is unethical and extremely irresponsible to impose a reward for killing a highly intelligent, enormously social animal that has evolved as a keystone species and top predator to have a very important ecological role.

 

Some of the cattle in the rural municipality of Big Lakes are grazing on lands that are either crown-owned or abutting crown-owned forests.  This natural resource is public, as is the wildlife living on it.  We have proposed to engage with the municipal council and work together to educate the community about preventative husbandry practices that are effective at deterring predators.   We are aware that Alberta Agriculture is not supporting this decision, but we feel that by not stepping in to improve the situation nor taking a public stand against it, you are being negligent and irresponsible.

 

We feel that it is the responsibility of Fish and Wildlife, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, and the Ministry of Agriculture to put an end to this outdated, ineffective and cruel practice.  There are alternative solutions and individuals with experience using alternative measures successfully that are willing to help and be involved in ethical alternatives. 

 

The following cost comparisons have been  made using information gathered by John A Shivik of the US Department of Agriculture  in his journal article in BioScience,  March 2006  (“Tools for the Edge: What’s New for Conserving Carnivores?”), and through personal communication with  wolf biologists, ranchers, and individuals providing electric fence workshops.

 

LIST of Cost Comparisons at $87,000 and duration of effectiveness (NOTE THAT THIS AMOUNT HAD BEEN SPENT BY 2012)

Fladry:  Cost estimate $781/km.  Could purchase 111.4 km. Duration 60 days

 

Electric Fencing:  Cost estimate -$250 for Super Energizer IV voltmeter- 50 mile range (if off grid $450)

- grounding plates $17 or rods (rebar)

-rebar posts every 10-12 feet ($600 to $700 per ton)

-stucco wire roll 100 feet $80, or ¼ mile tensile steel $25

Could purchase -348 voltmeters or 5118 grounding plates or 134 tons of rebar posts or 108,750 feet of stucco wire or 870 miles of tensile steel.

Duration of effectiveness would be unlimited as long as fence was properly constructed and maintained.

 

Turbofladry: Cost estimate $1328/km.  Could purchase 65.5 km.  Duration unlimited as long as fence was properly constructed and maintained.

 

Livestock Guardian Dogs: Cost estimate $300 - $1000 initial cost, then $500 per year.  Could purchase 108 guardian dogs (at $800 each).  Duration of effectiveness is approximately the lifespan of guard animal, typically years.

 

Carcass Removal Programs: Cost estimate 9¢/lb for ruminants where programs occur, with a minimum $75 charge.  If the average calf weighs 525 pounds at weaning 1160 calves could have been removed (at $75).  If the average cow weighs 1800 lbs, then 537 cows could have been removed.  In some parts of North America Fish and Wildlife will donate the truck and fuel costs. 

 

Often funds are generated through rancher donations, conservation group donations, local taxes, and grants.  Duration of effectiveness is ongoing.

 

Range Riders:  Cost estimate $110/day for 2 months/year is $6,600.  In some parts of the US tourists are paying for the opportunity to do this.  Could provide  range riders for 13 ranches.  Duration of effectiveness is ongoing.

 

Fladry is a simple, inexpensive yet effective method for deterring wolves from entering a pasture.  It is a line of flags hung outside a pasture to dissuade wolves from crossing it and entering the area.

 

Husbandry practices where predators share the landscape with domestic stock can have a major influence on whether or not wolves will be attracted to an area. 

 

Action:  Phone or e-mail the following people to let them know that you do not support these unnecessary actions in the name of livestock loss prevention.   Wolf bounties are immoral and irresponsible.  Urge them to do what they can to see this stopped!

         

People to Contact:

Municipal council through the executive secretary of the Big Lakes Municipality                      execsecretary@mdbiglakes.ca  780-523-5955 or toll free 1-866-523-5955

 

Association of Alberta Agriculture Fieldmen for  Municipal District of Big Lakes  agassist@mdbiglakes.ca  780-523-5955

 

agriculture@mdbiglakes.ca  780-523-5955

Alberta Minister of Agriculture   agriculture.minister@gov.ab.ca 780-427-2137

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development   780-415-4815

Alberta Minister of Environment   complaints: 1-800-222-6514 env.infocent@gov.ab.ca

Alberta Premier  premier@gov.ab.ca   ( 780) 427-2251

Alberta Fish and Wildlife program manager enforcement field services steven.cross@gov.ab.ca