Content uploaded by Gilbert Proulx
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Gilbert Proulx on Jun 15, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Killing wolves and farming caribou benefit industry, not caribou: a response to Stan Boutin
Abstract
This letter was submitted by several scientists across North America in reply to a response from Alberta's S. Boutin regarding killing wolves under the guise of caribou recovery.
... Proulx (2018b) developed a stepwise human-predator conflict resolution strategy that included some of the recommendations made by Leopold and Chamberlain (2002) and Dubois et al. (2017). In this strategy, a predator culling program cannot be based on prejudice, perceived problems based on anecdotal reports, or political requests to accommodate the activities of some lobbyist group or the interests of industry ( Figure 17). ...
Wildlife conservation and management are in a state of crisis. On the basis of nearly 50 yrs as a field wildlife biologist, researcher and manager, I identify issues that impact on wildlife. These relate to species-at-risk, habitat loss, human-wildlife conflicts including predator and "pest" control, pollution, animal welfare, invasive alien species, bad management caused by socio-political interests, and the North American Model for Wildlife Conservation. I propose solutions in a series of points to ponder to implement proper procedures, recognize and protect valuable habitats, preserve and ensure the perseverance of populations, and prevent or reduce pollution, pesticides and invasive species. Finally, I identify basic principles that should be considered when developing a model for wildlife conservation: 1) Wildlife is an integral component of people's environment; 2) The cost of conservation and management are borne by all citizens and funds are entirely dedicated to wildlife populations and habitats; 3) The maintenance of viable wildlife populations always takes precedence over their use by people; 4) Wildlife habitat conservation, restoration, and connectivity always takes precedence over landscape development and use by people; 5) Animal welfare concerns are properly addressed in all consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife use; 6) Invasion of alien species, and the source of these invasions, are immediately stopped; 7) Wildlife conservation is based on multidisciplinary consultations; 8) Wildlife conservation and management are science-based; 9) Public education, school programs, and community initiatives are essential components of wildlife conservation and management programs; and 10) Funding needs to be consistent and apolitical from year to year. The future of wildlife ultimately depends on dedicated wildlife biologists with high professionalism and ethics, working together to implement effective science-based conservation and management programs.
... For example, Hervieux et al. (2014) in a controversial analysis claimed that killing 841 grey wolves over 7 yrs, (approximately a 45% reduction in mid-winter wolf abundance), was sufficient to increase population growth rates of endangered woodland caribou in their study area, but insufficient to increase caribou abundance. Critics of that study have questioned many aspects of that claim, particularly the mistargeting the major sources of caribou mortality or misidentifying the true causes of population decline (Proulx 2017;Proulx et al. 2017). ...
... Certainly, the desire to forestall nearterm extirpation is a compelling argument for taking extreme measures, including wolf control (Hervieux et al. 2014). However, opponents of wolf control argue that wolves are being killed mainly because of the government's unwillingness to address the root causes of caribou declines, which relate to ongoing habitat degradation (Proulx et al. 2017). There is merit to both perspectives and the final decision is likely to be made in the court of public opinion. ...
The aim of this book is to build a bridge between conservation theory and practice. The narrative is focused specifically on Canada. This permits an integrated treatment, where conservation theory is presented in the context of the social and institutional framework responsible for its implementation. Special attention is given to topics that are the subject of debate or controversy, as they provide valuable insight into the practical aspects of conservation. The result is a comprehensive synthesis of applied biodiversity conservation, tailored to the needs of conservation students and practitioners in Canada.
... Critical habitat loss has resulted in several caribou herds dwindling to "functionally extinct" numbers (Robbins 2018), despite endangered species status and federally mandated recovery plans. Cull targets have been placed on wolves who are guilty only for performing natural predation behavior, yet this taxpayer-funded wildlife control is quicker and cheaper than protecting habitat from natural resource development or recreation (Proulx et al. 2017). The social acceptability of killing one species to save another is lacking when habitat loss and other human-driven ecosystem imbalances are the root cause of species declines (Dubois and Harshaw 2013), as causing more harm does not fix the problem. ...
There isn’t one conversation about animal ethics. Instead, there are several important ones that are scattered across many disciplines.This volume both surveys the field of animal ethics and draws professional philosophers, graduate students, and undergraduates more deeply into the discussions that are happening outside of philosophy departments. To that end, the volume contains more nonphilosophers than philosophers, explicitly inviting scholars from other fields—such as animal science, ecology, economics, psychology, law, environmental science, and applied biology, among others—to bring their own disciplinary resources to bear on matters that affect animals.
It is a resource designed for anyone interested in the moral issues that emerge from human interactions with animals.
Chapter 31 - Explores is it ever ok to kill wild animals? How can we apply a common framework globally for assessing conservation interventions where root causes are ultimately human behaviour.
... (2) killing one species to improve conditions for another is contentious and raises concerns around the ethics of such approaches (Proulx et al., 2017;Wasser et al., 2012); and (3) wolf reduction is meant to be a short-term action, and is therefore unable to prevent declines in the long term without addressing the ultimate driver of habitat loss and fragmentation (Brook et al., 2015;Hervieux et al., 2015;Musiani & Paquet, 2004). Maternity penning has been demonstrated empirically and, through modeling, to have some potential for enhancing recovery (Adams et al., 2019;Johnson et al., 2019). ...
Recovering endangered species is a difficult and often controversial task that challenges status quo land uses. Southern Mountain caribou are a threatened ecotype of caribou that historically ranged in southwestern Canada and northwestern USA and epitomize the tension between resource extraction, biodiversity conservation, and Indigenous Peoples' treaty rights. Human‐induced habitat alteration is considered the ultimate cause of caribou population declines, whereby an increased abundance of primary prey—such as moose and deer—elevates predator populations and creates unsustainable caribou mortality. Here we focus on the Klinse‐Za and Quintette subpopulations, part of the endangered Central Group of Southern Mountain caribou in British Columbia. These subpopulations were trending toward immediate extirpation until a collaborative group initiated recovery by implementing two short‐term recovery actions. We test the effectiveness of these recovery actions—maternity penning of adult females and their calves, and the reduction of a primary predator, wolves—in increasing vital rates and population growth. Klinse‐Za received both recovery actions, whereas Quintette only received wolf reductions, providing an opportunity to test efficacy between recovery actions. Between 1995 and 2021, we followed 162 collared female caribou for 414 animal‐years to estimate survival and used aerial counts to estimate population abundance and calf recruitment. We combined these data in an integrated population model to estimate female population growth, total population abundance, and recovery action effectiveness. Results suggest that the subpopulations were declining rapidly (λ = 0.90–0.93) before interventions and would have been functionally extirpated (<10 animals) within 10–15 years. Wolf reduction increased population growth rates by ~0.12 for each subpopulation. Wolf reduction halted the decline of Quintette caribou and allowed them to increase (λ = 1.05), but alone would have only stabilized the Klinse‐Za (λ = 1.02). However, maternity penning in the Klinse‐Za increased population growth by a further ~0.06, which when combined with wolf reductions, allowed populations to grow (λ = 1.08). Taken together, the recovery actions in these subpopulations increased adult female survival, calf recruitment, and overall population growth, more than doubling abundance. Our results suggest that maternity penning and wolf reductions can be effective at increasing caribou numbers in the short term, while long‐term commitments to habitat protection and restoration are made.
This is an opinion paper on the influence of politicians on the conservation of carnivores. Examples from the USA and Alberta, Canada, are provided.
To determine the minimum effect of strychnine baits placed for wolves in winter during a program targetting Gray Wolf(Canis lupus) in west-central Alberta from 2005 to 2020, I present a summary of all recorded species killed (n = 522). Fewerwolves (n = 245) were killed compared with non-target animals (n = 277), which included 10 mammal and four bird species.These data provide context on the environmental and ethical impacts of using poison as a component of wildlife management.
Mountain caribou, a behaviourally and genetically distinct set of ecotypes of the Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) restricted to the mountains of western Canada, have undergone severe population declines in recent decades. Although a broad consensus exists that the ultimate driver of these declines has been the reduction of habitat upon which mountain caribou depend, research and policy attention has increasingly focused on predation. Recently, Serrouya et al. (Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 116:6181–6186, 2019) analysed population dynamics data from 18 subpopulations in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada, subject to different treatments and ‘controls’, and concluded that lethal wolf control and maternal caribou penning provide the most effective ways to stabilize population declines. Here we show that this inference was based on an unbalanced analytical approach that omitted a null scenario, excluded potentially confounding variables and employed irreproducible habitat alteration metrics. Our reanalysis of available data shows that ecotype identity is a better predictor of population trends than any adaptive management treatments considered by Serrouya et al. Disparate behavioural characteristics and responses to industrial disturbance among ecotypes suggest it may be incorrect to assume that adaptive management strategies that might benefit one ecotype are transferable to another.
Wild lions are threatened by loss of habitat and prey and various forms of human-caused mortality. Despite examples of locally effective lion conservation, many populations have declined drastically over recent decades, and prospects for averting those threats over the long-term and at large spatial scales are not especially bright. Yet, many maintain hope for the future of lions. Some believe trophy hunting of lions is an appropriate measure for conserving lions because it can incentivize maintenance of lands in a condition suitable for lions and other wildlife. Others disagree. We analyze the issue with formal argument analysis, an important tool in applied ethics. The analysis indicates that in some regions of Africa trophy hunting of lions would be inappropriate insomuch as at least one empirical premise – necessary for supporting the conclusion that trophy hunting of lions should be tolerated – does not hold. The analysis also draws on principles of utilitarianism and deontology. The value of this analysis does not emerge from expecting it to resolve the issue – that would be an inappropriate standard by which to judge even a purely scientific paper. Rather the value of argument analysis lies in clarifying premises and logic upon which an ethical view rests. While the authors are not uniform in their intuitions about one of the argument's ethical premises, we all agree the considerations offered here about that premise are essential for better understanding the issue. Reactions to this analysis – be they endorsements or criticisms – are vital for identifying critical points of disagreement more precisely than otherwise possible.
The implementation of mammal predator killing programs is highly controversial and deserves discussion within the scientific community. In this opinion paper, I use specific examples to discuss the whys and hows of programs aimed at: 1) ensuring human safety and health; 2) addressing concerns of interest groups; and 3) safeguarding native and endangered species. Successful programs share some commonalities: they focus on the main factor that is responsible for the problematic situation and on culprit animals, and they are developed with an understanding of the ecology and behaviour of the predators. Public support for such programs requires that killing methods be species-specific, humane, and effective. I propose a stepwise strategy to properly assess the causes of human ̶ predator conflicts and determine if a killing program should be implemented.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.