Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Jeff Gailus: Behind That Grizzly Curtain


Friday, September 30, 2005 Posted at 12:14 AM EDT
Special to Globe and Mail Update

More than a month ago, bear No. 66, a tolerant female grizzly with three cubs, was struck and killed on the Canadian Pacific Railway line in Banff National Park. At that time, experts gave her cubs almost no chance of survival. Three weeks later, two of the cubs were killed crossing the Trans-Canada Highway. Parks Canada officials quickly captured the third cub, which now resides in the Calgary Zoo.

The regular deaths of grizzly bears as a result of human activity are nothing new for Canada's flagship national park. During the past six years, 13 grizzlies have died or been removed from the population as a direct result of human activities. This toll leaves Parks Canada and the managers of Banff National Park in direct contravention of the park's management plan for the sixth year in a row.

This is bad news for Alberta's grizzly bear population, a sensitive and threatened species, but it is even more troubling for Canada's voting public, which continues to watch an arrogant federal government ignore its own regulations, policies and management plans for reasons only the bureaucrats and politicians in charge must know.

Banff National Park's management plan, which was approved by Parks Canada officials (and Parliament) in 1993, stipulates that human activities in the park must be managed in a way that will keep human-caused grizzly bear deaths below 1 per cent of the estimated population. With only 60 grizzlies in Banff National Park, that means fewer than 0.6 bears can be killed each year. This translates, really, into one bear every two years. But that legally binding threshold has been surpassed for the sixth consecutive year. On average, more than two grizzlies have been killed each year, more than 300 per cent higher than the management plan's target. In 2005 alone, the target has already been surpassed by 800 per cent.

The frequency and regularity with which grizzlies die in Banff National Park is a sure-fire indicator that Parks Canada is failing to maintain the park's ecological integrity, its primary mandate. As disappointing as that may sound, it may not be the problem that should bother Canadians the most.

What may be more important is the apparent indifference and lack of accountability exhibited by a federal government known to ignore issues that matter most to Western Canada. For six years, Parks Canada has done nothing meaningful to improve the way it manages Banff National Park to ensure that grizzly bear deaths are kept below the target it set 12 years ago. Yes, a 70-kilometre-an-hour speed limit was implemented for the Trans-Canada Highway through Lake Louise, but it is rarely obeyed and almost never enforced. Yes, a “strategic framework for the conservation of grizzly bears” was incorporated into the Banff management plan during a review in 2004. But neither of these facile actions have been effective at reducing the number of dead grizzlies. The statistics themselves bear this out.

Parks Canada's laissez-faire attitude toward our national parks and the wildlife they are meant to protect raises other questions: What other policies and standards is the federal government ignoring, policies and standards that might, perhaps, be more directly linked to the welfare of all Canadians? What about water quality standards, which can have disastrous consequences when ignored? What about air quality, health care, fiscal policy? Are these portfolios being managed with as little care and attention as our national parks?

The issue of grizzly bears in Banff National Park is about more than just charismatic critters and pretty scenery. It's about government accountability and good governance. Canadians deserve both, and should demand an explanation from Parks Canada about why it has failed to meet its own standards for so many years, and why it has done virtually nothing meaningful to address its failure to protect the ecological integrity of our national parks.
Then we should pull back the curtains and see what other negligence lurks in the federal government's dark and dusty closet.

Jeff Gailus, a conservationist and writer from Canmore, Alta., is working on a book about the history and future of Canada's Great Plains grizzly bear.

Follow conversation (7)
Latest Comments in the Conversation
Editor's Note: Globeandmail.com editors read and approve each comment. Comments are checked for content only, spelling and grammar errors are not corrected and comments that include vulgar language or libelous content are rejected.

Scott M. from Toronto, Canada writes:
I don't like the way that Banff has been Disneyfied, but I also see clear evidence that large amounts of money have been spent to try to protect widelife, the major transportation rights of way have been fenced off and under/overpasses built.Yes, more may need to be done, but in the absence of constructive suggestions, this sounds a lot like more from people whose reason to live is to crap on government and other large institutions.We all know that niether government nor anything else is perfect.How about some specifics on what you'd like to see them do done to make things better?
Posted Sep. 30, 2005 at 10:33 AM EDT
Link to Comment

Steve Turner from Aurora, Canada writes:
If the "Conservatives"formed the next government, they would probably kill all the bears in order to make the park safe for humans.If the NDP got in, they would probably keep the humans out and leave the land for the animals.The main concern is that any government we elect will put economy ahead of reality, and that means getting as many people in the park as the park can hold and collect all the fees that can be charged...and be damned with anything else living there.
Although they all say otherwise, no government truly looks beyond their mandate, and this attitude does not bode well for Canada.However, nature has its own way of trumping politicians.Down south, Bush decided not to sign the Kyoto accord because it "could wreck the U.S. economy".Well, Hurricane Katrina's power certainly did a number on the U.S. economy, as well as our own with the spike in gas prices, so the economy is irrevocably intertwined with the environment whether we recognize that fact or not.The point is missed if we try to pinpoint any one party for blame.It is society's attitudes that are the problem.
Besides, I'm sure that Liberal, Conservative, NDP and even Bloc supporters all cruise above speed level in the park.
Posted Sep. 30, 2005 at 10:50 AM EDT
Link to Comment

C Burns from Sarnia, Canada writes:
How can a speed limit prove effective if it is not inforced? Perhaps a crackdown by law enforcement officers and tougher fines for violations would at least give motorists pause.
Posted Sep. 30, 2005 at 11:29 AM EDT
Link to Comment

J S from Leader, Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Indeed, it is not just Banff National Park that is a victim of governmental policies that are, at best, inexplicable.Prince Albert National Park in Saskatchewan has become less a haven for wildlife and more a experiment in environmental hedonism for cabin owners and bickering federal officials.Heaven forebid the good people that are hired to manage the parks be allowed to actually pursue and fulfill their mandate.
Posted Sep. 30, 2005 at 2:06 PM EDT
Link to Comment

Constance Menzies from Canada writes: I've just come back from visiting Banff, Jasper and Kootnenay NPs. From Banff to Jasper they are adding another lane - this was very disheartening to see! Like Pacific Rim National Park, the Albertan and Canadian governments need to impose a quota system on Banff and Jasper and enforce and reduction of speed for those vehicles that do pass through. And whats with all the RVs? Camping is about getting back to nature - not creating a recreational suburb (other than the townsites) in a national park. That accident we saw with a bus-size RV killed at least one person and totalled the RV and three other vehicles. I don't need to visit these Park if it meant preserving the habitat for bears, moose, wolves, elk, sheep....
Posted Sep. 30, 2005 at 4:01 PM EDT
Link to Comment

No comments: