Challenge 6: Better Information



There is a growing need for better information on wildlife and habitats to inform management and conservation outcomes as well as achieving robust compliance and enforcement.

Opportunities:

  • Review the need for natural resource management legislation to ensure natural resource management decisions consider information about wildlife and their habitats.
  • Improve decision making by gathering and considering a wide range of information sources about wildlife and their habitats, including scientific information and Traditional Ecological Knowledge.
  • Revitalize the wildlife and habitat research program by obtaining additional financial and human resources and establishing greater ties with academia and Indigenous peoples.
  • Improve the sharing of scientific information and wildlife data with Indigenous peoples, stakeholders, academia and the public and consider ways to formalize the use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge and citizen science in wildlife and habitat conservation decision-making.

 Discussion Questions

  • How can Traditional Ecological Knowledge, citizen science and other forms of knowledge complement science to support decision-making?
  • What are the best ways to share information broadly so that there is transparency and trust is gained among all parties?

Sort

59 responses to “Challenge 6: Better Information

    User avatar
    [-] Chris

    You can gather all the info you want, but the gov needs to actually use this info to make decisions. They have proven from the Grizzly hunt that decisions are only about emotions and not science.

    10
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Scott

    The government needs to actually use real information, Not emotional science, to dictate science based decision makeing. Real science based wildlife management needs to be implemented, and the government needs to be really careful with social politics influencing wildlife decision making. The majority of outdoorspeople won’t respect government decisions until the above is taken seriously.

    7
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] John

    Ask a local about wildlife…use the local knowledge. Recognize that the current methods of studying wildlife does not allow for an in depth understanding as the animals are “studied” for exceeding brief periods of time throughout the year.

    No study of habitat or wildlife should be accepted unless it includes a significant amount of information obtained from local sources and stakeholders. While this information is considered “un scientific” and “anecdotal”, it has been profoundly undervalued by researchers and managers in the past. Remember…biologists wiped out the pilchards in the 1960’s based on their studies and ignored fishermen when making the decision. The fishermen were right.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Lee

    We need to renew natural resource management legislation, improve decision making, revitalize the wildlife and habitat research program and improve sharing and education of scientific and wildlife information by adopting large-scale ecosystem planning. It is estimated with a 3°C-increase we can expect a 250-km latitude change and/or a 500-m altitude change in their range as a minimum (McArthur 1972, Dorf 1976, Furley et al. 1983). This alone creates serious challenges as species may migrate out of our current protected areas set aside for them. The only way to manage our wildlife and habitats is is through large scale ecosystem planning that maintains 50% of the integrity of each land-based ecosystem. This is the only way we can protect species in our rapidly changing world. This hard reality of large-scale ecosystem planning and forward thinking of having to move species protected habitat areas due to the effects of climate change requires education of the public, our politicians and industries.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Annie

    Actually use best practices for consultation, lots of research out there on that. Better education materials as well. Better support for non-profits already doing good work in this area (check out Northern Bear Aware Society).

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Judy

    Linking traditional knowledge, science based studies, citizen science and more funding is absolutely necessary. Bringing all parties to the table is the only way transparency and trust will be established.

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Norman

    We need to quit QUOTING old papers from the 70’s and get up to date and real info.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Norman

    How can there be any TRUST when the Gov. doesn’t listen to even its top advisor about the infected salmon farms. Only the all mighty DOLLAR maters. The health of the entire Wild Salmon population is at risk and only denials from the Gov.
    Also antlerless seasons continued for years after it is known of the demise of the species. Very hard to trust any Gov. in the decision making.

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Alexander

    Uninformed popular public opinion should not be the basis for setting wildlife policy. Public opinion provides valuable sense of the importance of an issue, but typically not how to properly address it. It is up to governments and the ministries tasked with managing the issues to seek the truth and science to make an informed decision. The government should make a firm commitment to science based management in order to ensure special interest groups or uninformed public opinion do not have a detrimental impact on achieving sustainable wildlife populations through habitat restoration and protection. I am a hunter, and I care, but I don’t have the scientific backing or education to make informed decisions about how to reverse the trends that I see in BC’s fish and wildlife species stemming from the loss of habitat. My opinion shouldn’t form policy and nor should any non-hunter or interest group. We all want habitat and wildlife to recover and be restored. It is a common goal. It is incumbent on the government to talk to biologists and other scientists about the best way to restore and enhance habitat to bring back species from the brink of extirpation or extinction because of overwhelming public desire to do the right thing. However, don’t seek advice on what the right thing is from the public. We have opinions, but aren’t informed enough or qualified to set the policy. There are professionals and scientists who specialize in this. Their knowledge should be the sole source for forming policy.

    2
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Harry

    How can Traditional Ecological Knowledge, citizen science and other forms of knowledge complement science to support decision-making?

    TEK and any other local knowledge (hunters, birders for example) can play a useful role providing site-specific knowledge (go hear to find species X; that place is important for species Y), and for documenting changes over time at specific places. So this can help with local decisions regarding habitat protection/planning/stewardship. But TEK and local knowledge is biased and should not be used to inform management decisions. That’s where less biased scientific data and analysis is needed.

    ‘Information’ includes results, not just raw data. We have a lots of data. We need to start using it better: analyze, report, make a decision.

    I fully agree with others who have voiced irritation with basing decisions on public opinion and emotion. Evidence-based management.

    Finally, for many decisions we do not need more information – we just need to take action. The province needs to start protecting habitats for Oregon Forestsnail and Pacific Watershrews. The lower mainland is a mess. I am not sure TEK or any other locals or scientific study could tell you much about those two species. Just protect the last few fragments, identified by the Feds, and be done with it.

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Rob

    Many ENGOs in BC observe and record data about wildlife and habitat. Those data are not readily available to provincial biologists because provincial inventory and data systems are designed to ignore or reject those data. The province needs to rethink this policy AND establish funding and guidance programs to work with these ENGOs. I have been assisting many of these ENGOs since 1995/96 (20+ yrs.) to organize and publish their local resource data because the province has constantly turned away from this valuable citizen based source of information. The current name for this is “Citizen Science” but resource stewards have been recording their observations long before that name became popular. From the mid 1990s until 2010 I was a provincial employee working with internal data systems and was completely aware of the short comings of those data compared to the information from ENGOs that I was helping. There are systemic problems with the way the province collects, manages and publishes/shares natural resource data. The Province of BC needs to complete reevaluate their information management polices and practices to adequately make resource management decisions for the future.

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Holly

    How do you communicate with each other? Where does everyone get their info about anything from. That’s where you share. Main thing is no matter what anyone says, you need to listen fully to their point. It’s not about wolves eating them or coyotes grizzlies, hunting to get that big bad wolf and to get that carcass for the wall. It’s about habitat. How do you make the habitat better.

    0
    1
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Will

    I think there should be more open information about which species are endangered and which ones are at risk of becoming endangered, as well as research done as to why these species are disappearing and what the consequences will be. We need to prioritize unbiased scientific knowledge over industrial/commercial goals. These industries support BC financially, but when plants, animals, and old growth forests disappear, ecosystems are changed forever and this loss in biodiversity is irreversible.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Hilary

    Start with primary school education. Provide funding for naturalist clubs and organizations to foster education and interest in each community. All natural resource legislation should ensure conservation of wildlife and their habitats.

    2
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Keaton

    When it comes to understanding nature, TEK and western scientific knowledge often compliment each other. Scientific knowledge is quantitative and usually based on many replicates over a short period of time. TEK is qualitative and can provide descriptions of ecological processes over a much longer period of time. Together they give us a more complete picture of a region’s ecology than either of them could on their own.

    One step in the right direction would be training government scientists on how to better work with TEK holders. Another step would be to create better, perhaps more formalized connections between citizen science groups and government ministries.

    Mechanisms also need to be put in place to make sure the information collected is used appropriately and not discarded in favour of listening to the most powerful stakeholder at the decision-making table!

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Dylan

    Compliance enforcement must become more stringent and robust in all sectors that impact our fish and wildlife, and their habitat. Currently the value of them has been undercut by the lack of importance that our natural lands have been given when industry, and economy is involved. More stringent guidelines must be implemented in regards to the use of our natural resources, and with that, the enforcement of those standards must be constant. Budgeting for proper enforcement must properly represent the value that BC residents hold in their lands.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Ray

    TEK is vital to understanding tradition use patterns and linking western science to management decisions. Citizen science while informative requires tools to evaluate and account for biases – can potentially inform needs for more intensive investigations but in of itself is a challenge to support decision making.
    Wildlife management needs to better incorporate choice theory/human dimensions into overall management considerations. Will inform how biases are developed, inform human use patterns and how they change with policy or climate change.

    Open data sharing requires some level understanding by the public – information needs to be explained and characterized for all to better understand how science is used by decision makers.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] James

    Government can improve upon the usability of existing services such as Databc. Create a database of information pertaining to wildlife. Develop GIS maps of information and tables of data inventoried during wildlife monitoring.
    Develop a portal for disseminating the information, or allow people to consume (download) the data. Using this information, creates awareness and supports wildlife management decisions.

    Rely on Citizen data. Create apps, collect information from people on highways and hiking or riding in the woods.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Karen

    Ensure a broad spectrum of knowledge is accessed when making decisions. All values and sectors are considered and no one sector is given ultimate control. If negative impacts are incurred mitigation must be provided and if long term impacts are evident appropriate valuing for future generations needs to be part of the process. Sometimes negative impacts mean saying no to some development.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Mike

    The BC Government can “increase involvement and shared stewardship” by creating a new wildlife society made up of First Nations, stakeholder groups and professionals in wildlife management. This new group would use science, measurable objectives and increased land use planning to make informed decisions on management of wildlife and their habitat; funding generated by use of wildlife and habitat such as hunting licenses sales, outdoor gear sales tax, logging contributions and mining contributions; and finally this group would gain social support for these actions through the responsible stewardship of the resource.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Stephanie

    The public needs to be educated on real conservation, the science. The majority of voters are in the most populated city limits and do not have boots on the ground. They need to understand what true conservation is and what the science says. The public needs to be made more aware of when the government is asking for opinion on items. Look at the grizzly hunt discussion: they asked for people’s opinion but barely advertised this. This resulted in only a few thousand people responding, the majority of which live in Vancouver or in major cities who don’t understand conservation and only envision Winnie the Pooh when they think of a grizzly bear.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Judy

    Rehire more government staff and do the work!

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Rob

    First and foremost, there needs to be a venue for citizen science and then those views must be heard. The hunting community reiterated the necessity to utilize science-based management surrounding the grizzly bear hunt. When the decision was made to terminate the hunt based on emotion and public sentiment over science-based principals, trust is lost by our community. When input is provided and willfully dismissed, seeking further input becomes a challenge.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Emery

    Do more community involvement, for example, I went down and counted sheep with the wild sheep foundation, it was a great time and I really enjoyed it, why don’t we have more of those for more species? I would love to count mountain goats or grizzly bears, as hunters we love to be outside and enjoy nature. Getting community’s involved in counts is a great way to make sure honest numbers are written down

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Kent

    Have the people in charge actually pay attention to the ones that have been around the fence a number of times. People that make mistakes normally rectifie the problem the next time around. Some thing that Government people or ones that just came out of school simply don’t understand.

    Be open and transparent. Don’t say one thing and then behind closed door’s do the opposite…

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Kyle

    • How can Traditional Ecological Knowledge, citizen science and other forms of knowledge complement science to support decision-making?
    -First and foremost, there needs to be a venue for citizen science and then those view must be heard. The hunting community reiterated the necessity to utilize science-based management surrounding the grizzly bear hunt. When the decision was made to terminate the hunt based on emotion and public sentiment over science-based principals, trust is lost by our community. When input is provided and willfully dismisses getting further input makes it challenging.
    It is important to recognize that Traditional Ecological Knowledge is not limited to First Nations. Other user groups including ranchers, farmers, outfitters, and hunters all frequent the land and have local knowledge that are effective if utilized.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Kyle

    What are the best ways to share information broadly so that there is transparency and trust is gained among all parties?

    Having stakeholders at the table, sharing information with them to disseminate to their membership is critical. A round table creates the best environment for these discussions. By ‘nation to nation’ negotiations this creates an environment that lacks transparency and creates an environment of distrust.
    – Hosting local and regional round tables are necessary to sharing information, and developing a regional strategy that will benefit wildlife and habitat

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Warren

    Science based management should include local knowledge from First Nations, ranchers, farmers, outfitters and hunters.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Eric

    It doesn’t take a life long biologist to know that an ecosystem is a living being all in its own that depends on every component with it to coexist and react with each other. Science has proven that these interactions are to be kept at a specific balance in order for the ecosystem to thrive, and it is an embarrassment that the virus of political opinion has infected our management strategies for this beautiful province.
    Local, indigenous, and expert knowledge should always assist in science-based decision making, but we cannot allow ourselves to integrate our emotions into something that is so much bigger than ourselves.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] christopher

    Science based data in conjunction with citizen science to develop wildlife and habitat strategies
    Each region within the province should have a roundtable format setup ,sharing info ,experience and data , with the common goal of wildlife and conservation , leaving the baggage at the door to focus on the real problems
    Traditional knowledge needs to include all hunters , guide outfitters as well as FN ,because after all we are all just hunters and conservationists

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Peter

    —All knowledge-development that actively engages people in reflecting on their relationship with wildlife/environment is enriching and positive. Traditional ecological knowledge, flowing from a respectful posture vis-a-vis the natural environment, is of particular value. It not only informs, but also teaches us all of less-exploiting, more respecting, more adapting ways of being members of a sustainable community of all species.
    Education is paramount. Of specific value is providing greater exposure of traditional Indigenous ways of thinking about and interacting with wildlife/environments. Many environmental groups are well established and well positioned with Indigenous sectors to help in this way. School curricula should be revisited to render them more in synch with holistic thinking that includes support of a steady-state human economy.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Gary

    “Citizen Science” makes me very nervous. Is this the same “Citizen Science” that resulted in the Grizzly Bear Hunt ban?
    The Science that counts must remain the exclusive preserve of trained and qualified Professionals (Foresters, Wildlife Biologists, Wildfire professionals, Watercourse specialists, Geotechnical Engineers (for erosion), etc. Funding must be made available to obtain information from these qualified sources as the first priority.
    Once this is done, observations from user groups and stakeholders such as Hunters/Fishers, Backcountry Recreation Enthusiasts, and Industry representatives can be added to provide additional information, however these sources of information each come with an agenda, so they must be carefully considered under the scrutiny of the employed professionals.
    Don’t let this turn into a platform for Industry to have their say without challenge, or a beauty pageant for animal rights activists to sway a largely uninformed urban population against legitimate activities such as hunting without a counter-point, otherwise the outcome will be much worse for the wild places we need to protect.

    1
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Mandy

    The government should use scientific research and knowledge, not public opinion to inform wildlife decision making. Also, ask local people, and local hunters and trappers what they have been seeing when they are out in the woods as part of that research. The opinions of voters in metro Vancouver have been given too much weight in wildlife decision making, especially in ending the grizzly bear hunt. Local outdoors people are the ones who are out in the forests and seeing wildlife, not people in the city. Unfortunately most outdoors people already feel alienated by this government. If the government wants to gain trust with actual outdoors people, it needs to start listening to those people, and scientists, and not base decisions on emotion and political gain.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Jordan

    • How can Traditional Ecological Knowledge, citizen science and other forms of knowledge complement science to support decision-making?
    First and foremost, there needs to be a venue for citizen science and then those views must be heard. The hunting community reiterated the necessity to utilize science-based management surrounding the grizzly bear hunt. When the decision was made to terminate the hunt based on emotion and public sentiment over science-based principals, trust is lost by our community. When input is provided and willfully dismissed, seeking further input becomes a challenge.
    It is important to recognize that Traditional Ecological Knowledge is not limited to First Nations. Other user groups including ranchers, farmers, outfitters, and hunters all frequent the land and have local knowledge that is effective if properly utilized.

    What are the best ways to share information broadly so that there is transparency and trust is gained among all parties? Having stakeholders at the table and sharing information with them to disseminate to their membership is critical. A round table creates the best environment for these discussions. Engaging in ‘government to government’ negotiations whilst ignoring stakeholders creates an environment lacking in transparency and creates an environment of distrust. Hosting local and regional round tables are necessary to sharing information, and developing a regional strategy that will benefit wildlife and habitat

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Evelyn

    Bring together these groups with the government. Perhaps using skype like technology to create “round tables” Ask these groups for ideas as well, i’m sure many already work together.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Rob

    Traditional knowledge, citizen science and other forms of knowledge can only inform decision making if the government commits to funding, clear objectives and the application of science.

    Currently we do not have clear objectives, the grizzly hunt ban indicates that science takes a second position, and we don’t fund the whole project sufficiently.

    This must change.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Nadine

    The science is in. We just have to have the desire to use it. We know habitat loss is the biggest contributor to loss of wilderness and wildlife. Therefore no further loss of habitat. Simple. Using science further to say whether something can survive further impact is not acceptable. Humans have used science to justify actions and just because it says we can do something doesn’t mean we should. I believe the science when the question is right but I don’t trust we will use it for anything other then our own desire to have more. Science say enough Grizzlies to sustain a hunt so it’s ok to hunt them. That is just wrong.

    0
    2
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Frank

    the problem is when a decision is made on good science and local knowledge it gets quashed in Victoria and no funding comes its way

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Brycen

    The provincial government appears to be attempting to engage all parties by having this discussion forum. This is a great tool for everyone to share thoughts and provide ideas for moving forward. We can see based on the “Engagement Counter” at the top of the page that the information is still not being distributed in a broad manner (As of July 28 only 677 responses which seems drastically low for being open for essentially two months). It appears that although the provincial government says it wants to share information broadly people are still not getting the message.

    I just learned of this forum today and see it has been open since May 22. Perhaps I just wasn’t looking for it in the right places but once hearing of it I was excited. I think more people would have the same reaction. Perhaps the Province could look at sharing information through traditional means such as mail. Most people receive ballots to their address during voting years. Could information regarding this discussion and other provincial issues be shared through this means? In specific to hunters and anglers, we are now having to purchase our licences and tags online and have to create an account (most times using an email). Why not disseminate information through email as well?

    The lack of information regarding this forum and others like it is a prime example of why the provincial government comes across less than transparent.

    Great Forum!

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Nick

    Manage on science. Release the peer reviewed papers for the public to read. Simple.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Kevin

    Previous gov’ts have chosen to not follow biologists direction…as did this govt with the Grizzly bear decision. Science must take precedence to political hay! Press releases and news section on the Environment websites all updated weekly.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Dave

    I support more money going into data gathering and analysis. This should be something that receives more than just user fees, as we want to preserve a shared asset for all people in BC. Vancouver needs to contribute to the nature they like to visit in the summer.

    Science based. Include citizen science. Be very leery of “traditional” anything. Just because something is old or the way we used to do it does not mean it has a basis in fact. Look at the history of the study of migration. Because animals moved out of the range of certain human populations, the humans did not have good data. So they speculated and got things spectacularly wrong.

    One can and should gather data from people who see the animals and plants, but it must be supplemented by science based analysis and data. The stories can give clues of where to investigate and can support other data, but they should be recognized as only part of the story.

    Ensure that the citizen science allows input to everyone and if qualitative stories are collected, that it include all people, not divided by race. An hunter who has hunted for 50 years has knowledge, no matter the race.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Glen

    Start with simplifying the refs and associated maps so that things are clearly understandable.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Cody

    There is a wealth of knowledge available from various organizations, stakeholders, wildlife/ wilderness users and researchers. However the questions is whether or not that the agency responsible will actually use this information to base decisions or just work according to their own agenda as was demonstrated with the grizzly bear hunt. Trust and transparency is a hard to ask for unless you are willing to give it in return.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Nick

    Yes, better information is correct and necessary. In depth science based studies should be 98% of what wildlife management decisions are based on and the last 2% should be local knowledge and how it affects those near the issue. Public opinion should not have any bearing on which animals get special treatment when the general public will not consider the effects their opinion will have on the big picture.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Darren

    First and foremost, there needs to be a venue for citizen science and then those views must be heard. The hunting community reiterated the necessity to utilize science-based management surrounding the grizzly bear hunt. When the decision was made to terminate the hunt based on emotion and public sentiment over science-based principals, trust is lost by our community. When input is provided and willfully dismissed, seeking further input becomes a challenge. -It is important to recognize that Traditional Ecological Knowledge is not limited to First Nations. Other user groups including ranchers, farmers, outfitters, and hunters all frequent the land and have local knowledge that is effective if properly utilized.

    Having stakeholders at the table and sharing information with them to disseminate to their membership is critical. A round table creates the best environment for these discussions. Engaging in ‘government to government’ negotiations whilst ignoring stakeholders creates an environment lacking in transparency and creates an environment of distrust. – Hosting local and regional round tables are necessary to sharing information, and developing a
    regional strategy that will benefit wildlife and habitat

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] David

    We need to broaden the definition of traditional knowledge – there is First Nations history, but there is also the experience of a farmer who’s family has farmed the land for generations and their observations of wolf populations, etc.

    “Complement Science” is the wrong terminology – traditional knowledge should give us an indicator of what to look at, but we should always back that up with science since traditional knowledge isn’t perfect (see traditional medicine as an example – some of it works, some of it doesn’t)

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Sorelle

    • Feral rabbit control suffers from a lack of information. There are substantial differences between North American native rabbits and feral domestic European rabbits, significant differences in brain structure between wild and domesticated European rabbits.
    • There are also differences with farm, pet and feral rabbits in behaviour and jurisdiction, and this also needs communication and further study for to be able to implement effective control.
    • A mapping project is essential to identifying the locations and the spread of invasive European rabbits.
    • A regulated pet identification system also needs to be explored and the behaviours and interactions after sterilization need to be examined.
    • There is also a lot of control history that needs to be logged and analysed. (eg: the rabbit overrun of 2006 has vastly differing information about the number of rabbits, the type of rabbits, why they got out of control and what solved the issue).
    • Anecdotal evidence is useful when presented in volume.
    • All previous ‘infestations’ and control procedures, whether successful or not, need to be studied and shared with input from all stakeholders.
    • The effects of the feral rabbits on the environment needs further exploration, as does the effects of the environment on the rabbits.
    • The legislative aspects, eg: the ‘trickle down’ and other effects of the ‘wildlife’ designation on abandoned domestic rabbits and stronger laws geared for prevention, need to be thoroughly analysed with the help of boots-on-the-ground rabbit rescue and control agencies.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] John

    Wildlife management needs to be science based, not anicdotial information from groups . Involvement of groups or individuals in studies such as the current mule deer study in southern b c is a very good example of facilitating dissemination of knowledge. This study has been financially leveraged by participating agencies providing aid both physical and finabpncial. Sheep counts are another example of citizen participation which encourages buy in of wildlife programs..

    Wildlife management strategies and results needs to be “advertised “ more frequently to educate the public as to the values of wildlife and promoted as a part of the appeal of the diversity of the province .

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Andrew

    The provincial government needs to lead by example and make science based decisions.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Warren

    The BC government must state that BC will follow the North American model of Wildlife Conservation. With doing that they must educated the public on the proven success and how the framework is built. By using this model there is no gray area or things left open for interpretation. All decisions are based on science and that in turn will always put wildlife first. When all stakeholders know the framework on how policy will be created that will produce transparency.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Josh

    Keeping funding from fees of paying users out of general revenue and in wildlife would be a good start. Traditional Knowledge can be useful to backup scientific research ei. Ancient cave drawings of people hunting!

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Shelly

    Can’t can’t change what you can’t measure. More advocacy for Mother Earth and animals. We’re so far gone, some days question it all!

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Martin

    Would like to see 100% of tags and licenses to go towards the conservation of wildlife and wild places. Funds being used for science should tell use what is needed. Would like to see science based conservation for the betterment and management of BCs wildlife.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Bill

    Trust is lost when confronted by extreme emotionalism.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Vickie

    Simply put increased funding for science based research is the best answer to be able to make the most educated decisions.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Scott

    Inventory in our diverse and rugged province is poor, at best. Not only is access an issue, but time of collection is an impairment to gathering accurate information. Despite extensive data collection, with habitat and population modeling there is always a degree of uncertainty and a potential for error. Modeling often over-simplifies complicated interactions. As a result, the inclusion of TEK and citizen science is a vital component in the collection of relevant and accurate information to validate or improve the current inventory methods. New inventory techniques such as drones and infrared need to be explored as a cost-effective solution to the predominantly visual aerial survey techniques currently utilized in British Columbia.

    Dr. Susan Kutz, Professor in University of Calgary’s faculty of Veterinary Medicine, has worked extensively to incorporate citizen science into her research models. She has established that citizen science is an important piece of the puzzle. Individuals such as outfitters take a long-term approach to wildlife management and often have thousands of hours on the ground with significant local knowledge. This is mainly because outfitters have defined boundaries and cannot move. Similarly, First Nations have traditional territories and take a seven-generations perspective to wildlife management. Local knowledge and First Nations traditional knowledge must be incorporated into population models to improve accuracy.

    • Local community-based input is crucial
    • Inclusion of local and traditional knowledge
    • Need a balance of all species across the landscape i.e. predator and prey
    • Develop wildlife populations for predator and prey species, based on habitat and carrying capacity
    • Objectives need to be created so everyone understands what we are managing to

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] David

    1. Invest in data collection and monitoring.
    2. Have an open mind to new models.
    3. Recognize that broad stroke beliefs on certain species should be tested and revisited. Ie., belief that a species requires only old growth when proof exists that same species lives in second growth forests.
    4. Publish papers.

    0
    0
    permalink
    User avatar
    [-] Jefferson

    Independent, peer-reviewed science….including human animal behavioural science.

    0
    0
    permalink
Comments are closed.