(more…)

   Ian McAllister photo

Several years ago, the B.C. Liberal government lifted a ban on hunting grizzlies, but critics say the decision was based on faulty science.
<http://www.straight.com  By Andrew Findlay
Publish Date: June 26, 2008
The Zodiac glides along the water, nudging up against the bank of a river that flows into the heart of the Fiordland Recreation Area on the central coast. The passengers step out and wade through a lush estuary blossoming with purple lupines and knee-deep in Lyngby’s sedge, a favourite springtime food of coastal grizzlies. Here and there, the fertile alluvium is freshly overturned where a grizzly has clawed the ground to uncover succulent silverweed roots. A quick scan of the broad floodplain with binoculars reveals two grizzlies methodically eating their way along the forest’s edge, their distinctive shoulder humps shimmering with blond-brown fur. Camera shutters click furiously.
More and more foreigners are paying top dollar for the opportunity to see a magnificent grizzly in the wild. British Columbia, though, still permits the sport killing of an animal that is highly evocative of what remains of our wilderness and is regarded as a keystone indicator of ecosystem health. Last year, a record-setting 430 grizzlies died for sport, for animal control, or from poaching, yet the complex science used by government to establish hunting quotas remains at the heart of one of the most controversial wildlife-management issues in Canada. That’s why environmentalists, First Nations, and bear-viewing companies believe the province is risking international shame over the hunting of grizzlies, considered by the federal Species at Risk Act, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, and the B.C. Conservation Data Centre to be a species of special concern.
A recent public-opinion poll that says most British Columbians—73 percent—want the provincial government to end the hunt is adding fuel to the controversy. The poll was commissioned by Pacific Wild, a nonprofit group started last year by Ian McAllister after his split from the Raincoast Conservation Society, an environmental group he helped found more than 15 years ago.

(more…)

var cid=20728884;var partnerID=134726; window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.location.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; var _hb=1; initBtn(1,1,1,1,0,0,’003366′,’000000′);initSponsor(0,’right’,’ ‘,’000000′,’ ‘,’ ‘,’ ‘);initAlt(1,1,1,1);eval(sponFunc);drawBtn(’V',1);  

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON(AP) - Officials from northern Canada were in Washington on Monday to make an unpopular argument: Let U.S. hunters continue to kill polar bears for sport.

The politicians from Canada’s Northwest Territory asked Interior Department officials to allow U.S. sportsmen to still bring back polar bear hides after their hunts in Canada’s Arctic region, despite the increased protection now afforded the bear under the Endangered Species Act.

(more…)

Globe and Mail Article – Exclusive by Mark Hume    June 10, 2008Bear Matters Note: please vote for this article at bottom of page at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080610.wbcbear10/BNStory/National/home MARK HUME From Tuesday’s Globe and Mail

June 10, 2008 at 4:00 AM EDTVANCOUVER — Seven years after the British Columbia government lifted a moratorium on the sport hunting of grizzly bears, a growing number of people want to see the practice banned again.According to a poll to be released today, 73 per cent of British Columbians support an end to the trophy hunting of grizzlies, a substantial increase from the 52 per cent who were opposed in 2001, when the hunt resumed after the newly elected Liberal government overturned a moratorium imposed six months earlier by the NDP.“That’s a 21-point increase since the moratorium was lifted,” said Ian McAllister, director of a non-profit wildlife conservation group, Pacific Wild. “It was an unpopular decision when the government lifted the ban and it’s even more unpopular now.“The people of B.C. are generally more interested in the environment than they were in the past and I think we’re seeing that reflected in the increased numbers,” Mr. McAllister said of the poll, which was commissioned by his organization. “I think the message here is clear: Just ban the hunt.” Mr. McAllister said he hopes the poll, together with voter pressure during an election year, will persuade the provincial government to reinstate the moratorium.“People are getting frustrated over this issue,” he said. “The government has failed to protect grizzly bear habitat … and people are getting tired of hearing about bears being killed for sport.

(more…)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:     

JUNE 10, 08 MEDIA CONTACT: IAN MCALLISTER, PACIFIC WILD, Email: info@pacificwild.org ( no affiliation or relation to McAllister Opinion Research) 

(more…)

GLOBAL WARMING: Conference would seek dissenting views.

By TOM KIZZIA
tkizzia@adn.com

Published: May 4th, 2008 12:03 AM
Last Modified: May 4th, 2008 02:43 AM

(more…)

MARK HUMEFrom Tuesday’s Globe and Mail E-mail Mark Hume <mailto:mhume@globeandmail.com>   | Read Bio http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinions/columnists/Mark+HumeBio.html>   | Latest Columns <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinions/columnists/Mark+Hume.html> 

April 15, 2008 at 3:57 AM EDTVANCOUVER — A record number of grizzly bears were killed in British Columbia last year, according to new figures released yesterday by environmental organizations.“It’s kind of shocking … very disturbing,” Chris Genovali of the Raincoast Conservation Society said of provincial government statistics that show 430 grizzly bears died in 2007, bringing the total to nearly 11,000 killed in the province since 1975.“I don’t think you can call that a sustainable harvest,” said Mr. Genovali, whose group has long been lobbying for a moratorium on B.C.’s grizzly bear hunt.

(more…)

(Also See Sample Letter to Premier Below) 

Petition: It’s a very easy user-friendly petition. But after filling in your name and address and clicking NEXT you have to fill in the next page, too. If you don’t want to list five friends, click on NO THANK YOU and you will receive confirmation that your name is on the list. 
Here’s the link.http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/halt-the-hunting-of-black-bears-on-haida-gwaii

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AIjV3lJ0Bs A Hunt on Haida Gwaii

(more…)

Joel Kom, Calgary Herald

Published: Friday, March 28, 2008

He’d like to see a “one-stop shop” where federal, provincial and publicly reported information is compiled as one.

Darcy Whiteside, a spokesman for Sustainable Resource Development, said while the province contributes information to WildSmart, another tracking website, officials would see how the new website goes before discussing their own any further.

The bears, meanwhile, are awakening from their winter naps.A remote camera on a wildlife overpass in Banff National Park snapped a male grizzly trudging through the snow earlier this month, while reports of fresh bear tracks have come from as far north as the Canmore area and as far south as Montana.

(more…)

Colin Payne - Golden Star - March 19, 2008 Last week, The Golden Star presented information on the growing debate about independent power production in British Columbia.Proponents say ‘run of river’ hydroelectric projects are a source of ‘clean energy’ that can be built and run more efficiently and economically by private companies. Opponents argue the province’s rivers are being handed to private interests without public consent; without concern for public interest.One aspect of this issue which could not be treated in last week’s article is the debate over environmental issues surrounding the potential construction of hydroelectric generating facilities on hundreds of creeks and small rivers throughout the province.John Calvert, an associate professor at Simon Fraser University who teaches public policy, recently published “Liquid Gold,” a book about energy privatization in B.C.His book takes an in-depth look at the myriad of issues surrounding independent power producers (IPPs) in B.C. One having particular resonance with people throughout the province is the potential for damage to the environment these projects present.    

Calvert says the government has argued these projects will cause little environmental damage, but the reality is quite different.“If you look in general at what has to happen, most of these projects do dam up a river in one way or another,” he explains. “In that regard, it’s not like you put a turbine in a flowing stream and get energy out. You have to have a penstock, the tube that diverts water to the power plant. A lot of those involve major tunnels that are six, eight or 10 kilometres long. So you’re doing a lot of serious work in terms of digging out all this rock. You have the diversion of the water from the stream through the penstock, which means there’s much less water flowing through the stream itself.”Calvert points out that taking water out of the stream, and also collecting water in a small reservoir (known as a headpond) can have a warming effect on the stream and has the potential to affect fish and other aquatic life in the rivers.

A proposal for a hydroelectric project to divert water flowing through Glacier and Howser creeks down the west side of the Purcells into the Duncan Reservoir near Meadow Lake, B.C. is currently in environmental assessment process with the Ministry of Environment (MOE).The project is being proposed by Montreal-based Purcell Green Power, which is parented by Axor, an engineering and construction company of Montreal.According to the preliminary plans filed with the MOE, these projects will involve the construction of two hydroelectric generating facilities; one on Glacier Creek generating 40.5 to 60 Megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity, and another on nearby Howser Creek that will generate 50.5 to 65 MWh. Both of these projects involve the construction of two small dams, ‘water diversion weirs,’ on each creek, and three secondary weirs on nearby tributary creeks which will divert water from the creek bed into two 4.5 metre-wide underground tunnels 6.8 and 8.5 km in length. The water will flow into two powerhouses, before being dumped directly into the Duncan Reservoir, without being returned to the original creek bed.Calvert says the actual construction of these power generation facilities, and subsequent operations necessary to run them can also have a major environmental impact. “You have to build a power plant,” he says. “There’s a lot of concrete involved normally. You have to have roads to get in . . . heavy equipment to actually do the construction. During that period, there’s an enormous amount of construction around the stream.“Then you also have to build the transmission lines. That’s a big-ticket item. Some of these lines are 50 -100 km long, and often go through pristine areas that are often untouched. Where there’s no roads, for example. Because normally, they’d like to have the most direct or straightforward hookup to the main grid. They have to keep the lines clear of potential falling branches, and that normally means a corridor of 50 to 100 m on either side. So that means a big change to the environment.”Calvert notes these transmission lines and roads may give people in off-road and all-terrain vehicles access to areas previously unaccessible.

The majority of access to the Glacier/Howser project will be done on the existing Duncan Reservoir and Glacier Forest Service roads. But combined, the two projects could require up to 12.75 km of permanent roads, and 885 m of temporary roads.Purcell Green Power has proposed a transmission line of approximately 91.5 km in length, and a width ranging from 30-100 m to be built across the Purcells to deliver power to the Invermere substation on the east side of the mountains. Dave Quinn, Purcell program manager for Wildsight says his organization has numerous concerns with the Glacier/Howser projects. “The proposals are to divert up to 90 per cent of Glacier and Howser Creeks,” Quinn says. “They (Purcell Green Power) said it will be less than that. But their tenure allows them up to 90 per cent. That will be diverted down through tunnels that will never go back into the creeks.”He notes this can have a significant impact on the aquatic habitat in the creeks. The roads and transmission lines are also a huge concern, Quinn says, noting construction will be going through areas currently protected for old growth forest and wildlife habitat.“Upper Howser is currently protected and reserved in what are called old growth management areas,” he says, adding Upper Stockdale Creek, on the Invermere side is totally protected, in what’s called an endangered forest - due to its high grizzly bear values and the fact that it’s intact and doesn’t have any roads or right-of-ways in it. So this proposal is to put a big right-of-way power line right through those protected areas.

With environmental assessments, projects with plans to produce less than 50 MW of electricity go through a relatively simple process, while bigger projects go through a full assessment by the MOE.Because the Glacier and Howser Creeks are being done together, they have the full environmental assessment, says Garry Alexander, MOE project assessment director for the Glacier/Howser project.This process involves the formation of an inter-governmental technical committee which does numerous consultations with the project proponent and the public before an application for an environmental assessment appication is submitted to the MOE.The MOE is currently waiting for the environmental assessment application for the Glacier/Howser project, he says. Alexander notes about 15 per cent of all assessment applications submitted get turned down.Because the details have not yet been solidified for this project, he’s unable to comment on exactly how much water will be diverted from the creeks, and how much will be left.Simon Gordeau, project manager for Purcell Green Power, says they’re planning to allow for stream flow, and they do not intend to divert 90 per cent of the stream flow from the creeks.“The way a project like this usually works, is you establish minimum stream flow requirements with the ministries, and those are minimum flows mandated to be left in the stream before you’re allowed to take any water for power production,” Gordeau explains. “So when there’s more than the in-stream flow requirements in the river, the extra that’s available - if it’s enough to run the turbines - you’re allowed to produce electricity with it.”When it comes to the transmission lines, Alexander says he’s unaware of any protected areas they might go through.“My understanding is those (areas) aren’t designated in the way that parks conservancy areas are designated,” he says. “And there are certainly areas in the Upper Howser that are important to wildlife. We’re aware of that, and the proponent is aware of that in terms of constructing their transmission line to avoid wildlife impact.

”While projects like this are being closely examined for their environmental impacts before a water license will be granted, the hundreds of smaller projects in the application process go through a much less rigorous process.According to the MOE Water Stewardship Division, applications for small hydro projects are first reviewed for potential impacts to other parties who may have claim to the lands. Staff then do a technical assessment for streamflow requirements, and a senior official then decides to grant the license or not.The license applications for the Kicking Horse River, and the two projects already in motion for Cedar Creek and the Blaeberry River were subject to this process.In comparison to the Glacier/Howser project, the latter two projects are small scale, and pose less possibility for environmental damage. The Cedar Creek and David Thompson (Blaeberry River) Power projects are owned by local firm, Kucera Engineers, in partnership with a Salmon Arm-based business called Remote Structures Inc.

The group held a public consultation on these projects in February 2006, where 24 people attended and the summary of this consultation shows support from local government and some community members.According to a fact sheet released by the group, the Cedar Creek Power Project will produce 3.4 MW of electricity, and the David Thompson project will generate 8 MW, which is enough electricity to power about 900 homes.Chuck Kucera, owner of Kucera Engineers, says his company is dedicated to building these facilities in an environmentally sound way. He notes these projects won’t involve the construction of any new roads, and there will be minimal clearing of land for structures and power lines.In the case of Cedar Creek, there will be some construction in areas not accessible by road, but materials will be flown in to minimize disturbances.The David Thompson project will be built on the Blaeberry River, in the area of Thompson Falls, a Ministry of Forests recreation area. It will be built on the side of the river opposite the recreation site, on land previously disturbed by logging activity. Transmission lines from the site will be built along existing forest service roads.While, individually, projects such as these may not have significant environmental impact, people are asking what their collective impact is going to be, especially in areas that have many projects concentrated in one area.

Calvert says the environmental assessments for many of these projects look only at the individual project, and not at the cumulative impact of many. He cites the Whistler-Squamish area as an example.“In the Whistler-Squamish area, there are over a dozen projects on-stream,” Calvert says. “Developers have been applying for water licenses that could result in up to 70 projects going forward. If all these got built, imagine the cumulative environmental impact on that beautiful valley from all the new power plants, access roads and transmission lines.”Currently there are 13 water license applications by two companies in process for creeks in the Columbia Mountains west of Donald, between the Kinbasket and Revelstoke reservoirs.

INFORMATION BULLETIN

VICTORIA – Five new conservation officers are being hired to enhance the capacity of the Conservation Officer Service (COS) to participate in collaborative compliance projects with external partners, and engage in additional compliance activities throughout the province. These officers will be placed in Fort St. John, Golden, Vernon, Nanaimo and Surrey. 

(more…)

by Sylvia Dolson, Whistler Question, March 13, 2008Check out www.bearsmart.com/dencam.html  and watch a bear named Rascal as he sleeps in his den in real time.

(more…)

McCain Sees Pork Where Scientists See ScienceBy Joel Achenbach Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 10, 2008; Page A01

WEST GLACIER, Mont. — If you’ve heard Sen. John McCain’s stump speech, you’ve surely heard him talk about grizzly bears. The federal government, he declares with horror and astonishment, has spent $3 million to study grizzly bear DNA. “I don’t know if it was a paternity issue or criminal,” he jokes, “but it was a waste of money.”

(more…)

(more…)