|
www.OntarioBlackBears.com |
 |
|
|
Ontario's Problems With Black Bears
~As Complicated As Nature Itself~ |
|
|
Petition
to Stop Bans on Hunting
On November 23rd, 2005 Nipissing MPP, Monique
Smith, brought the issues surrounding Ontario's Black Bears to
Parliament. Ms. Smith's presentation and the ensuing debate was
very articulate and knowledgeable. It was also heartening to
see the serious treatment and significant knowledge of the polititians
regarding Ontario's Black Bears. This has improved dramatically
over the past number of years. This debate can be found in the
at: http://hansardindex.ontla.on.ca/hansardeissue/38-2/l019.htm.
Comment on the MPP Monique Smith's Motion, and the
parliamentary discussion on
NOTO's Bulletin Board
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
 Ms.
Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): I move
that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario
should do whatever is necessary to protect the citizens of Ontario
from nuisance bears.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Ms. Smith has moved private members' notice of motion
number 5. Pursuant to standing order 96, Ms. Smith, you have
up to 10 minutes. You have the floor.
Ms. Smith: I
rise today to speak to the issue of nuisance bears, which is
very important in my area, and in my riding in particular. Although
it is perhaps somewhat selfish of me to take up the time of the
House on this issue, I think it is an issue for all of Ontario,
and specifically for northern Ontario.
This issue, which has always been a part of
our lives up in northern Ontario, came to my attention most recently
this fall. It has really become an important issue and a serious
safety concern for the children of our community and for the
broader general public. I decided to bring forward this resolution
in September, when I had spoken to a number of people who had
been directly affected by the presence of nuisance bears in our
communities.
Nuisance bears are affecting our schools.
In Mattawa, the school is on guard for bears. Let me just cite
for you an article from the North Bay Nugget: "Hungry black
bears are roaming the streets of Mattawa and Trout Creek, and
the North Bay District Ministry of Natural Resources is getting
swamped with calls from people who say the bruins are getting
too close for comfort." This is dated September 9, 2005.
"At least one school has increased supervision during recess
after tracks were found on its property, and residents are walking
in groups at night with flashlights and bells to ward off encounters."
This is in downtown Mattawa. The council in Mattawa "discussed
the situation at a special meeting ... after a bear tore apart
a garbage box" at some time over the weekend of September
9 "at the Mattawa Child Care Centre on the St. Victor school
property." The bears are right in the school properties,
right in our communities.
In North Bay proper, we've had bear sightings
near the West Ferris Secondary School. On September 14, we had
to have the North Bay Police Service and our humane society get
involved and actually trap and remove a bear cub. They were involved
because the Ministry of Natural Resources' bear wise technicians
were unavailable at the time due to the high number of calls
and traps being sets in Mattawa and other communities. We do
have resources in place to deal with the nuisance bears. However,
they're being tapped out.
Again, this one really brought it close to
home for me in October, when we had a bear sighting right next
to our high school at 11:30 in the morning. The high school yard
is attached to a primary school. The children in the primary
school were kept in the school for their lunch-hour recess because
the teachers were too concerned about letting them out while
there was a bear in the vicinity. The police were called and
they actually shot this bear cub out of a tree in front of the
students. I bring this particular incident to your attention
because it was right in downtown North Bay. It was about eight
blocks from where I live. It's right next to the school that
my brother attended. It's very scary. It also disturbed the children
and the neighbourhood. That was following a sighting the night
before of a bear in that neighbourhood as well.
When I was in Mattawa recently for a rally,
I met with some of the seniors there who were afraid to take
out their garbage. They're afraid to go out of their homes. One
particular senior told me that she hadn't left her house for
two days after she'd seen a bear at the end of her driveway.
This isn't, of course, just an issue for my riding. As you know,
we've had some serious bear incidents across the province, including
the tragic mauling death of Dr. Jacqueline Perry in September
in the Missinaibi Lake provincial park and the injuring of her
husband.
The numbers speak for themselves: There have
been an inordinate number of sightings this year in particular
of nuisance bears across the province. Province-wide last year,
2004, we had 948 occurrence of bear sightings in August, and
in September we had 736. This year, 2005, we had 1,758 reported
occurrences in August, and in September we had 2,385. Let me
just compare that to the numbers of bears that have been reported
killed: In 2004, 25 in June and 30 in July. In 2005, 81 in August
and 92 in September. We're seeing an exponential growth in the
number of sightings of nuisance bears and then having to deal
with them.
Again, the number of bears reported killed
is a low number, because it's those reported. We have a number
of residents who are taking issues into their own hands, dealing
with the nuisance bear problem on their property. The Ontario
Federation of Anglers and Hunters questioned some of the numbers
that the Ministry of Natural Resources is putting out, because
they feel that they are being under-reported.
I want to take the Legislature through a brief
history of where we've been and where we're going with the bear
hunt. Back in the 1980s, there was an open bear hunt; there was
no real restriction on our bear hunt. In 1987, we introduced
some licensing restrictions around the bear hunt. It wasn't until
1999 that we actually saw the elimination of the spring bear
hunt, many would argue for political reasons, and many have questioned
the science behind that decision.
I will concede that there are some questions
around the science and the correlation between the increase in
nuisance bear sightings and the elimination of the spring bear
hunt. However, the people of my community are firmly of the belief
that the elimination of the spring bear hunt has increased the
number of nuisance bear sightings and the bear population in
the north.
As you know, in December 2003, our government
introduced the bear wise strategy. This is based on some very
good science: Most of the reports from different jurisdictions
talk about the fact that we have to educate the population on
how to deal with our nuisance bears. The bear wise program, introduced
in March 2004, outlined a strategy for reporting bear sightings,
responding to those bear sightings and preventing human-bear
conflicts. As the Minister of Natural Resources reported yesterday,
the reporting line which we set up, which is a 24-hour, toll-free
hotline, has had 14,500 calls.
We have developed protocols with 40 municipalities
in order to deal with nuisance bear calls, and our municipalities
are supported by the MNR. But as I indicated, in our community
and the North Bay sighting in West Ferris, we didn't have the
resources available because there are so many calls that our
resources are tapped out.
I might also draw your attention to the fact
that in 1996-97, the previous Conservative government cut the
resources of the Ministry of Natural Resources down to the bone.
We have, over time, been building them up since our government
came into power. We have been providing more resources to that
ministry in order to deal with these problems, but there is a
legacy of problems within the ministry not having the proper
resources that they need.
The bear wise program is going some way to
deal with the problem, but as I've noted, our communities are
noting an increase, this year especially. I wanted to bring it
to the attention of my fellow legislators, as well as to the
attention of the general public. In the North Bay Nugget on October
1, we had a report of a gentleman living in Powassan who shot
four bears outside his home after they ripped off the screen
door of his home. In his home at that time were his wife and
six-month-old child. That causes huge concerns in a community
where we have bears being that brazen and bold. That led the
township of Chisholm, at its council meeting in October, to pass
the following resolution:
"Whereas the cancellation of the spring
bear hunt several years ago has resulted in an overabundant black
bear population; and
"Whereas the black bear population is
becoming increasingly bold and there are increased incidents
of nuisances bear and bear attacks in urban and rural areas;
and
"Whereas the spring bear hunt was a viable
management tool and a way of controlling the black bear population;
"Now, therefore, be it resolved that
the council of the corporation of the township of Chisholm petitions
the Honourable David Ramsay, Minister of Natural Resources, to
immediately move to reinstate the bear hunt, and further, that
this resolution be circulated to local members of Parliament
and all municipalities in the province of Ontario for support."
The science is there. Many reports have indicated
that prevention and education is an important component in dealing
with the spring bear hunt. But there are also other ways of dealing
with nuisance bears, and I would argue that one of those ways
is to reintroduce the spring bear hunt and allow for some management
through that means.
1110
Most recently, in the state of Pennsylvania,
where they've been dealing with the issue, they introduced a
management plan for black bears in October 2005 based on the
most recent science and studies. They do indicate that nuisance
bear conflicts have economic and public safety consequences.
They go through a number of initiatives which they are introducing,
including a major educational effort. But as part of their overall
strategy, they are looking at, by October 2008, identifying areas
within their bear management units where locally high bear abundance
is a factor in human-bear conflict and they're evaluating if
hunting may be used to reduce that abundance. I would suggest
that might be an appropriate approach for our government to deal
with the nuisance bear problem which is putting our population
at risk, particularly in the north. I think the issue of our
children's and our seniors' safety is something this Legislature
has to take seriously.
I thank you for your time, and I look forward
to responding to my colleagues.
The Deputy Speaker:
Further debate?
 Mr.
Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka):
It's my pleasure to join in the debate on this resolution from
the member from Nipissing, "That in the opinion of this
House, the government of Ontario should do whatever is necessary
to protect the citizens of Ontario from nuisance bears."
I'm very pleased that the member has brought forward this resolution.
It's important to get the government's attention on this issue,
although I would point out that the member is part of the government
and the government doesn't need a resolution from private members'
business to act on the question of nuisance bears -- although
I think this resolution is certainly a lot more important than
the past one, which was the Kormos resolution to do with a dress
code in the Legislature. This is certainly a much more important
issue.
The government needs to act on the recommendations
of a report that was tabled on August 28, 2003, and that's the
Nuisance Bear Review Committee report. In that report, there
was a recommendation for a partial reinstatement of the spring
bear hunt. Now, they didn't find in that report a connection
between the cancellation of the spring bear hunt and an increase
in the number of bears, but they did recommend a reinstatement
of a very controlled spring bear hunt for socio-economic reasons.
There was also a recommendation in that report
for further research, and I think that is very much needed. Information
I have from an independent organization on the bear synopsis
for 2005 says that Ontario's black bear population may now be
100% higher than what the MNR is telling the public -- that means
200,000 or more and growing. The MNR's estimate of 100,000 is
based on information more than 20 years old.
This has been a bad year for bear attacks
and deaths. We've had at least four people attacked -- one killed
-- in Ear Falls, Chapleau, Sioux Lookout and Upsala. Problem
and nuisance bears are at unprecedented levels across the province.
For example, the town of Marathon recently declared their garbage
dump a danger zone. MNR's province-wide toll-free number received
15,000 calls in 2004. The OPP and residents are killing problem
and nuisance bears at unprecedented levels.
I received a lot of information, and I don't
have enough time to go through everything, because other members
want to speak to this. But I did receive some excellent information
from an outfitter in the north, Roxann Lynn at Moose Horn Lodge
-- a whole package of information, including some highlighted
excerpts from the Liberal campaign document of 2003.
But one of the more compelling letters in
that information package is a letter from the Minister of Conservation
for the province of Manitoba. I'll highlight a couple of parts
of that letter: "Experience in this province" -- Manitoba
-- "has shown that if bear populations increase, then there
would be an increase in the number of bear-human conflicts. This
increase would lead to more bears being killed in response to
increased property damage and to circumstances where personal
safety is at risk. Large numbers of cubs would subsequently be
orphaned as, inherently, less thought is given in these circumstances
to the protection of females and cubs....
"The spring bear hunt provides socio-economic
benefits to Manitoba. The purchase of goods and services by both
resident and non-resident hunters, coupled with initiatives such
as the mandatory use of outfitters and resident licensed guides
by non-resident hunters, is important in many areas of the province,
particularly where high unemployment exists.
"Manitoba's bear populations are stable,
and Manitoba Conservation views a well-managed spring bear hunt
as a legitimate approach to managing the bear population."
"With respect to your inquiry on orphaned
cubs, it is my understanding that approximately six orphaned
cubs are handled each year by Manitoba Conservation."
Interestingly enough, that letter was signed
by Oscar Lathlin, the Minister of Conservation for the province
of Manitoba. In Ontario, a partial assessment of the number of
orphaned bears with no spring bear hunt, which was part of the
justification for the cancellation of the spring bear hunt --
in 2001 in Ontario, there were 159 orphaned bears as compared
to six in Manitoba.
Also, this person sent a letter from the minister
in Quebec as well, outlining why they support having a spring
bear hunt as well.
I think the spring bear hunt obviously has
some socio-economic benefits, but also it is a tool for the control
of the population of bears. We've certainly seen many incidents
this year, in particular the very tragic incident near Chapleau,
when Jacqueline Perry, a doctor from Brantford, was killed by
a bear.
I support this resolution, and I think the
government should act on the report that it has in its hands
and received in August 2003. I look forward to some comments
from other members of our party who want to add something to
this debate.
 Mr.
Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay):
Well, I think there has been a conversion in this Legislature.
I just heard it happen a couple of times this morning. Us northerners
-- Mike, Monique, others. When was it that the bear hunt was
cancelled in northern Ontario? Was it under the Liberal government?
Was it under the NDP government? No. It was under the Conservative
government. I just heard the whip for the Conservative Party
now take a position that we should reinstate the black bear hunt,
and I think that's rather interesting, considering it was his
very party that cancelled it in the first place. So I look forward
to a response to this question from the Tory caucus when they
get up and debate. Is I to take -- "Is I," as I always
say in good English, right? Am I to then take from the speech
from the Conservative whip that the Conservative Party has reversed
themselves and they are now taking the position that we should
reinstate the black bear hunt in the province of Ontario? I need
to know that from the Conservative caucus.
I also heard my good and esteemed colleague
from North Bay -- I think I heard her right, and I was a bit
surprised. As some people say, I almost swallowed my bubble gum
because I thought what I heard you say was that you're in favour
of the reinstatement of the spring hunt. I would like a clarification
on that at the end, because if that's the case, then I would
ask the member, why not bring the motion in the House this morning
rather than having a motion now that basically says, "The
government should do everything possible to deal with black bears"?
Well, that's kind of a no-brainer. We're all going to vote for
that, and we all believe that the government should do all it
can about nuisance bears and protect the public. I don't think
there's a member in this House who's going to vote against that.
But if the position of the Liberal member is that there should
be a reinstatement of the spring bear hunt as a means to control
the black bear population in northern Ontario, if that's what
Madame Smith is saying, I would suggest that you should say that
categorically, yes or no, because maybe I misunderstood you.
I heard you say yes. If the answer is yes, then you should have
amended your motion to say, "I call on the Legislature to
reinstate the black bear hunt," and we could have had a
very clear vote. People would have voted the way they were, and
we would have known the position of both the Liberal and the
Tory caucuses.
I've got to say that our caucus -- I'm personally
not on side with this decision -- has always taken the position
that the cancellation is something that should be maintained.
That's what my leader says and that's what the majority of caucus
says, other than me. I've taken an opposite view. Sometimes you
lose these battles within caucus and you take your lumps and
you go along. However, that is the position of the NDP caucus,
and I'll be very clear about that. But if I'm hearing that there
is now a change on the part of the Conservatives and Liberals,
that they are now reversing themselves and saying we should reinstate
the black bear hunt -- I just thought that was rather interesting.
The motion should have been straight up or straight down: "Do
you vote for the reinstatement of the black bear hunt?"
1120
I want to say that we have, as all legislators
have over the years, made fun of the black bear thing. But it's
really a serious issue in northern Ontario. For anybody who lives
in northern or, I would argue, central Ontario -- you probably
have some of the same problems in and around Parry Sound, Muskoka
and those areas -- I'm telling you, it is a real serious issue.
For example, in my own backyard last year, at about 3 or 4 o'clock
in the morning -- I live in downtown Timmins. It's not as if
I live out in the bush. I have a cottage out in Kamiskotia, but
I live in downtown Timmins, on Middleton Avenue. I, like most
residents, have been woken up a whole bunch of times over the
last two or three years by bears in our backyards. And I live
in a downtown community. I don't leave my garbage outside, so
there's nothing for the bear. The barbecue is protected, so there's
nothing for the bear to get in the barbecue. But the bears, rummaging
for food, travel from one backyard to the other knocking over
barbecues, trying to get into homes, going into garbage cans.
In fact, I've been woken up in the middle of the night more than
once by Timmins police chasing black bears out of my backyard
on Middleton Avenue.
Just now, before I came into the Legislature,
I was talking to Glen and Marjory Ironside on a different issue.
I asked them what they thought about this. Their position was
that the cancellation was the wrong thing to do. Both Glen and
Marjory, like most northerners, I think, say the reinstatement
of the black bear hunt is something that should be done, because
they're seeing, as citizens in the city of Timmins, an incursion
of bears into our community.
I want to relate to you a couple of stories
that happened to me just last summer. I think they're kind of
indicative of what we're starting to see. First of all, we need
to understand what the issue is. As there are more bears out
there and humans are basically encroaching on their territory
-- that's what's happening. As our communities are getting larger,
our cottage areas, all that stuff, as we're developing more and
more land, there are less and less places for bears to sustain
themselves as they normally do out in the forest. As a result
of an increased population of bears because of the cancellation
of the spring bear hunt, I would argue, you have more bears with
fewer places to go, so they're coming to where we live. Basically,
we're the ones who are backing up into their backyard.
The point is this: The bears are not as afraid
as they used to be. I'll give you a couple of examples of what
happened to me this summer. I've got a cottage out in Kamiskotia.
We have a dump run by the municipality, so you bring your garbage
out to the dump. Obviously, there are going to be bears at a
dump. We all know that. That happened even before the cancellation
of the black bear hunt. But here's the difference. It used to
be that you'd see one or two, sometimes three bears, from time
to time, at the dump. But if you saw them, and you drove up in
your truck or your car with the trailer on the back with the
garbage, the bears used to skedaddle. They didn't want to be
around humans, because they were nervous about having humans
around them. Nowadays, those bears don't give a darn. They're
in big numbers. I'll show up at the dump and there will be five,
six, seven bears rummaging through the garbage bags at the dump.
It's to the point that you know when you go to the dump now,
you're going to see bears.
Here are a couple of things that happened
to me this summer. I went over one time with my Uncle Condo,
who has a cottage just up the road from us. I have this habit
-- because a lot of our elderly neighbours don't want to go to
the dump. Mrs. Damini next door doesn't want to go to the dump
because she's afraid of the bears. Mr. and Mrs. Lo-a-chie, on
the other side, don't like to go to the dump because of the bears.
So I've gotten in the habit of picking up the garbage as I go
to get rid of the garbage for the neighbours who are afraid to
go to the dump. Well, I went with my Uncle Condo, I think it
was this summer, and we saw the bears. We drove up and did what
we normally do -- made a bit of noise, trying to scare the bears
away. But they weren't being scared away, so we took my truck
and parked it a little farther away so the bears wouldn't bother
us. So here I am, and I know there are no bears where I'm dumping
the garbage into the hole. The bears are over there by about
150 feet. I see there are no bears inside the hole. I walk behind
my pickup truck, open up the back and take out the garbage bags.
I'm talking to Uncle Condo as I throw the garbage in, at which
point my Uncle Condo goes, "Holy Jeez, look behind you!"
I'm throwing the garbage on top of the bears, because those suckers
had walked across during the time I had turned around; they were
like five and 10 feet behind me, and I'm throwing garbage bags
on to the bears. It was, "Whoa, let's get out of here."
Something could have happened. Some people
would say that might have been a good thing, if there had been
a by-election in Timmins-James Bay. I think most people would
have said no. But the point is that the bears are no longer afraid
of humans, and it's getting to be a problem. Even somebody like
me, who has grown up in the bush and who understands the rules
of the outdoors -- I'm careful and responsible about how I approach
this; I looked to see if there were any bears. I'm used to bears.
We've had them around for a long time. And here, these bears
had no fear. They saw me throwing garbage out of the back of
my truck. They're at the point where I'm throwing garbage and
I hit one bear square in the head, right in the snout, with the
garbage bag. If the bear had got kind of -- thank God there was
a steak or something inside that bag, because he didn't come
after me; he went after the bag. That was a good thing. That's
an interesting thing: "Bisson? Garbage bag? Bisson? Garbage
bag?" Imagine the decision that bear had to make. That's
scary when I think about it. That's another story.
I've got to tell you another story. We go
back and we tell this story to some of our neighbours over a
couple of wobbly pops, as we call them back at the cottage. We're
having supper over a glass of wine and talking about this bear
story. My aunt says, "You know what? Every time I've brought
people out to the dump to take a look at bears, I was never lucky
to see bears. Can I go with you next time?" I said, "Sure."
So I pick up Aunt Carmen, I put her in the truck, we drive out
to the dump, and there, behold, are about four, five or six bears.
We're sitting there looking at the bears; we're inside the truck
where it's nice and safe. Finally, the bears kind of move away,
so I open the truck door and my aunt is going, "Gilles,
Gilles, arrête. Don't do that. The bear is going to come
after us." I say, "Ma tante, don't worry." I grab
the garbage bags, I throw them inside the hole at the dump, I
get back in the truck and I sit down.
Now, because I was throwing the garbage, the
bears got attracted. This is the interesting part, back to my
point that they're no longer afraid. The bear didn't only come
up to sniff the garbage, didn't only put his paws on my truck
and look at the window; it got in the back, the box of my truck.
Here my aunt is panicking inside the truck somewhat, saying,
"Look at that. The bear is in the back of the truck. What
do we do?" I said, "Let's drive and show it to Uncle
Condo." I didn't have the nerve to do that, because I would
have brought the bear into a populated area, but that was my
reaction. My point is, the bears aren't afraid any more. The
bears are basically in contact with humans much more than they
have ever been before, to the point where the fearful part is
that they're not afraid.
Another story: In Smooth Rock Falls, a gentleman
-- and I can't remember his name. I wish I had called for the
name. If I had called Réjeanne Demeules, the mayor, she
would have told me. This guy was at a celebration that the community
was putting on last year, I think it was. The story with him
is, he comes walking out of the arena at the celebration, in
the middle of summer, on an August day, walking across the town
as he normally does to get back to his house. He turns the corner
at the schoolyard, and what does he come in contact with? A big
black bear. Now, he kind of got scared, so he raised his arm.
The bear took a swipe at him and scraped him, the whole bit.
Now, you should see the bear. I've got to say, the bear fared
less well than the guy did. The guy only got swiped at. I wonder
what happened to the bear. The point is, they're not afraid of
humans any more and that's really what we need to take seriously.
One other thing before I wrap up. One of the
things that happened, again this summer: We've had this cottage
at Kamiskotia since about 1961, and we have never seen bears
on our property. Mrs. Damini or Mr. Lane next door, or ourselves,
or the Lo-a-chies or the Albertsons, or the Vincoeurs, we've
never seen bears on our property. They've just always stayed
away. What we've started to see last year and this year is that
the bears are starting to incur on to our properties. They are
not satisfied staying at the dump; they're now coming up to the
cottages and they're looking for garbage in our garbage cans.
We're responsible cottagers; we don't keep garbage in our garbage
cans. But to show you the degree to which these bears are persistent,
I've got this garage that's built out of railway ties that my
father built before he died. He built this great garage out of
railway ties, a pretty solid thing. I've got a habit that if
I leave the cottage, I take my garbage cans and I put them inside
the garage and lock it up because I don't want the bears being
attracted by the scent of an empty garbage can, those plastic
ones with the covers on them.
So I go away, and my mom comes in the next
day to the cottage. My mom is 70-some years old; I won't say
her age. She drives the car in and she walks into the cottage.
She didn't notice, but the bear was around where the garage is.
It was a neighbour who noticed that the bear was scratching at
the door of the garage, had ripped part of the door apart, and
was trying to dig underneath to get inside the garage. It luckily
couldn't get in because I have a cement floor there so he couldn't
dig his way underneath. My mother walked right by the bear. She
happened not to see it because the bear was down and not scratching
at the door as she walked in. Now, the point is, what can a 70-some-year-old
woman or anybody do if they walk into a bear? It can be a very
dangerous situation.
I think a couple of things need to be done.
The government has said that they were willing to re-upload the
responsibility of taking care of the nuisance bears. I think
that's a good thing. That's something that we, as New Democrats,
called for. But we've not done the kind of stuff that we need
to do in order to protect citizens when it comes to bears. For
example, there was supposed to be a program put out where basically
the government was going to spend some money on trying to do
some public education about what to do when you're in contact
with a bear, because for a lot of people, it's just a natural
reaction, if you run across a bear, what you do. There are things
that you should do and things that you shouldn't do, and if you
do the wrong thing, the bear may come after you. Those are some
of the things that I think the government needs to look at.
This motion? Obviously, we're going to support
it.
You didn't tell me anything. Do you want time?
Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): It's OK.
1130
Mr. Bisson:
OK. She says to keep on going. I just looked up at the time and
noticed where I was at.
Anyway, I say to the government, I think there's
not going to be anybody who is going to vote against this motion.
As parents, as citizens of our communities and as MPPs, it's
a no-brainer. We're all in favour of doing more to protect the
public from nuisance bears. But I go back to my original question
to Madame Smith from Nipissing -- I forget the name of the riding.
Ms. Smith: It's
just Nipissing.
Mr. Bisson:
Just Nipissing. Sorry. I really want to make clear what you're
saying here, because what I thought I heard you say in the debate
was that you were in favour of the reintroduction of the spring
bear hunt. If that's the case, there are people in northern Ontario
who would agree with you. I just think that what you should do
is be clear, yes or no, are you in favour? If you are, I'd like
to know an answer to the question, why, then, did you not put
into the motion that we should vote here today, this day, on
the reintroduction of the spring bear hunt? If you can answer
those two questions, that would be very helpful.
I say again to my colleagues, we will be in
support. I'm sure we have not heard the last of the bear story.
It's an issue that I think affects many people across Ontario.
We need to figure out what to do with this, because as Madame
Smith has said -- she's right, and I totally agree with her on
this -- somebody is going to get hurt. We've already had somebody
killed this summer in Missinaibi Park. We're now at the point
where we're seeing bears in schoolyards, and she pointed that
out in her debate, quite rightfully. I know it's happened in
my constituency, where bears have been sighted during the school
year in the schoolyard at an elementary school. That's pretty
scary stuff. I think we need to figure out what we can do as
legislators to be able to make it safe so that people are not
put at risk because of the increasing bear population and the
bears being less afraid and coming into our communities. We need
to do what we can to make it safe, and we will vote for this
motion.
 Mr.
Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan):
It is my pleasure to rise today and speak to this motion. I'd
like to thank the member from Nipissing for introducing it. The
member is from North Bay as well, and being from Thunder Bay,
I think that people from southern Ontario sometimes confuse the
two. We're only about 10 or 15 hours apart by car. It's a bit
of a segue, though, into this issue, because I think this issue
was confused by those in southern Ontario as well when they were
trying to get it right back in 1999.
I can tell you that one of the first times
I spoke in caucus after the election was on this issue. It was
then, and it is still now, a very sensitive issue in northern
Ontario, and I think that in short order it is going to become
a bit more of a sensitive issue in southern Ontario as well.
If we go back to 1999 and look at the history
of what was intended here, beginning with the chronology of Harris
and Snobelen and the Shad Foundation, the intention as an animal
welfare issue, I think -- at least that put out there for public
consumption -- was that we were going to try and limit the number
of bear cubs that were orphaned through the spring bear hunt.
That is what was put forward as the reason for substantiating
the cancellation of the hunt, that there were too many cubs being
orphaned. Well, in fact, as is often the case when we sometimes
meddle with Mother Nature, we get it exactly wrong. If you talk
to the people in the know, they will be the first ones to tell
you that this cancellation of the spring bear hunt has had probably
the exact opposite effect. There are probably -- and according
to them, most assuredly -- more bear cubs being orphaned now
than there were before the cancellation of the hunt, and that's
for two or three different reasons.
One is that during the spring bear hunt, there
were many more adult male bears that were being culled. Of all
the bears being taken during the spring hunt, about 70% of them
were male bears. Of course, when there are more male bears in
the bush, they become very cannibalistic in their nature when
they get hungry; in fact, they will take bear cubs, and that's
what's happening now as there are more male bears allowed to
be in the bush.
In the fall hunt, there are now more female
bears being mistakenly taken as well, which of course leads to
cubs being orphaned.
The third thing, and most important, I think,
for this Legislature to consider, is that there is a phenomenon
that's occurring in northern Ontario now, and it's referred to
where I come from as the "shoot, shovel and shut up"
approach. As the number of large bears increases, people are
taking matters into their own hands. If you think this policy
is stopping the orphaning of bear cubs, I can tell you that when
people live in remote communities, when they feel that their
lives are in danger, that their children's lives are in danger,
that their property is in danger, they are in fact taking matters
into their own hands and shooting these bears. Many of them are
not turning up in the numbers we see that are reported to MNR;
they're just being killed. Of course, the result of that is orphan
cubs as well. So if you are somebody out there who is concerned
about animal welfare and you think that this policy was well-intentioned,
I call tell you it's having exactly the opposite effect to what
was intended. There are two main issues for me as well: the safety
and the economic issues that this policy has affected.
In my riding of Thunder Bay-Atikokan, I think
I can safely say that, overwhelmingly, the people I represent
in that constituency all would see this issue as having gotten
greatly out of control. The sightings are increasing exponentially,
as has been mentioned by the member from Nipissing. I can tell
you there are schools that no longer put their kids out for recess
in the fall, because they are afraid. There are too many bears
in town. I can tell you about an individual who was pulled by
a bear out of his tent and was being drawn into the bush, the
bear seeing him now as a food source.
One of the things we're told is the reason
for the increase in sightings is that it was a bad crop year,
or that there was not enough food in the bush. Well, we had many
years previously where there were bad crop years, and we did
not see the increased number of sightings. There are things going
on, and primarily what it is is that there are too bears many
in the bush.
I don't like the word "nuisance"
bear, either. I think that severely understates the seriousness
of this issue. These are dangerous animals that will kill at
a moment's notice.
I have to go quickly. I apologize.
Economically: Ecotourism does not replace
what was lost by the fall hunt. This was a $40-million annual
revenue stream in the north. If you multiply that, on a relative
basis, that would be a multi-billion dollar industry in southern
Ontario.
I'm told I need to wrap up. I apologize for
rushing through this.
I want to comment on the bear wise program.
I think it is something that was well-intended. It has gone,
through its education and prevention strategies, a fair way to
trying to help a little bit, but clearly, this is a much more
serious issue than can be addressed by simply the bear wise program.
We need to give serious reconsideration to the reinstatement
of the hunt.
 Mr.
Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant):
We're debating a resolution that the government do "whatever
is necessary to protect the citizens of Ontario from nuisance
bears." I feel it is a much broader issue than that. It's
an economic issue -- certainly in the north -- and it's a heritage
issue.
The controversy has been around, I guess,
since the mid-1980s. There were areas in North America where
populations were declining, and much of that has rebounded, but
that's certainly not a problem in the province of Ontario where
the black bear population is one of the largest in North America.
MNR had some conservative estimates two years ago of 75,000 to
100,000 bears. I think they've rejigged that to 150,000 bears,
and I hear estimates of 200,000 bears.
With any large population of an animal like
that, one of the most effective means of population control is
hunting. Hunting is a management tool. It's a tool that is more
than appropriate with respect to increasing populations of cormorants,
for example, raccoons and possums. We have an issue in our area
with the possum cycle. I think of deer. Myself, I've smashed
into two deer in the last year. I've smashed two cars now. That
tells me there are too many deer in my area. Again, hunting is
the biological control.
However, banning the hunting of bears in the
spring was not, at the time, a biological sustainability issue.
As has been said here today, it was an issue related to the practice
of hunting, to the position that young bears were potentially
orphaned at that time of the year at a time when they're highly
dependent on their mothers. But again, if you shoot a bear at
the dump or kill one in your backyard in the spring, you have
potentially created an orphaned cub. There are other reasons
for cub mortality: starvation, for one, and the killing of cubs
by male bears. I don't know whether they eat them or not. That's
where we have to rely on expert opinion and science.
We have an ongoing controversy on the spring
bear hunt. I fully support continued, objective, research-based
analysis of the issue and scientific investigation. Much study
has been done. I don't know how much of that has been made public
or if the general public is aware of it, and I certainly don't
think much of that has been acted on. Ongoing, independent external
reviews are very important.
1140
Of course, safety is paramount. The protection
of our environment and the management of species like bears is
dependant on a number of things. I feel it's very important that
we maintain the legislative protection of our heritage rights
and that we continue to rekindle the interest of young people
in hunting. We have the hunter apprenticeship safety program
in Ontario. That's an excellent program. We have legislation
that protects the heritage of hunting and fishing. All of this,
in my view, is very important for future generations, not only
in northern Ontario but in southern Ontario.
I live in the sticks. I'm a hunter. I smash
into deer with my car. I guess I get my limit that way. For many
of us in the south and the north, hunting is a way of life, and
that includes the spring bear hunt.
 Mr.
David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie):
I know our time is limited and there are numerous speakers today,
so I will try to condense what I have as best as possible. First
let me say that I fully support the member from Nipissing's resolution
to do whatever is necessary to ensure that the safety of Ontarians
is paramount. Certainly in northern Ontario, in the riding of
Sault Ste. Marie and surrounding area, this has become a much
larger issue in recent years. I can recall being on city council,
and a trapper who was contracted by the city used to get about
15 to 20 calls about nuisance bears in the area of Sault Ste.
Marie. Following the 1999 cancellation of the hunt, that number
escalated to 250, to 600, and there are now well over 900 calls
of reported bears in Sault Ste. Marie and area. A Web site, sootoday.com,
continually posts bear sightings, and if anybody logs on there,
they can see just how many sightings we're talking about. We're
not talking about an area that is in the wilderness, in the backwoods
of northern Ontario; we're talking about residential areas, main
streets, schoolyards and the like.
I would like to read a brief article that
appeared in the October 1, 2005, Sault Star. This certainly doesn't
have much to do with wildlife science. It's important to get
the history of the cancellation on the record here at Queen's
Park. This was written by a former NDP candidate in the Algoma-Manitoulin
riding and I think it's right on the mark:
"Many northerners believe this is the
inevitable result of the cancellation of the spring bear hunt
in 1999, a decision that continues to produce as much controversy
and polarized opinion as the hunt, itself, did.
"Why was the hunt cancelled?
"It had nothing to do with the preservation
of black bears in Ontario. The estimated bear population in the
province, then and now, is between 75,000 and 100,000 animals,
which is close to capacity for the available range.
"The government's stated reason for the
cancellation of the spring hunt was concern over the orphaning
of bear cubs that was alleged to have occurred when hunters mistakenly
shot nursing sows. The more widely accepted reason for the hunt
cancellation was that the Tory government of the time blinked
when a group opposed to the bear hunt threatened to mount a vigorous
campaign in ... 1999 ... against eight first-term Tory MPPs in
southern Ontario who won their seats by a narrow margin of victory
in the 1995 election. The group, funded by industrialist Robert
Schad, distributed videos concerning the bear hunt to homes in
the `swing' ridings and conducted billboard campaigns against
the hunt in southern Ontario.
"The number of bear cubs orphaned wasn't
really significant -- in the eyes of the anti-hunting groups
and, ultimately, then Minister of Natural Resources John Snobelen,
any number was too many. There are far more cubs orphaned each
year by ... vehicle collisions than the number orphaned by the
spring bear hunt. But the images of cute cubs on billboards in
Toronto and the probable reaction of people in the southern portion
of the province was too much for the Tories to ignore. They went
ahead with the cancellation of the hunt, even in the face of
concern over how much political clout and influence an interest
group with deep pockets could have over the Ontario government.
Ironically, the number of cubs actually orphaned has still never
been accurately quantified.
"Rather than investing some money in
an objective analysis of the mortality of cubs, the group spearheading
the cancellation drive seized upon hypothetical estimates and
stated them as fact on numerous occasions."
The addition in Ontario of 20,000 large bears
over the past six years is an incredible concern, both in northern
areas and throughout the province. The article concludes by saying,
"Any measures that the bear management strategy concludes
are necessary, including the reinstatement of the spring bear
hunt, should be implemented. Never again in Ontario should biologically
correct wildlife management strategies be trumped by political
manoeuvring."
The presence of bears in the Sault Ste. Marie
area in the community and in the city -- I think we're fooling
ourselves if we're thinking that these bears are not being shot.
They're being shot now by city police officers and by the OPP.
In schoolyards, there are reports of recesses being cancelled
in Sault Ste. Marie; kids can't go out and enjoy some fresh air
because there are bears in the schoolyards. As a former teacher,
I recall getting notes from students who had come late to class,
saying, "I couldn't get to the car because there was a bear
in the driveway."
I just want to express my complete support
for the member from Nipissing to do whatever is necessary to
ensure that we protect the safety of all Ontarians.
The Deputy Speaker:
Further debate?
 Mr.
Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): This
is actually a topic that I'm very passionate about and I could
spend a lot of time speaking about it. I'm going to be very succinct
in the time remaining on some of the issues.
We talked about reporting bears. I'll give
you an example. I hired an individual just outside of Timmins,
in Mr. Bisson's riding. Pierre said a bear came into his yard
up in Foleyet and killed his dog. I asked him, "Did you
report it?" He said, "Oh, absolutely. I reported that
bear." I said, "Well, do you remember about eight years
ago, when you had the bear in the barnyard, and you went in and
grabbed the gun and came out? It had gone from the barnyard into
the tack shop, and when you were standing there, you could hear
a noise. You turned and looked, and the bear ran right overtop
of you. You shot it and it fell dead after it had knocked you
over. Did you report that one?" He said, "Well, no.
Why?" I said, "Why would you report one that kills
your dog, but you wouldn't report the other one?" That's
because the incidence of reporting is now almost 100%. You're
seeing a large number of incidents being reported because of
those bases, because people are reporting them, and they should
have been doing that in the first place.
Some of other things that need to be made
very clear: When you're talking about territories of bears, the
average boar or male bear will range up to 90 miles as part of
their territory. I read in a book dealing with Oshawa, printed
by Dr. Hoig, which stated that in 1918, an individual had just
picked up his new car and drove to the ridges in Oshawa, which
is about halfway between Port Perry and Oshawa. He saw a big
black bear -- it could have been any size -- and he turned around
and came back. In other words, the point I'm trying to make is
that the range of bears has extended throughout the province
of Ontario, and documents right back to 1918, when you talk about
those things.
You talk about municipalities taking on the
responsibility. One of the positions within the ministry was
that if you take on the responsibility of bears, what happens
with deer? What happens, for example, as on my street, when a
deer crashes through the school window and goes right into the
school? What happens with racoons, opossums, beavers and all
the other animals? Or birds and bird droppings? I know I get
complaints because birds are leaving droppings in one place in
one particular house. What happens with all those incidents?
Is it the responsibility of the Ministry of Natural Resources
to take on all those actions and correct them all? No, I don't
believe so, because once you accept the responsibility, and total
responsibility, for one animal, then you take on the onus of
accepting responsibility for all the other animals as well.
The member from Thunder Bay mentioned bears
killing cubs. The reason for that is a practice called infanticide.
What takes place is the boars go out, they find the cubs and
kill them in order to bring the females back into season so they
can breed them so that their prodigy or their life cycle or genes
can continue on in cycle. That's the main reason that bears practice
infanticide.
My, my, how we've changed from the NDP, when
Frances Lankin stood up in this Legislature and gave out little
tiny teddy bears to everybody. Soft, little teddy bears were
going to be saved because the spring bear hunt was now protected.
Well, guess what? The reality of the situation now is that bears
are doing what bears do best, and that's going out to feed and
get involved. They participate in activities and, all of a sudden,
people are starting to realize, "Oh, my God. I'm seeing
bears in my cottage now like never before, and they're not afraid
of me."
1150
The spring bear hunt was more about managing
the population numbers. The report in 2003 indicated that the
numbers should not increase until 2005 because of the cancellation
of the hunt. The reality of that situation is that bears are
creatures of habit. In the springtime, when they are chased by
dogs and shot at by people, they realize, "People: bad things;
stay away." There was a report handed to me by a person,
Vern Mason, that indicated that the reason the bears were going
inside and ripping open tents and sleeping bags was because of
the same thing Mr. Bisson mentioned. Guess what? At the dump,
they smell humans, they smell garbage, they associate it with
food and they rip the bag open. The same thing with tents and
sleeping bags: All of a sudden they smell humans, they associate
that with past practices, and they tear open the tent or the
sleeping bag because they assume there is food there.
It's negative reinforcement that needs to
take place, and that's what happened with spring bear hunt. You
had negative reinforcement, negatively imprinting humans on bears,
and they stayed away from them. When you closed that, it stopped
that.
Bear populations are very difficult to assess.
There is a tuna can bait line they use to try to determine the
numbers, but it's very difficult to determine. In the same fashion
that they determine the deer population and how the tags are
allocated in that area -- and that's done because of the amount
of crop damage reported, as well as the number of car incidents
that take place -- they do the same thing with bears. When there's
a large number reporting and a large number of incidents, they
potentially have the opportunity to increase the tag allocations
in that area to deal with that.
The study in 2003 was designed to effectively
determine what is in the best interest not only of people but
of bears as a population as well. With the large number and potentially
increasing number of incidents, I expect we sshould see more.
The one thing I'm disappointed about in the resolution is that
we should have concrete actions in the resolution. I will be
supporting it, as I did -- and I've been on the record. I've
been on radio shows stating that I think the spring bear hunt
is something that should be continued. It doesn't help me a lot
in Oshawa, but it's a personal belief. In this particular resolution,
I think some more action specifically telling us what and how
we can move forward would be far more positive.
 Mr.
Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): First of all, I want to thank my colleague from Nipissing,
Ms. Smith, for bringing this resolution forward. In my opinion,
this debate is long overdue. Indeed, there should be little argument
that the province should be doing whatever it can to protect
all its citizens from the nuisance bear problem. The question
then becomes, what exactly should we do to deal with this increasingly
dangerous situation?
In my opinion, we should begin by listening
to the people who are affected by this problem: our constituents,
all of whom are northern residents, for those of us in the north.
For the past several years, I have been inundated with calls
from many constituents terrified as a result of their encounters
with bears. Regardless of what ministry officials say about the
number of calls they've received, this past summer was the worst
in terms of calls I've received. People from Marathon, Terrace
Bay, Schreiber -- in fact, every community I represent -- contacted
me by phone to tell their story. On two occasions, constituents
actually called me at home while the bear was clawing at their
door. Bears are wandering through towns, school yards, backyards,
around daycare centers. They are clearly a real danger to our
citizens.
Frankly, my constituents become very frustrated
when they are told that the problem is a result of a bad berry
crop, or they're told to empty their bird feeders or to tightly
enclose their household garbage or to be sure to clean their
barbecue grill. They are already doing this -- perhaps they need
to be reminded, but they are already doing this -- but the problem
continues to get worse.
What we do know is that there are more bears
out there than ever, and they appear to have lost their fear
of human contact. As we all know, deadly tragedies occurred this
past summer, and I fear more will take place unless we deal with
the situation in a more aggressive manner. At a time when we
are hearing discussions of a bear cull, I want to put on the
record today a call for a similar discussion on the return of
the spring bear hunt -- a more humane, controlled hunt, for sure,
but a return nonetheless.
I don't think that anyone in this House would
dispute that the cancellation of the hunt in 1999 was purely
politically motivated. Not even my Conservative colleagues across
the floor, whose government made that decision, would disagree
with me. Indeed, the consequences of that decision have been
economic devastation for tourist lodge operators in the north
and, I would argue, the truly dangerous situation we are facing
today. While I do not think that the return of the spring bear
hunt will immediately improve the problem, I have become convinced
that an improved, properly run spring hunt will make a difference.
But perhaps just as importantly, agreement
to begin discussion on the return of the hunt would send an important
message to northerners, the message that we are listening to
them. We told northerners during the last campaign that decisions
affecting the north would be made by northerners. I believe that
was a commitment that was genuinely and sincerely made, but in
light of the serious concerns regarding the human-bear contact
over the past several summers, it's become all the more important
that we live up to that commitment. Certainly, a reopening of
the discussion regarding reinstatement of the spring bear hunt
would send a very clear message that we are indeed listening.
 Mr.
Tim Peterson (Mississauga South):
In the very brief time, it's great to wrap up on behalf of the
members from Nipissing, Sault Ste. Marie, Thunder Bay-Atikokan,
Thunder Bay-Superior North and Oshawa.
I would like to raise this challenge with
the member from Oshawa and the member from Timmins: that we approach
our leaders to look at revising and helping to get the bear hunt
back. The official position of all the parties is that the bear
hunt should be banned. I think it's incumbent on us as backbenchers
to take a personal challenge to our leaders and talk to them
about that.
From my point of view as the parliamentary
assistant to the Minister of Tourism, the effect on tourism in
the north has been devastating. It's approximately a $40-million
industry. As part of my job as parliamentary assistant, I did
a trails consultation across Ontario. In northern Ontario we
have the largest and best-run snowmobile trails in all the world.
The 43,000 kilometres of snowmobile trails allow us access to
nature and allow us to understand our Canadian heritage, for
the real Ontarian personality is built in northern Ontario in
our interaction with all forms of nature, including the wildlife
there.
It is great to support this motion. I compliment
the member from Nipissing for bringing it forward. I also hope
it leads to concrete action.
The Deputy Speaker:
Ms. Smith, you have two minutes to reply.
Ms.
Smith: I'd like to thank those who
joined us in this debate this morning: the members for Parry
Sound-Muskoka, Timmins-James Bay, Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant, Oshawa,
Thunder Bay-Superior North, Sault Ste. Marie, Thunder Bay-Atikokan
and Mississauga South.
I'd like to address a couple of the concerns
and issues that were raised by some of my colleagues. I was delighted
to hear that the member for Parry Sound-Muskoka is onside with
us on this, because his caucus is notoriously not onside for
a lot of northern issues. It's good to see you're supporting
the north.
As many of you will remember, it was former
Premier Mike Harris, who formerly represented the riding of Nipissing,
who cancelled the bear hunt and left a lot of northerners feeling
betrayed. The basis of that decision was not scientific, but
was strictly political. Now we have the leader of the Conservative
Party, John Tory, up in North Bay, and when asked about nuisance
bears, he said more study was needed. I'm glad to see that some
of his colleagues, members of his caucus, are onside for the
reinstatement of the spring bear hunt. I hope you will have some
success in convincing your leader of the need for it.
With respect to the comments from the member
for Timmins-James Bay, I have been clear throughout my campaign
in Nipissing and here in the House that I am in support of the
return of a limited spring bear hunt. I've been clear on that
since the beginning; I haven't wavered. There have to be some
restrictions, but I believe that the return of the spring bear
hunt is part of the management process that will reduce the number
of nuisance bears in the north and increase the safety of our
residents, including our children and seniors. I think it's a
sad indication that your party here, represented by seven members,
three of whom are from the north, cannot see fit to support the
return of the spring bear hunt, but I leave it to you to convince
your fellow members that it's needed here in the community.
You also asked about the education process.
Our government has in fact invested $900,000 in 165 projects
involving prevention, education and awareness through the bear
wise program. I know first-hand from my discussions with MNR
staff members in my area that they're in the schools, teaching
our children about how to be bear wise. I think that is a really
important part of this whole strategy on how to increase safety
and deal with some of the concerns that have been raised here
this morning.
Comment on the MPP Monique Smith's Motion, and the
parliamentary discussion on
NOTO's Bulletin Board
|
www.OntarioBlackBears.com |
|
|
|
Ontario's Problems With Black Bears
~As Complicated As Nature Itself~ |
|
|
Travel & Adventure in Canada - Reisen & Abenteuer in
Kanada
|
Advertising
|