Moving forward on a Caribou…

ERO number

019-4995

Comment ID

59843

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses

Comment

Moving forward on a Caribou Section 11 Agreement is a positive step for the province of Ontario.

However I have a number of questions and comments regarding the proposal as it is currently written.

Is there any evidence that local populations are self-sustaining in protected areas? If not, why does there seem to be such an emphasis on more conservation/protected areas? Where is the science supporting this approach? Protected areas in and of themselves are subject to forest dynamics and succession and natural disturbance events. While an area may currently support a population it may not be the case in the longer-term. How will this be managed through time?

Having dealt with scientific research activities in the past it is difficult to envision meaningful science being conducted, analysed and reported within the 5 year time frame where it may only commence in years 3 and 4. The parties should agree to fund and examine longer term science programs to support science-based management decisions.

The program as currently proposed is too narrowly focused on current range retention and not animal population. Field of dreams thinking (build/maintain it and they will come) will do little to sustain or expand the population of caribou. Shouldn't availability of habitat and population supports be considered at the same time?

The program as currently proposed is too highly focused on habitat in isolation of other factors possibly affecting population migration. Examples - climate change and related/unrelated patterns in northward migration of species such as deer (and others). Are Caribou being pushed out of formerly occupied areas? Will the governments take action to stop range expansion of species competing for habitat, preying on caribou or otherwise making formerly occupied areas undesirable?

How can we acknowledge and accept that climate change is occurring on one hand and at the same time want to maintain/preserve/conserve the status quo in terms of habitat availability, ranges and numbers?