I’ve written about the citizens of Alberta being ignored by Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation Cindy Ady and her Plan for Parks – a ten year framework for managing Alberta’s Provincial Parks – link to post here. Now it’s time to throw the research community under the bus. Evidence-based scientific management and consultation is cited as a key component within the plan. However I’m somewhat perplexed by what is expected of science that is already at odds with the existing framework of the Minister’s plan. The evidence that is to guide the decision making process calls for increased protection of critical habitats. Quite at odds with what the Minister’s plan is proposing – more infrastructure, more recreation, and more off-road access to wildspaces.

Since July 1999 Alberta’s Endangered Species Conservation Committee (AESCC) assessed 52 species native to the Province with the following conclusions: 13 are considered Endangered, 11 Threatened, 14 Species as Special Concern, 7 Data Deficient, and 7 (including the grizzly bear) In Process of being assessed.   Every 5 years Alberta’s Sustainable Resources Development Department (SRD) publishes a detailed report for species considered at risk or requiring further study to determine their respective status.  According to the Sustainable Resource Development web page these reports are

“authored and/or reviewed by individuals with unique local expertise in the biology and management of each species”

and cite the latest research available.

I mention this because the sidebar (right) contains passages from these Wildlife Status reports – which can be found on the Alberta Government Sustainable Resource Development Status of Alberta Wildlife web page link here – that clearly demonstrates the research community recognizes habitat loss as a major threat to the long term survival of a number of keystone Albertan species. Further, a number of species specific “Recovery” plans recommending swift action to curtail habitat loss and protect wildspaces have been approved by the Government yet none have yielded any significant success. Why? For the most part the Rovery Plans are never properly implemented. Critical habitat loss continues and little is being done to set aside much needed protected spaces.

A parks system that doesn’t follow it’s own scientific agenda… How exactly is this evidence-based management?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.