Caribou, where art thou?
According to the Committee on the
Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Boreal Caribou (formerly referred to
as Woodland Caribou) occur in naturally low densities in mature boreal forest
habitats. The Boreal Region is within the sub-arctic and cold continental
climate zones, is characterized by long, severe winters and short summers.
Vegetation is dominated by conifers. With rare exception, there are few
major population centres in this region and very little infrastructure.
Based primarily on observation rather than any scientific studies it has
been speculated that the Boreal Caribou range has receded northward to
approximately the 50th parallel within Ontario and Quebec with some isolated
southern populations such as the Slate Islands.
Gord Miller, a former Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, in his
2010/2011 annual report commented that for woodland caribou "to date only
crude population estimates and delineation of herd ranges have been publicly
available". This bears the question, why? And if all we have are
"crude estimates" then how were they identified as an endangered
species?
When the population is sparsely distributed how does one get a
reasonably accurate census? Similarly, back at the end of the 19th century,
which is the time that most references to their former range refer to, how
could they have been observed with confidence? The only access at that time in
Northwestern Ontario was either by canoe routes or the recently established
CPR. Even today occasional sightings are made far south of what is considered
their current southern limit. Could those sighting from over a century ago have
been of transients?
Even I have speculated that the Boreal Caribou may have moved north to
where there is no interaction with humans. But on reflection that does not
explain for example the herd in the Onaman Lake area that is south of the CNR
which one would assume would be the southern boundary if that premise is true.
I have tried to find reliable research
on Boreal Caribou and unfortunately there is essentially none prior to 2000 and
very little since. Yet we see articles with statements such as "Canada’s
woodland caribou herds and the habitat they need continue to decline" yet
no supporting evidence is given. This is further exasperated by what little
"data" is presented. For example, in 2017 it was reported that
"none of Canada’s 51 caribou herds is growing. Twenty are in decline and
not enough is known about 21 of them to even estimate their population
trend".
So, none are growing? So what? where in
the natural world does a species, other than man, continue to have its
population "grow" when it is always under stress from disease,
weather and predation? A well documented example is the relationship
between snowshoe hare and lynx. Thanks to very good records kept by the Hudson
Bay Company due to the fur trade we know that snowshoe hare population is not
constant and in fact is cyclical between a population peak and collapse.
Similarly, the lynx population rises and falls in sympathy with the hare
population although with a bit of a lag.
Is there a similar relationship between
wolves and ruminants such as caribou? What about predation by black bear? That
is the natural world in action and while we have hard data in the case of hares
and lynx, we have none for ruminants, especially caribou, other than hearsay.
The Canadian authour Farley Mowat first
achieved notoriety in 1952 with his book "People of the Deer". He
documented how the inland Inuit suffered extreme hardship due to the
inexplicable collapse of the local barren land caribou herd. Again, other than
pure speculation, no reason could be determined why the caribou numbers
collapsed nor why they eventually recovered.
In 2017, the Chronicle Journal
published a series of articles in their special supplement "The Outdoors
Guide" written by Tim Timmermann, a retired biologist formerly with MNR,
titled "Where Have all the Moose Gone?". It is interesting to read as
it documents the change from caribou being the dominant ruminant in
Northwestern Ontario around 1900 to them being supplanted by moose. This is
based strictly on eyewitness reports but what it does establish is that
population numbers of wildlife vary and, as no research has been done, only
speculation can be made as to the possible reasons. But he does make a good
summary statement: "Change is a 'way of life', and little remains the same
for any length of time. Such is the case of many wildlife populations that 'ebb
and flow' over time. Moose [and caribou] are no exception and densities have
and will fluctuate with passing years".
When it comes to caribou there is only one thing
certain; we know very little about the species and only in the current century
has much research been done. So why is a species that is found right across the
width of Canada with its range pretty well defined by the northern half of the
boreal forest a) considered "endangered" and b) the source of public
policy when there is no evidence that human contact has had a negative impact
on its range, both real or imagined?
In summary the real problem is the prevalence of junk science, such as
that used to substantiate “solutions” for a non-existent problem. Such junk
science is used to fool just about everyone who is not a scientist and even
many who are into believing this nonsense. Unfortunately, the victims of the
government policies enacted to fight a non-existent foe are we, the general
public. We need to take a stand now against the environmentalists who spew this
junk science to our collective detriment!
