The City has been reviewing its Wildlife Strategy, a document that outlines how we interact with our wildlife neighbours. The report will go to committee on June 17, 2024 for consideration, and to Council at a later date.
While reviewing the strategy, I made some first-impression notes. Here's what I saw:
Draft Wildlife Strategy - live notes
I’m reading through the Wildlife Strategy that went online last night. It will be tabled at a committee meeting on June 17. Here are my immediate thoughts as I read it:
This strategy is an update from the 2013 doc. It admits a lot has changed, including impacts of climate change. And public opinion has shifted: residents want animals that enter the city rescued, not killed.
Last year’s shooting of a young bear by police caused outrage and much of the public does not want it to happen again. This report is supposed to address that issue, among other things.
From the top, the report talks about “wildlife-transmitted disease” but focuses on Lyme Disease. I don’t think ticks are what anyone meant by “wildlife” but that’s an issue we can discuss.
Report notes that By-law Enforcement is responsible for transfer of sick, injured, and orphaned wildlife to Humane Society, vets, and rehabs.
On to public feedback: residents’ priorities are better education to prevent conflicts; reduction or elimination of lethal wildlife practices, including for beavers and coyotes; and asks that the strategy include protections for birds. More work is needed on birds…
Animal rehab orgs complain that the City completely depends on them to take in injured and orphaned animals but doesn’t fund them at all. This does seem unfair.
Big section on the Official Plan, which calls for protection of habitat. Says City will prioritize habitat protection and purchases. This is good.
Establishes advisory board to meet twice yearly. Includes experts!
Calls to review the city’s wildlife web pages twice/year, to better identify who to call about wildlife (this has been a big problem) and to do more social media about animals.
Great recommendations to consider locations for wildlife crossings over/under roads and highways, something Ottawa has lacked
Big section on mitigation costs – the City has to mitigate for protected species at risk under provincial law. This means that when a developer wants to expand and it might affect critical habitat, the City has to pay for habitat maintenance and replacement. The city wants to find a way to charge someone for this.
The 2013 report recommended the hiring of a wildlife specialist. They never hired anyone. This report recommends that too, but has found temporary funding.
That’s good news. But the report also depends on that one staffer to solve the problem of big mammals (bears, moose, etc) entering neighbourhoods. I think this needs clarity…
Beavers: City currently hires trappers to kill beavers that dam “drains” (e.g. streams, rivers, ditches). Many residents have called for this to stop.
Report recommends continuing current practices while looking into alternatives. This is definitely an area I’d like to see further considered…
Coyotes: report recognizes that coyotes are less dangerous than lightening and that killing coyotes doesn’t actually make a difference. Recommends working with Coyote Watch Canada to educate the public. $48K/year.
Finally, says clearing vegetation in spring and summer is problematic for breeding birds and animals, but admits that limiting them to fall and winter is impractical. No solutions offered, so we’ll need to work on this one, too.
Overall, many residents will be disappointed in this report. It makes some positive changes, but also sticks with the status quo on several pieces.
I’ll continue working on this file in the coming weeks.