Polar Bear Conservation &
Management in Canada:
2013-2015 Update
Meeting of the Parties to the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears
Sept 1-3, 2015
Outline
1. Context
2. Monitoring
3. Traditional Knowledge
4. Provincial/territorial and federal updates
5. National Management plan
6. Harvest
7. Other Economic development factors
8. Enforcement
9. Human-polar bear conflict
10.Conclusions
2
1. Context
• Canada has a large land mass with diverse conditions
• Federal system that aims at having decisions made at
•
•
•
•
relevant levels (not centralized)
Land Claims Agreements (Constitutionally protected): comanagement between governments and Aboriginal groups,
including Wildlife Management Boards.
Nine of Canada’s 13 polar bear subpopulations are shared
nationally or internationally.
The changing Arctic environment has implications for
management actions; systems must be reactive and
responsive to changing pressures.
What may look like a complex jurisdictional environment is in
fact an effective, dynamic and robust system.
3
4
1. Context:
Key instrument for coordination
• Polar Bear Technical Committee
– Feb 2014 and 2015
• Polar Bear Administrative Committee
– May 2014 and 2015
• User to User meetings
– Davis Strait, May 2015 – Allocation of harvest
– Southern Hudson Bay, Sept 2014 – Harvest & Allocation
• International Engagement
–
–
–
–
CMS: CoP - November 2014, Science Council - July 2014
Southern Beaufort Sea meeting: December 2014
Canada/US polar bear NGO forum: June 2015
Range States CAP drafting meeting: March 2015, Nov 2014, May
2014
– European Union: May 2014
– US Conservtion an management plan drafting: Feb 2014
5
2. Monitoring
• Building on a solid base:
– 40 yeas of monitoring
– on average Canada invested an average of CAD1.5M/yr over the past 19 years
• Risk-based approach:
– More frequent inventories for subpopulations with concerns and pressures
• A 15-year inventory schedule to plan and track survey efforts:
– The plan represents an increased investment in order to implement a more
intensive monitoring schedule
• Development of alternative/new methods:
–
–
–
–
Cost effectiveness
Increase speed or frequency of inventories
Addressing concerns over the handling of bears
Meeting information needs for conservation and management
• Providing a comprehensive base for enforcement and trade control (e.g.
genetic identification of bears).
6
2. Monitoring: Planning at 3 levels
• Regional
– Monitoring requirements incorporated into
regulations & management plans in some
jurisdictions
– Input from local communities, traditional knowledge
& science to establish priorities
• National
– PBTC (technical advice) and PBAC (management
coordination)
– National Polar Bear Conservation Strategy for
Canada (2011): Annex 1
– National population inventory schedule
• International
– Circumpolar Action Plan
– Bilateral agreements: Canada-Nunavut-Greenland,
US-Canada
7
2. Monitoring: Completed
Inventoried
within last:
5 years
10 years
20 years
>20 years
8
2. Monitoring: In progress & Planned
Inventoried
within last:
5 years
10 years
20 years
In-progress:
within
1-3
years
Planned:
within 5 years
9
2. Monitoring: Conclusions
• Baseline monitoring of polar bears in Canada is extensive
•
•
•
•
& coordinated at all levels.
Most populations in Canada have been subject to recent
inventories. Those remaining are scheduled for inventory
in the near future.
Significant investments in alternative monitoring
methodologies have increased the versatility and
responsiveness of Canada’s monitoring scheme.
All methods have differing assumptions and biases.
The combination of monitoring and research provides a
solid foundation for conservation and fast, adaptive
responses.
10
3. Traditional Knowledge (TK)
• Moving to systematic documentation and validation of
TK for each region:
– Inuvialuit Settlement Region
▪ published 2015
– Nunavik interviews underway
▪ publication expected in 2015/2016
– Nunavut
▪ Baffin Bay TK study
– Nunatsiavut
▪ Torngat TK study
11
5. National Management Plan
Special Concern
SARA
Threatened
Endangered
Range State Action Plan
Roles and
responsibilities
SARA Management Plan
Coordination of
processes
12
Newfoundland
and Labrador
Quebec
Nunavut
Ontario
Manitoba
Territories & Yukon
Northwest
Norway
Russia
US
Greenland
Conservation Strategy
Jurisdictional
Plans
• Codify
system
• Do’s and
Don’ts
• Deliverables
and
schedules
• Set timeline.
6. Harvest
Key management decisions (2013-2015)
• M’Clintock Channel
–
–
Public hearing held in June 2014
Decision made
• Southern Hudson Bay
–
–
–
September 2014 Voluntary Agreement for TAH signed by Parties
February 2014 Public Hearing held by NMRWB
Decision expected: Fall 2015
• Western Hudson Bay
–
Decision currently with NWMB
• Foxe Basin
-
Board had a hearing December 2013
Decision made
• Davis Strait
–
–
–
–
With Nunavik’s desire to have an official TAH for DS the jurisdictions are currently
undergoing new discussions
User-to-User Meeting May 2015 (discussed notional allocation)
Board hearings to take place in fall of 2015 (harvest level to be recommended)
Decision expected winter 2015/2016
13
6. Harvest & Quota
14
6. Harvest and Export
15
6. Recent Export data
Number of hide sold at Fur Auction House
6. Harvest Management
• Harvest
– Continue with existing system of adaptive co-management
– All human-caused mortality is applied to established quotas
(subsistence harvest, defense of life or property kills, nonresident hunt)
– Quotas are set according to the status of a subpopulation and
are reviewed regularly
• Ensure Aboriginal communities realize full
social/economic and livelihood benefits
17
7. Other Economic Development Factor
• Opportunities for economic development in the Canadian Arctic
– Resource extraction (mining, oil and gas, etc.).
– Arctic shipping.
• Eco-tourism: growing interest in opportunities for the public to view
polar bears in nature
– In Manitoba - Licensing and regulation of eco-tourism operators under
The Resource Tourism Operators Act
• Provides both opportunities and pressures
18
8. Enforcement
• Domestic
– Poaching and illegal trade continues to be very low in Canada
▪ User engagement is key
– Strengthening our national system
▪ Implementing RFID tag & a genetic database
▪ Centralization of permitting and reporting
▪ Continuous improvement in database: one of the best harvest/trade
data sources worldwide
– Objective for the next several years
▪ Implementation of CITES electronic permitting (2016)
• International
– Canada supports international efforts to oppose illegal take and
trade of any species
▪ Leadership at Interpol
▪ Co-sponsorship of UNGA resolution on illegal wildlife trade
▪ Direct investment in Kenya Canada (via Interpol) provided training for
African Nation wildlife enforcement
19
9. Human-Polar Bear Conflicts
• Increasing in some regions of
•
•
•
Canada
Concern for residents and
bears in communities
Manitoba – a world leader
– Polar Bear Alert Program
Other deterrent programs in
various stages of
development
Minister of Conservation/Polar Bear Management in Manitoba
20
10. Conclusion
Focus over short-term
• Focus on having a comprehensive management system
in place.
– Territorial/provincial systems largely in place. Focus now on
addressing gaps mostly at the inter-jurisdictional level and
regarding long-term planning;
– Monitoring coordination and planning ;
– Management plans (Provincial/Territorial & National);
– Up-to-date subpopulation estimates and careful management of
resources ;
– Cooperation and collaboration.
21
10. Conclusions
• Canada continues to place priority on conservation and
•
management actions for polar bear
Ensuring effective and comprehensive systems are in
place to:
▪ Provide best information to managers;
▪ Engage communities and their leaders;
▪ Conduct the necessary science and traditional knowledge studies
to inform conservation and management actions;
▪ Strengthen harvest management systems, and coordination
between jurisdictions, where appropriate.
• Canada continues to support a balanced approach to conservation
that maintains cultural traditions, and provides opportunities for
cultural social and livelihood development in communities that live
within the polar bear range.
22
Thank you
ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ
23