The Wolves of Algonquin Provincial Park
Algonquin Provincial Park is the largest protected area for the eastern wolf in North America. In the last several years, concern has been expressed about the likelihood of a decline in the population of the wolves of the park. Although wolves were historically hunted in the park, they currently receive protection within its boundaries.
However, an issue central to the viability of this population is human-caused mortality outside the park. These wolves frequently travel beyond the park boundaries, resulting in high mortality rates due to hunting and trapping. With a few notable exceptions, the Ministry of Natural Resources continues to allow a year-round open season on wolves with no bag-limits across the rest of the province. In fact, the Province of Ontario had offered a bounty on wolves up until 1972.
Scientists believe that the eastern wolf is found mainly in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence regions of Quebec and Ontario. The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) estimates the number of eastern wolves is 2,000 individuals spread among approximately 500 packs. The highest population densities are reportedly found in southwestern Quebec and southeastern Ontario, particularly in Algonquin Provincial Park. The eastern wolf has been extirpated from the more populated southern portions of its range due to the loss of habitat. COSEWIC classifies the eastern wolf as a subspecies (Canis lupus lycaon) of grey wolf. It also has designated the eastern wolf as being of “special concern.” However, in its own system of listing species at risk, MNR describes the status of the eastern wolf as “indeterminate,” and the ministry also considers it to be a subspecies of grey wolf.
In 1998, MNR established the Algonquin Wolf Advisory Group (AWAG) to assess the status of wolves in Algonquin Provincial Park. The purpose of the group was “to provide recommendations to the Minister of Natural Resources on an Adaptive Management Plan to ensure the long-term conservation of the eastern (Algonquin) grey wolves of Algonquin Provincial Park and surrounding areas.” AWAG included representatives from local communities, government, hunting and trapping organizations, environmental organizations, and the academic community.
In February 2000, AWAG hosted a Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) workshop to provide an independent review of the available scientific data on the wolves of Algonquin. Sixty participants attended the workshop, providing extensive input. The PHVA report was received by AWAG for consideration on August 10, 2000. This report recommended that further scientific evaluation is needed to determine the taxonomic classification of the eastern wolf. The report also recommended that the full range of the eastern wolf, beyond the boundaries of Algonquin, should be assessed.
The taxonomic classification of the eastern wolf, particularly whether it is a distinct species, has significant implications for its conservation measures. In following COSEWIC’s classification of the eastern wolf as subspecies of grey wolf, MNR is not obliged to modify its statutory and regulatory frameworks extensively. However, the PHVA report concludes that the available scientific information suggests that the eastern wolf “should not be considered a subspecies of the Grey Wolf,” implying that it should instead be a distinct species. This conclusion has also been reflected in the greater scientific community.
On December 5, 2000, AWAG submitted a report, The Wolves of Algonquin Provincial Park, to the ministry, summarizing their findings and providing 24 recommendation The report was posted on the Environmental Registry as an information notice, and comments were invited from January 15 to March 15, 2001. The purpose of this posting was “to invite public response to the 24 recommendations made by the Advisory Group, and as information to assist MNR in the development of future policy proposals.” This posting received comments from 1,708 individuals and 34 organizations. Four petitions were also received with a total of 1,880 signatures. MNR states that “seventy-six percent of respondents indicated support for the protection of park wolves going beyond that recommended in the report, either through a year-round prohibition on the hunting and trapping of wolves in the townships around the park or through prohibition of these activities within 10km of the park boundary.”
Almost a year later, in November 2001, MNR placed a proposal notice on the Environmental Registry for a 30-day public comment period. The ministry sought to implement all 24 recommendations from AWAG’s report, and expanded the recommendation to place a 30-month moratorium on the regulated hunting and trapping of wolves to include the 39 townships surrounding the park. On December 20, 2001, MNR made the decision to amend Ontario Regulation 670/98 (Open Seasons — Wildlife) under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, putting into effect the 30-month moratorium. On February 21, 2002, MNR posted the decision notice on the Registry. The ECO received a complaint from the public with regard to the two-month delay in posting the decision notice.
MNR received 1,041 comments on its proposal notice. Thirty of these responses were petitions, totalling 1,188 signatures. The majority of commenters stated that MNR did not go far enough in its proposal and most commenters sought a longer or permanent moratorium. In contrast, much of the dissenting opinion sought a return to AWAG’s recommendations and its more limited protection of the wolves MNR did follow general public sentiment on this issue, but failed to explain in the decision notice how it incorporated any of the public comments.
As was also recommended in AWAG’s report, MNR committed to developing a “science strategy” to monitor the status of the wolves. MNR asserted that the ministry “intends to monitor park wolves during the 30-month moratorium to assess its effect and the effect of other management actions on these wolves.” A decision on whether or not to extend the moratorium will be based on the results of a “before and after” evaluation of the moratorium.
ECO Comment
The ECO believes that the 30 months provided for the monitoring program is insufficient. It is unlikely that there will be any detectable changes in the wolf population size before the decision on whether or not to renew the moratorium must be made in the spring of 2004. These concerns were also reflected in the public comments. MNR’s science strategy was not formally approved until the end of March 2002. Further, monitoring did not occur during the two-month strike by the Ontario Public Service Employees Union. Even without these delays, 30 months does not allow for sufficient time to conduct such an ambitious and important monitoring program. Because of its environmental significance, the ECO also encourages MNR to post its final assessment of the monitoring program and the ministry’s proposed direction on the future of the moratorium on the Registry for public comment.
It is difficult to distinguish visually between eastern wolves and coyotes. Therefore, not protecting both species from hunting and trapping risks the accidental deaths of eastern wolves. It is for this reason that MNR has established a closed season for both wolves and coyotes in the geographic townships of Hagarty, Richards, and Burns since 1993. ECO agrees with the many commenters who suggested that the 30-month moratorium should have also included a year-round closed season on the hunting and trapping of coyotes in all 39 affected townships.
The ECO encourages MNR to maintain the moratorium on the hunting and trapping of eastern wolves in the townships surrounding Algonquin Provincial Park until such time as the population is scientifically demonstrated to be viable. Such action would be consistent with MNR’s Statement of Environmental Values and its use of the precautionary principle. It would also be consistent with the minister’s original terms of reference to undertake an adaptive management approach with regard to this issue. Given the high level of public interest in the eastern wolf, MNR should also periodically inform the public as to the progress of the monitoring program.
The ECO is concerned that MNR did not follow the spirit of the EBR with regard to this issue. MNR received more than a thousand public comments on the Environmental Registry proposal notice. However, as the decision was implemented the day after the comment period ended, it seems unlikely that MNR properly considered all the public comments. MNR did follow general public sentiment on this issue, but it did not explain in the decision notice how it incorporated any of the public comments.
Further, given that the amendment to the regulation included a sun-setting clause for the 30-month moratorium, the public may not have a formal opportunity to comment in 2004 when it ends. ECO encourages MNR to post any new directions with regard to this issue on the Registry for public comment, including any decision not to extend the moratorium.
| Recommendation 13:
The ECO recommends that the Ministry of Natural Resources maintain the moratorium on the hunting and trapping of eastern wolves in the townships surrounding Algonquin Provincial Park until such time as the population is scientifically demonstrated to be viable. |
| This is an article from the 2001/02 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2002. "The Wolves of Algonquin Provincial Park." Developing Sustainability, ECO Annual Report, 2001-02. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 101-105.
