WILDLIFE INVENTORY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Wildlife and wildlife habitats often come in conflict with development.  Therefore government regulations have been developed to protect certain groups of wildlife such as rare, endangered or threatened species.  New development must often come to grips with these concerns.  Polson Environmental has a long working experience in this area

Predicting and Resolving Problems Related to Commercial Development and Wildlife Conflicts:

• As more and more development takes place, there is a need to identify existing and in particular, future potential conflicts and provide avoidance procedures in early project planning.

• It is far less expensive in time and dollars to avoid problems than to attempt to fix or mitigate them at a later date.

Wildlife Inventories:

• Such inventories often rely largely on literature reviews.   However, the reviewer’s general knowledge of wildlife also plays a large role.  A brief field trip to the area is often helpful. The interpretation of high-resolution satellite imagery and aerial photographs before any field work increases the value of the field visit and may at times replace a field visit when either a visit is not practical or the study is at the wrong time of the year to gather meaningful wildlife observations.

• Such reviews are generally now a requirement for most developments.

• These restrictions are put in place by the government to avoid or reduce the impact of the development on specific species or groups of wildlife.

Assessment of Habitats for Threatened, Rare & Endangered Wildlife Species. Development of solutions to minimize impacts:

• This is now almost a universal requirement for any development.

• This is often tied in with the previous point.  Crucial to this area of study is personnel with a good working knowledge of wildlife.  Principals of Polson Environmental has worked in most areas of wildlife since the early 1970s.

TASTE AVERSION

Mr. Polson has been interested in using taste aversion to reduce the impact of predators on domestic livestock for several years.  The technique was developed by Dr. Karl Gustavson, originally from the University of North Dakota in Fargo.

Taste Aversion is a technique where a wildlife species is encouraged to eat baits that have been laced with a tasteless and odourless chemical that causes a short-term severe illness and vomiting.  The immediate effect is short-lived, however, and the predator quickly recovers.    This technique works on the subconscious.  The predator now attributes the illness to the bait which is chosen to resemble whatever we want them to avoid.  For example, honey & bees wax for bee colonies and bears, meat and hide of cattle and/or horses for wolves predating livestock, and mutton and/or lamb wrapped in sheepskin for coyotes predating sheep.  The effect remains for about a year or more but is not passed on to the young.  The baits, however, are not detritus to the environment and can be continued to be placed in the area by the affected farmer or managers once the system is set up.  

Mr. Polson successfully illustrated the use of this technology in preventing bear damage to beehives.  The technique has a broad range of potential uses in wildlife management.  

However, it has one characteristic that causes concern for many people.  It does not kill the predator!  Instead, the predator remains in the area, now living off of natural prey.  This concern is, however, one of its greatest advantages.  The predator remains but cannot eat the targeted species for example cattle, horses, sheep or bee components in a bee hive.  By remaining, the averted animal helps to dissuade other individuals of the same species from moving into the area.

The requirements for this technique are simple but unbending.  Success is measured in an “all or none” context!  It either is done properly and works, or improperly, and does not work or works to a limited extent.  Partial success is not success!

There are many potential uses for this technique.  However, with any new technology (only new to Canada), it is often difficult to convince the appropriate people to work with the new technology.  However, with public sympathies moving heavily towards non-lethal means of dealing with wildlife/human problems, taste aversion along with fencing and other protection strategies to avoid human/wildlife conflicts are becoming increasingly attractive.

Some Potential Uses of Aversion Techniques:

• Bears & Beehives

• Sheep & coyotes

• Ravens & newborn calves

• Coyotes & newborn calves

• Grizzle bears and calves - Alberta Foothills

• Wolves and cattle & horses in large pastures

• One unique one - Grizzly bears and trains in the Banff area of Alberta where they are attracted onto the railway tracks by grain spilled from grain cars travelling from the Prairies to the coast.

For a video example click here