| This alert has expired.
Please
click here for current alerts. |
YOUR
HELP IS URGENTLY NEEDED!
THE FUTURE OF
WILDLIFE REHABILITATION IN ONTARIO IS AT STAKE
Re: Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR)
Registry Number PB04E6022
A Broken Promise:
In spite of the McGuinty Liberal’s promise to address
the wildlife rehabilitation crisis created by the Ministry
of Natural Resources, the Ministry has quietly posted new
regulations that will, in fact, make the current crisis
even worse and eliminate what little help is left for
wildlife in Ontario.
Click here for an outline
of the issues and problems with proposed regulations.
A province-wide Coalition has been formed to send a
strong message of protest to the Premier. Given the short
time available, a sign-on letter has been prepared that we
hope you will be willing to sign and send to Premier
McGuinty.
Here’s how you can help:
Click for sign-on letter
and follow these instructions:
- Make
copies of the attached letter and get as many supporters
as possible to forward their copy to Premier McGuinty
with a copy to David Ramsay as Minister of Natural
Resources and a copy to your MPP. Remember to print your
name and full address above your signature on the
letter. Letters must be mailed by regular mail, not e-mail.
- Remember to copy your MPP. You should type in his/her
name under David Ramsay’s so that it appears on their
copies as well. While not essential, it will help if you
add a note to your MPP’s copy along the lines of “I’ll
be calling your office in a few days to see how you
intend to take this issue forward as it is not only an
important one to this community but there needs to be
assurance that the government we elect has the integrity
to honour its commitments”. A quick phone call to the MPP’s constituency assistant a few days later will
ensure that they understand that you want to know where
they stand on this issue. It does not matter if your
MPP is a Liberal or not, it will still receive political
attention.
CONTACTS:
Premier Dalton McGuinty
Government of Ontario
Rm. 281, Main Legislative Bldg.
Toronto, ON M7A 1A4 |
Hon. David Ramsay
Minister of Natural Resources
6630-99 Wellesley St. W., 6th Floor, Whitney Block
Toronto, ON M7A 1W3 |
Richard Patten, Lib. MPP (Ottawa Centre)
1292 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON K1Y 3A9
Tel: (613) 722-6414 |
Jim Watson, Lib. MPP (Ottawa West Nepean)
201-2249 Carling Avenue
Ottawa, ON K2B 7E9
Tel: (613) 721-8075 |
Philip McNeely, Lib. MPP (Ottawa Orleans)
110 Bearbrook Rd., Unit 6
Gloucester, ON K1B 5R2
Tel: (613) 834-8679 |
Madeleine Meilleur Lib. MPP (Ottawa Vanier)
237 Montreal Road
Vanier, ON K1L 6C7
Tel: (613) 744-4484 |
John Baird, Con. MPP (Nepean Carleton)
119-301 Moodie Drive
Nepean, ON K2H 9C4
Tel: (613) 828-2020 |
Norman Sterling, Con. MPP (Lanark Carleton)
130 Lansdowne Ave., Unit 5
Carleton Place, ON K7C 2T7
Tel: (613) 253-1171 |
Note: If you are not in one of the above ridings or are
unsure of your MPP, you can call 1-800-268-8758 to inquire
or check www.gov.on.ca - go to "contact us", then "contact your MPP" link.
Please Act!! - Orphaned Wildlife are depending on us to
take the time to sign and mail these letters.
! Challenging
unworkable wildlife rehabilitation regulations
Response to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
Proposal: "Enhanced Wildlife Rehabilitation Program" – EBR Registry Number PB04E6022 – has been swift and blunt
from wildlife rehabilitators, animal welfare
organizations and members of the public across Ontario.
Press
releases and letters to the editor from southwestern
Ontario, Toronto and eastern Ontario state:
London: ‘Volunteer Wildlife Custodians Fighting Mad’
– “the proposals are completely unacceptable for
custodians and the wildlife for whom they provide care”
and “the regulations, if enacted, will likely result in
all responsible wildlife custodians returning their
authorizations to the Ministry and withdrawing this
valuable public service”.
Toronto: ‘Wildlife Rehabilitators unfairly and
negatively targeted by the Minister’ – “the negative
attitude and disregard for rehabilitators is evidenced
by the Ministry’s lack of consultation with the broader
rehabilitation community”.
Ottawa: ‘Wildlife Rehabilitation Crisis Spreads
Across Ontario’ – “The McGuinty Liberals have broken
their election promise to develop a new and improved
working relationship between government and community
volunteers on behalf of restoring progressive wildlife
rehabilitation services” and “it is clear that these
proposed regulations are intended to eliminate help for
wildlife”.
The Proposal Issues:
1)
Release Restriction: The proposed 1 km – 5 km
release restriction for orphaned wildlife eliminates
humane and responsible wildlife rehabilitation. While it
is fully accepted that adult wildlife should be returned
to their familiar home territory, orphaned wildlife have
no established territory as they are still within the
nest or den when rescued. The majority of these orphans
have resulted from the adult mother having been trapped
and relocated, killed on a busy road or otherwise
compromised because of extensive development. Putting
young animals, after months of rehabilitative care, back
into these situations would be irresponsible, giving
them no chance of survival and would be severely and
rightfully criticized by residents because of the
impossible situation faced by the animals and the
predictable human/wildlife conflicts it would also
produce.
The
unrealistic release restrictions also mean that single
orphans would have to be raised alone in violation of
international and humane standards, creating habituated
“pets”, dependent on humans, the utter antithesis to
proper wildlife rehabilitation.
The
release restrictions also effectively eliminate the
critical final phase of wildlife rehabilitation, since
many species such as squirrels require a “soft” release,
i.e. transitional care by way of a supplemental food
source and a temporary nesting box in a tree on the
volunteer’s property until the animals can adapt to
being fully on their own. “Soft” release also ensures
the use of private property where the animals are wanted
so there is no conflict with residents.
What is Required? Ontario must simply adopt
standards governing wildlife rehabilitation care and
release that pretty much prevail throughout North
America: Orphaned wildlife should be raised with others
of their own species, to learn proper conspecific social
behaviours, and the group should then be released in
appropriate natural areas, with transitional care for
those species that require it, generally within the city
or county of origin.
2)
Elimination of Foster Families: The proposed
elimination of foster families will mean
drastically-reduced help for wildlife at a time when
development and loss of habitat is creating more demand.
It also fails to recognize that there are already way
too few wildlife rehabilitation programs in Ontario,
given the huge commitment of time and money required on
the part of community volunteers, to respond to public
demand. The elimination of foster families will also
mean that there will be no care available for very
young, eyes-closed, orphans requiring over-night
feedings.
3)
Acceptance Restriction: The restriction that forces
wildlife rehabilitators to turn away orphaned raccoons,
foxes, skunks and bats unless they have been found
within 50 km. of their facility fails to recognize the
exceedingly small number of rehabilitation facilities
and the fact that they are sporadically spread across
Ontario. As frequently occurs, someone finding a baby
raccoon beside a dead mother on a highway on their way
home from a cottage would be very unlikely to find any
assistance within that area. Thus, a compassionate
public will be forced to provide care for these animals,
putting the animals, themselves and their pets at
greater risk than would be the case for experienced and
properly resourced wildlife rehabilitators.
4)
Reporting and Monitoring: The proposed new
requirements will not only place an onerous and
unnecessary additional burden on wildlife rehabilitators
but they are offensive in that they treat community
volunteers in the same manner as they would those who
are intent on breaking the law by poaching or hunting
out of season. Requirements to have “unique temporary
markers” placed on animals, a map of a volunteer’s
property delineating dwelling and rehabilitation areas
and the use of a “witness” to accompany Ministry
inspectors shows the distrust and disrespect of this
Ministry for wildlife rehabilitation.
Wildlife rehabilitation services cannot survive under
the aegis of the Ministry of Natural Resources. It is a
question of such fundamental differences in mandate,
culture and philosophy that there can be no
compatibility. The mandate of the MNR is that of a
regulatory agency concerned with the harvesting of
wildlife, its funding received from licence revenue from
that activity. It holds solely a population level view
of wildlife while wildlife rehabilitation places value
on individual animals that make up populations. The fact
that an increasing number of the public view wildlife in
broader conservation terms than does the Ministry and in
that a majority of the public support wildlife
rehabilitation means that the Ontario government will
soon be forced to address this reality by reflecting
community values and changing public opinion.
The Hypocrisy of Targeting Wildlife Rehabilitation:
What exposes the very transparent deception in the
Ministry’s professed concern about “protecting public
health and the health of wildlife populations” is that
only wildlife rehabilitation is targeted. The Ministry
ignores or does nothing to enforce restrictions on
wildlife removal companies or homeowners who annually
trap and relocate tens of thousands of adult animals
without any regard for the state of their health.
Particularly, when minimal public education efforts by
the Ministry (long recommended by rehabilitators) such
as posting notices in stores selling traps about the
legal restrictions on relocation could make a huge
impact in deterring the practice. It would also
substantially reduce the numbers of orphaned wildlife
needing rehabilitation in the first instance, given that
60-70% of orphaned wildlife are “created” orphans by the
trapping and relocation of the adult.
Compared to the tens of thousands of adult animals
relocated, there is an extremely small number of
orphaned wildlife that are rehabilitated and released in
Ontario each year. In fact, so infinitesimally small
that wildlife rehabilitation serves only as a symbolic
gesture that has little impact on the environment. It
does, however, provide an important outlet and
educational benefit for the growing number of people who
recognize it is our substantial impact on the
environment that has caused the need in the first place.
Furthermore, there are no disease concerns with respect
to rehabilitated orphaned wildlife. As the Ministry well
knows, disease concerns are eliminated by the fact that
orphaned wildlife are cared for under close observation
by experienced rehabilitators, they are regularly tested
and treated for parasites, they are vaccinated against
diseases, they are regularly seen by veterinarians and
they are kept beyond disease incubation periods. This
ensures that the healthy young vaccinated animals that
are released actually provide a disease barrier and
contribute to the health of the general wildlife
population.
What this is Really All About: The public is no
longer fooled with respect to the MNR agenda. It is
increasingly clear that the regressive and unwarranted
regulations imposed on wildlife rehabilitation in
Ontario are due to the fact that the Ministry and its
partners cannot attract multi-millions of tax dollars
for rabies research, testing and operations unless they
can maintain a high degree of public fear that raccoon
rabies is a significant disease threat when, in fact, it
is the lowest public health risk in North America.
Wildlife rehabilitation and its promotion of respect and
understanding for wildlife represents an impediment to
creating this climate of irrational fear. It is,
therefore, a significant threat to rabies funding
programs, particularly at a time of increased
competition from what are serious government spending
priorities.
Abuse of the EBR Process: In July 2002, the MNR
abused the EBR process by posting changes to wildlife
rehabilitation regulations on the basis of intentionally
misrepresented information while fabricating a
non-existent “emergency” to deny public input.
Now,
in spite of two years of strong public protest during
which time the Ontario Liberals, while in Opposition,
presented petitions from over 9,000 residents in 260
communities in the province demanding changes to those
regulations, the changes now proposed by the McGuinty
Liberals, in fact, make matters worse. Perhaps that is
why they have been quietly posted just ten days before
Christmas with little time for public comment, without
any prior consultation with the majority of wildlife
rehabilitators in the province and with parliament
conveniently recessed until March 2005 so there would be
no political opposition to this highly contentious
issue.
The
posting suggests that wildlife rehabilitators in Ontario
have been consulted with respect to these proposed
changes. Nothing could be further from the truth. The
Ontario Wildlife Rehabilitation and Education Network (OWREN)
has never been given the mandate by its members to speak
on their behalf with respect to policy matters. In fact,
wildlife rehabilitators from across the province formed
the Ontario Wildlife Coalition a year ago to challenge
the unethical and opportunistic attempt by the MNR to
co-opt and so transparently manipulate a not-for-profit
organization for a government ministry’s self-serving
purposes.
As
for the Rabies Advisory Council having been consulted
with respect to this EBR, it should be noted that it is
hardly an independent body. Its members are drawn from
federal and provincial government ministries or the
academic community whose budgets rely on rabies funding
and who have benefited significantly from the
extraordinary amount of public funds that has been
allocated to the lowest public health risk disease in
North America.
Summary: The reference by the MNR to these proposed
changes as “enhancements” and the suggestion that the
changes would “improve” care for wildlife is
contemptuous of the public’s intelligence. In fact, the
crisis already created by this Ministry and the severe
criticism it has invoked from animal professionals such
as veterinarians and humane societies as well as the
general public, will only be made worse by these
recommendations. If these regulations are approved, they
will eliminate what little help is left for wildlife in
this province.
While
Ontario has legislation that provides for wildlife
rehabilitation, the bias against it within the MNR has
created such restrictive regulations and negative
attitudes that it is disallowed. Frankly, the
regulations must either be changed and wildlife
rehabilitation housed within a ministry that can
accommodate the public values that support it, or the
legislation should be rescinded. At least that way,
Ontario will stand honestly in one place or the other –
either as a very unprogressive province or it can join
the majority of North American communities that provide
the modern wildlife response demanded by the public.
Click for sign-on letter
January
2005
Premier Dalton McGuinty
Government of Ontario
Rm. 281, Main Legislative Bldg.
Toronto, ON M7A 1A4
Dear Premier McGuinty Re: EBR Registry Number
PB04E6022
I want you,
as Premier, to know of my disappointment and anger with
regard to the changes proposed by the Ministry of Natural
Resources for the rehabilitation of orphaned and injured
wildlife in Ontario. For the Minister to suggest that these
changes would “improve” care for wildlife is contemptuous
of the public’s intelligence.
The crisis already created by this
Ministry will only be made worse by these recommendations.
The proposed care and release regulations (1km and 5km
restrictions) will mean that single orphans will have to be
raised alone in violation of international and humane
standards and, after months of care, put back into busy and
inappropriate areas – effectively eliminating the critical
final phase of wildlife rehabilitation, since many species
require a “soft” release with transitional care provided at
the release site – and eliminating any chance of survival.
The proposed elimination of foster families will mean
drastically-reduced help for wildlife at a time when
development and loss of habitat is creating more demand.
Furthermore, the reporting and monitoring conditions the
MNR would impose on wildlife rehabilitators demonstrate its
negative bias and disrespect for rehabilitators who
volunteer their time and offer a free and much valued
service to communities all over Ontario.
Ontario
must adopt regulations governing wildlife rehabilitation
care and release standards that prevail throughout North
America: orphaned wildlife should be raised with others of
their own species, to learn proper conspecific behaviours,
and the group should then be released together in
appropriate natural areas, generally within the city or
county of origin. Otherwise, wildlife rehabilitators cannot
provide an ethical, responsible service, and you will
rightfully continue to receive strong criticism from
hundreds of members of the public, from all walks of life,
left without help each and every wildlife birthing season.
An Abuse
of the EBR Process and A Broken Promise by your Government:
Your government, while in Opposition, was strongly
critical of the Ministry’s wildlife rehabilitation
regulations, having presented petitions from over 9,000
residents in 260 communities demanding change. You
promised, if elected, that you “would review these
regulations, working with rehabilitators, to develop a new
and improved working relationship between government and
community volunteers”. Instead, these current proposals
were quietly posted just ten days before Christmas with
little time for public input, without any consultation with
the majority of wildlife rehabilitators in the province and
with parliament conveniently recessed until March 2005 so
there would be little political opposition to this highly
contentious issue.
I expect
the EBR process will once again be abused by MNR and that
is why I am directing my comments to you. In July 2002, the
Ministry posted changes to wildlife rehabilitation
regulations on the basis of intentionally misrepresented
information while fabricating a non-existent “emergency” to
deny public input. The current EBR posting states wildlife
rehabilitators have been consulted when, in fact, they
certainly have not.
The
public is no longer fooled with respect to the MNR agenda.
Wildlife rehabilitation and its promotion of respect and
understanding for wildlife undermines the fear-mongering
the Ministry needs to sustain a hugely expensive and
unwarranted rabies budget for the lowest public health risk
in North America. As a taxpayer, I am appalled that so
much funding is being diverted from badly-needed programs
to this boondoggle.
We urge you
to withdraw the EBR posting, to consult with the majority
of wildlife rehabilitators in Ontario and to ensure that
this country’s largest province is not the only
jurisdiction in North America without any progressive help
for wildlife.
Sincerely
Name:_________________________________________________________________
Address:_______________________________________________________________
City:
_______________________________Prov:____________P/Code:____________
Signature:______________________________________________________________
c.c. David
Ramsay, Minister of Natural Resources
|