Jump to content

User:Sg3516/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Environmental history of bison conservation in North America

[edit]

I will be in charge of working on the the evolution of federal government wildlife policy and programs in Canada and the associated sub-sections. I will also be contributing to the sub-section: Implications of preservation efforts under the historical decline of the North American bison population.

Proposed outline

[edit]
  • Historical decline of the North American bison population
    • Plains bison – importance and symbolism
    • Wood bison – importance and symbolism
    • Social ecology - importance to Aboriginal people
    • Evolution of hunting practices
    • Implications for preservation efforts
  • Origins of wildlife preservation in Canada
    • Ideological development of the wildlife conservation movement
    • Contradictions
  • The evolution of federal government wildlife policy in Canada
    • Trajectory: preservation → utilitarian conservation → rational, scientific, bureaucratic management that promoted domestication of wildlife and Native people
    • Goals: preservation of wilderness and wildlife; recreational, commercialization, assertion of state authority and control over wildlife and Native people
    • Contradictions in policies
    • Social, cultural, and political forces
      • Internal colonialism – disdain for Native hunting cultures, assertion of state authority, influence of scientific knowledge, modernization agenda for Canada’s north
    • Significance and legacies over the long term – historical and cultural implications
  • National Parks
    • Buffalo National Park in Wainwright, Alberta
    • Wood Bison National Park in northeastern Alberta and southern Northwest Territories
    • 1925-28: Transfer of plains bison from the overpopulated range in Buffalo National Park to the supposedly understocked range in Wood Buffalo National Park resulted in hybridization between the species and the infection of the northern herds with tuberculosis and brucellosis (Sandlos, 2002, 95).
  • Interactions between Aboriginal peoples, preservationists, and government officials
    • Cultural and ecological interactions between Native Americans and Euroamericans in the Great Plains
    • Historical conflict between Native hunters and conservationists over bison
    • Assertion of state authority over the traditional hunting cultures of the Cree, Dene, and Inuit peoples
    • Social, cultural, political, and economic implications for Aboriginals
    • Ecological implications for bison populations
  • Contemporary bison conservation
    • Significance and legacies
    • Current conservation efforts – plans to reintroduce bison to Banff National Park

Implications for preservation efforts

[edit]

The first bison preservation efforts in Canada included the Unorganized Territories Game Preservation Act of 1894, through which the government legislated a closed season on the bison.[1] This act was passed on the assumption that the bison in Canada were in decline based on a few excursions in which naturalists estimated the number of bison across a vast range. This assumption wasn’t precise as the few excursions were short and were done by solely observing the animals. From this assumption naturalists were able to create a more active federal wildlife administration in the Northwest Territories. [2] The Wood Buffalo National Park was created in 1922 in response to Northern Canada’s wildlife crisis. [3]

Evolution of federal government wildlife policy in Canada

[edit]

Trajectory: preservation → utilitarian conservation → rational, scientific, bureaucratic management that promoted domestication of wildlife and Native people

[edit]

Preservation was the main focus of management up to the Second World War, which was accomplished by “feeding the bison, shooting carnivores that preyed on them, and patrolling for poachers[4]. In 1907, the federal government purchased Michel Pablo’s herd from Montana and transferred it to Buffalo National Park in Alberta as a response to the declining number of bison in Canada[5]. They were nearly extinct at this point and the park served as an ideal environment for them to thrive which resulted in an increase in the number of bison.

After the Second World War, wildlife scientists recognized how the bison in the north could be exploited for national benefit[6]. Wildlife and the wilderness were conceptualized to be factors that could be manipulated to increase the economic development of the north[7]. In 1947, the Dominion Wildlife Service (Later known as Canadian Wildlife Service or CWS) was created to centralize wildlife research infrastructure within the federal government[8]. The manipulation of the bison was justified by CWS biologist William Fuller in his study who demonstrated that the tuberculosis that was found among the bison helped maintain a stable number in the park[9]. Slaughter became more systematic and frequent among the bison through the management plan in 1954[10].

Goals: preservation of wilderness and wildlife; recreational, commercialization, assertion of state authority and control over wildlife and Native people

[edit]

Through the Unorganized Territories Game Preservation Act of 1894, the federal government enforced a closed season on the bison[11]. The bison were near extinction in Canada and with these efforts the government hoped to preserve them from the Native hunters. Preservation efforts were not only for recreational purposes; After the Second World War, the bison were used for commercial purposes as well. As the numbers of bison increased, the federal government issued licenses to regulate the number of bison and also brought in revenue[12]. Through the restriction of hunting practices, Natives were no longer able to feed themselves through customary means[13]. This effected the Native culture with the restrictions and licenses that need to be purchased before they could hunt.

National parks excluded Aboriginal people for game conservation, sport hunting, tourism, and aboriginal assimilation.[14] This is a shift from preservation to recreation and commercialization of the national parks. Banff National Park in Alberta excluded Aboriginals mainly for the goals of conservationists and sportsmen.[15] The Aboriginal hunting practices conflicted with the goals of the DIA to civilize and assimilate Aboriginal people.[16] In the winters of the 1880s and 1890s, hunting was encouraged for Aboriginals, but agriculture was seen as a way to move away from hunting.[17] The goal of the federal government was not to remove Aboriginals for preservation, but instead was an effort to create an environment with an abundance of game, for sports hunting and tourism, and to assimilate Aboriginal people within the rest of society.

Contradictions in policies

[edit]

The preservation of the wood bison in northern Canada was implied by the strict federal control of traditional Aboriginal hunting practices by creating a wildlife sanctuary.[18] The federal government proposed fencing and breeding plans which they wanted to implement on the bison herds.[19] There was no role for the human use of nature. Preservationist approaches to the bison in the north implied the assertion of federal power over the bison which had been under the control of Aboriginal hunters for generations.[20]

In 1952 and 1954, there was a shortage of mature adult male bison which resulted in the slaughtering of more female and young bison and caused conflict within the management.[21] CWS biologist Nick Novakowsi argued that the bison was declining due to slaughtering along with the effects of flooding.[22] This caused conflict between the management at the Wood Buffalo Park and the federal government. The park management didn’t see this as reducing the bison herd for stabilization, but instead described it as “mass murder.”[23]

The federal government’s goal of commercializing the bison throughout Canada contradicted the desire to provide inexpensive bison meat to northern Canada.[24] With new agreements with meatpackers in the south, combined with their prior commitment to the Hudson’s Bay Company and Indian Affairs, over nine hundred bison were slaughtered.[25] Through the agreement the packing companies received the best quality bison meat for low prices, whereas northern Canada got tough meat that was sold at higher prices.[26] CWS biologists feared that there was no scientific legitimacy to the slaughtering of the nine hundred bison, many which did not have tuberculosis.[27] Conservation of the bison contradicted with its commodification. In the winter of 1957- 1958, the testing and slaughtering program of the bison was established.[28]

In the late 1980s, there was a debate on the outbreak of tuberculosis and brucellosis at Wood Buffalo Park discussing whether the diseased bison should be replaced. A committee was established in 1986 to discuss the possibilities of action and suggested: “maintenance of the status quo, fencing of the park boundary, a combination of fences and buffer zones near the park boundary and the complete eradication of the hybridized park bison with replacement by a disease-free hard of wood bison."[29] This caused a debate between Environment Canada, who was in favour of the eradication, and Wood Buffalo National Park staff, who opposed it. The park staff argued that the risk of the diseased bison infecting cattle was overstated and that it was to justify using the bison for commercial purposes.[30] Due to the opposition the diseased bison were not slaughtered.

Social, cultural, and political forces – disdain for Native hunting cultures, assertion of state authority, influence of scientific knowledge, modernization agenda for Canada’s north

[edit]

Natives opposed the creation of the Wood Buffalo National Park in 1922 and continued to protest their opposition even after it was established[31] . With the creation of the park, non-treaty Indians were removed and the treaty Indians were allowed to continue to hunt under strict regulation by the park staff[32] . Native hunting cultures were not taken into consideration when these laws were enforced, instead the preservation of the bison was a bigger concern to the federal government. After 1945, government wildlife workers became interested in developing the North and realized the economic benefits that the bison could provide them[33]. CWS biologist William Fuller, in his study of the bison infected with tuberculosis, provided the federal government with the justification it needed to slaughter the bison for commercial and economic purposes.[34].

Significance and legacies over the long term – historical and cultural implications

[edit]

According to Sandlos, several historical forces converged in shaping wildlife conservation in northern Canada: “the disdain among conservationists for traditional hunting cultures, the authoritarian approach of the state to wildlife conservation, the rise of scientific knowledge,” and a broader “modernization agenda in the region” [35]. Federal wildlife officials combined the philosophies of wildlife preservation and utilitarian conservation, “arguing for the salvation of the bison based on the contradictory images of a wilderness [frontier] and a semipastoral landscape”[36].

References

[edit]
  1. ^ John Sandlos. “Where the Scientists Roam: Ecology, Management and Bison in Northern Canada.” Journal of Canadian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2002): 93‐129.
  2. ^ John Sandlos. “Where the Scientists Roam: Ecology, Management and Bison in Northern Canada.” Journal of Canadian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2002): 93‐129.
  3. ^ John Sandlos. “Where the Scientists Roam: Ecology, Management and Bison in Northern Canada.” Journal of Canadian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2002): 93‐129.
  4. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 139.
  5. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 139.
  6. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 143.
  7. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 143.
  8. ^ John Sandlos. “Where the Scientists Roam: Ecology, Management and Bison in Northern Canada.” Journal of Canadian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2002) p. 110.
  9. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 140.
  10. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 141.
  11. ^ John Sandlos. “Where the Scientists Roam: Ecology, Management and Bison in Northern Canada.” Journal of Canadian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2002), p. 94.
  12. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 23.
  13. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 23.
  14. ^ Binnema and Niemi 2006, 724
  15. ^ Binnema and Niemi 2006, 738
  16. ^ Binnema and Niemi 2006, 738
  17. ^ Binnema and Niemi 2006, 738
  18. ^ Sandlos 2007, 25
  19. ^ Sandlos 2007, 25
  20. ^ Sandlos 2007, 26
  21. ^ Loo 2006, 147
  22. ^ Loo 2006, 147
  23. ^ Loo 2006, 147
  24. ^ Sandlos 2007, 95
  25. ^ Sandlos 2007, 96
  26. ^ Sandlos 2007, 96
  27. ^ Sandlos 2007, 98
  28. ^ Sandlos 2007, 98
  29. ^ Sandlos 2002, 114
  30. ^ Sandlos 2002, 115
  31. ^ Sandlos, John. Hunters at the Margin: Native People and Wildlife Conservation in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2007, p. 24.
  32. ^ Sandlos, John. Hunters at the Margin: Native People and Wildlife Conservation in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2007, p. 25.
  33. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 140.
  34. ^ Tina Loo, State of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006, p. 140.
  35. ^ Sandlos, John. Hunters at the Margin: Native People and Wildlife Conservation in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2007, p. 241.
  36. ^ Sandlos, John. Hunters at the Margin: Native People and Wildlife Conservation in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2007, p. 25.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Sg3516/sandbox&oldid=486578104"