From climate to caribou: How manufactured uncertainty is affecting wildlife management

Abstract

Over the past decade, declines of Canadian populations of boreal caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) have received considerable attention from scientists, government agencies, environmental nongovernmental organizations, Indigenous communities, and the forest industry. Boreal caribou (also known as boreal woodland caribou) was listed as a threatened species in Canada when the Species at Risk Act came into force in June 2003. Many boreal caribou populations have been shown to be decreasing, in some cases precipitously, and empirical evidence from adult survival and calf recruitment surveys indicates that the cumulative effect of habitat disturbance, including that which results from industrial development, is a key driver in the decline. Yet, as scientific understanding of the decline has become clearer, and agreement among scientists and governments about habitat management requirements has increased, campaigns of denial have intensified in the public sphere. In this paper, we examine parallels with climate change rhetoric prolific in the 2000s and show that willful ignorance disguised as skepticism has resulted in public uncertainty despite robust scientific evidence. We show how these strategies of manufactured uncertainty used in climate change denial campaigns have seeped into wildlife management debates, with pernicious results. In this case, it has successfully delayed efforts to effectively address the decline of boreal caribou, which is protected under federal, provincial, and territorial legislation, and inhibited meaningful dialogue about socially acceptable conservation solutions. Ó

From human invaders to problem bears: A media content analysis of grizzly bear conservation

“…Additionally, scientists may want to proactively write editorials for newspapers, to make their research and knowledge more publicly accessible. In addition, scientists and journalists can together craft media messages that communicate individual and collective responsibility for people to adopt strategies to coexist with bears and value their ecological role or economic potential (Boan et al, 2018;Freeman & Jarvis, 2013;Jacobson et al, 2018;Lakoff, 2010). Borrowing from behavioral sciences, messages could be crafted using loss aversion techniques, for example, that focus on bear safety without over-dramatizing the nature of a bear or humanbear interactions (Gal & Rucker, 2018;Lopez-Baucells, Rocha, & Fernandez-Llamazares, 2017;Lu, Siemer, Baumer, & Decker, 2018).…”

“…It also appeared as though several grand narratives were used by the news media to resonate with the public, who may be eager to consume and internalize sensational bear stories (Bombieri et al, ). This eco‐gossip, with very predictable and clear protagonists and antagonists and the occasional man‐bites‐bear surprise, appears to be the diet of manufactured information fed to the public (Boan, Malcolm, Vanier, Euler, & Moola, ). Repetitious and negative storylines like these undoubtedly have the power to influence public perceptions about bears by unrealistically elevating risk perception among the public, and perhaps hampering conservation efforts or polarizing conservation debates (Bombieri et al, ; Bornatowski, Hussey, Sampio, & Barreto, ; Hathaway et al, ; Kaczensky et al, ; Sabatier & Huveneers, 2018; Stoddard & MacDonald, ).…”

When the protection of a threatened species depends on the economy of a foreign nation

“…Setting conservation targets that are ambiguous, too ambitious, or not scientifically-based will stall negotiations and delay the implementation of conservation actions [63]. Boan et al [64] indicate that "campaigns of denial" by forestry corporations, conservative think tanks, and industry lobbyists can also result in such delays. In the specific case of boreal caribou, minimum habitat requirements for recovery have been identified from a scientific meta-analysis [9].…”

“…Over the long-term, however, the trade-off might not be such a clear dichotomy: Lubchenco [65] pointed out that the actual choice between job and environmental conservation should be viewed in terms of short-term financial gain versus long-term, sustained prosperity. Habitat management for boreal caribou has thus far had little if any noticeable impact on AAC, and job losses in the Canadian forest industry have been more closely associated with the fluctuation of the US market than caribou conservation [64]. While the market will continue to fluctuate over time, the loss of caribou populations and the decrease in its distribution can become permanent.…”

Mind the gap: Coping with delay in environmental governance

“…This resembles the ozone layer depletion story, and many other examples of chemicals denial (EEA 2001(EEA , 2013Karlsson 2019). 2 Furthermore, in the area of wildlife conservation, researchers have claimed misuse of scientific results in different cases spanning from wolves in Sweden (Chapron 2014), over lions in Africa (Lindsey et al 2013) and protection of boreal caribou in Canada (Boan et al 2018), to exploitation of tropical peatlands (Wijedasa et al 2017). In marine policy, a telling example of denial links to the role of phosphorus (and phosphates in detergents) in promoting algal growth and ultimately eutrophication of waterbodies.…”