Letter from District of Invermere Re: Urban Deer Management

Re: Urban Deer Management

The District of Invermere has spent a considerable amount of Council and staff time, effort, and financial resources dealing with the issue of our urban deer population and responding to legal challenges to a deer cull we undertook in 2012.

As you are aware, a group of concerned citizens sued the municipality in February of 2012 as our deer cull was about to begin. The group claimed that the process we had followed was both flawed and did not have enough public consultation. The process Council followed was one recommended by the Province which included: establishing a deer management committee to review and recommend management options, surveying local residents and implementing a no-feeding bylaw. In October of 2013, the Justice Gropper dismissed the lawsuit against the District, disagreeing with all of their claims and validating the (Provincial) process that was used.

Although we are attempting to recover costs from the Invermere Deer Protection Society and Shane Suman, it is unlikely that we will recover the majority of the $40,000 we have spent to-date on legal fees. As we have essentially been defending a process recommended by the Province and because our case has had significant interest for and direct impacts on many other communities and jurisdictions facing similar wildlife management issues in British Columbia, we respectfully request your consideration in reimbursing the District of Invermere for a portion of our legal fees in responding to this lawsuit. With our limited financial resources, a cost sharing of $20,000 for each party – the municipality and province – would seem reasonable.

In addition, we respectfully ask that future consideration be given by the Province to cost share the implementation of deer management options with local governments. In the document, "Roles of Provincial and Local Governments in the Management of Urban Ungulates", it states that the Province will not provide funding to support communities addressing urban ungulate management issues. We, along with many other affected communities in British Columbia, do not feel that this is fair. Deer are legally a provincial resource. As such, there should be both shared responsibility and funding when managing them within municipalities.

We were very disappointed to hear first from the lobby group, LifeForce, about potential changes to provincial legislation that would allow the hazing of deer with dogs. LifeForce has been a very negative and adversarial entity that has not assisted local governments in dealing with urban deer issues. It is disconcerting that we would hear of potential changes or issues around urban deer tools from a lobby group prior to receiving a substantive notification from the Province. It is alarming that they may have more influence in or connection to changes to legislation then the local governments who are directly impacted by urban deer. A simple letter to the executive director of UBCM the day before LifeForce contacted local governments, is not in our view, effective and meaningful communication with those impacted local governments. We have not had recent direct communication from the Ministry or from UBCM on this issue, and if was not for our local MLA's office enquiring, we would not know anything other then what LifeForce has told us. This is obviously disappointing.

Further to the concept of allowing the hazing of deer with dogs, we are concerned that this will become a 'red herring' in the court of public opinion and something that will be used by animal rights group as the 'magic cure' when for many communities, who do not have public/crown land nearby, it may not be feasible or in any way effective. We strongly encourage the Province to take a proactive role in clarifying that hazing with dogs is not a perfect solution and in many cases will not be operationally practical.

Alternative and non-lethal deer management tools are likely to cost much more per deer or per season then a trap and cull process, and without consideration for shared funding, these tools are not practical and, therefore, realistically cannot actually be considered to be part of the municipal tool box.

In conclusion, we would ask that your Ministry; give consideration to reimbursing the District of Invermere a portion of the money we have spent on legal fees defending what is essentially the Provincial process we adopted, give future consideration to shared funding of urban deer management issues with affected municipalities, take a lead role in explaining the limitations and challenges associated with hazing deer with dogs, and strive to have better direct communication with affected local governments in the future.

Respectfully,

Mayor Gerry Taft District of Invermere

CC: City of Cranbrook City of Kimberley District of Elkford City of Grand Forks City of Penticton Town of View Royal Capital Regional District