A ruling from the Environmental Appeal Board (EAB) in British Columbia has brought attention to the definition of “hunting” and its implications for a wildlife biologist. Doug Heard, a former provincial government wildlife biologist and adjunct professor at the University of Northern B.C., has dedicated the past decade to the restoration of an endangered caribou herd at Kennedy Siding, a critical habitat southeast of Mackenzie, B.C.
Heard’s methods of collecting caribou hair for DNA samples were deemed illegal by the Ministry of Water, Land, and Resource Stewardship. Despite having a permit to gather DNA samples from hair and fecal pellets, Heard was found using a device known as a “cable caster” to collect caribou hair directly at a feeding station.
Following the incident, Heard’s permit was revoked, leading him to appeal the decision. The EAB, in a ruling released on May 7, concluded that Heard’s actions fell within the definition of illegal hunting under B.C. law as outlined in the Wildlife Act.
The tribunal highlighted that the act of pursuing animals with the intention of capturing even a part of them, such as hair, constitutes hunting. The board rejected Heard’s argument that his method was less invasive compared to his previous approaches, which had also been deemed unacceptable in prior decisions.
The province contended that allowing Heard’s actions to go unpunished could set a precedent for individuals to target wildlife as long as their aim was to capture only specific body parts. The EAB upheld the ministry’s decision, emphasizing the importance of adhering to wildlife protection laws.
Heard, who could reapply for a wildlife permit as of May 2, declined to provide a comment on the ruling. The case serves as a reminder of the legal and ethical responsibilities associated with wildlife research and conservation efforts.
