E-KNOW Editorial

Social media is rapidly becoming the forum for discussions on topics important to everyone.

Thanks to basic rules of decorum that are usually adhered to by most, Facebook can be a fascinating forum for intelligent and lively discussions about all sorts of topics.

It provides a clear view into the heart of some issues as those commenting are doing so on-the-spot and honesty shines through in the immediacy.

An example of this is an ongoing discussion on the District of Elkford’s Facebook page, concerning the sighting of a cougar in town limits.

The district, along with numerous other municipalities in the region, are using Facebook to help spread the word about a wide range of subjects and posting something like a cougar sighting in town gets plenty of attention, likes and shares.

And along with being effective in terms of spreading the word, it opens the door for great discussions as is currently happening in the thread ‘Conservation Officers have removed the cougar from Balmer Crescent,’ which was initially posted on Jan. 24.

The next day it was noted that the B.C. Conservation Officer service in fact killed the cougar, which had a fresh killed close to a local school and residences.

The responses show the different views people have about living alongside nature.

The discussion at https://www.facebook.com/district.elkford appeared to stall on Jan. 26, but it fired up again today when someone noted it was “disgusting” that the cougar was destroyed.

It is a discussion every community in the East Kootenay has had, numerous times, because we share the surrounding landscape with an abundance of wildlife species – some dangerous, some a ‘problem’ and others a bit of both.

Granted, Facebook allows for the discussion to become much broader than inter-community forms. In this case, the person noting the killing of the cougar to be disgusting is from Golden.

“If we are going to live in an area that is surrounded by nature, we had better to learn to live WITH nature, and that includes predatory animals,” she stated.

The comments from other people show the divide how some believe animals should not be killed as a solution to urban wildlife conflicts, while others, usually with children, state the ‘greater good’ must be considered.

On cue, everyone’s favourite urban wildlife conflict causing beasties – deer – come front and centre in this conversation.

“The district has had to put down some of the (deer) herd due to the malnutrition and health issues in the deer. They are plentiful and sickly in a small area. This is why we are now seeing the cougar in town! It is an area of easy pickings unlike the outlying areas where the deer still have their natural defenses. Sorry soft hearted ones… killing needs to happen now because we have neglected our duties. But it’s the deer that need to be dispatched. And public education of how feeding wildlife has brought us to this place,” a local woman points out.

The re-igniter of the discussion suggests, “The common denominator in all of these issues (bears, deer, cougars), is humans. Humans are the problem. Not the animals.”

“And we can’t shoot the people! Shame,” jests the local woman.

Another Elkford woman notes that the cougar in question was behind her house with its kill.

“I was concerned about my kids, which means I didn’t let them outside alone, but I saw no reason for the cougar to be killed. He was doing what was natural and it is wilderness where he was. And deer can kill a child, so saying there is a big difference is just ridiculous considering there are at least 70 deer in town and maybe two to three cougars will pass through. It is a shame that the only solution seems to always be the animal losing its life because of our actions!” she stated.

These kinds of discussions need to continue because the conflicts between human civilization and wildlife will only grow in scope and complexity, as more and more wild lands are usurped for human needs.

Just mention “deer” in the District of Invermere and watch the spittle fly! Ditto Kimberley and Cranbrook, while it has dodged the furor of a full-fledged ‘anti-deer-cull’ versus ‘get rid of the darned things’ fight, is doing more work to determine if there are other means to solve the overpopulating of deer in the city limits.

So we just want to note ‘good on’ the folks who have chimed in on the Elkford Facebook discussion, for remaining civil, for starters, but for also posting well-thought out comments. It is such discussions that will help lead to reasonable, concrete solutions based on the best science available as opposed to the cheapest remedy or knee-jerk solutions designed in the rattle and hum of an angry cacophony.

And back to using Facebook as a useful tool, the District of Elkford is seizing the momentum from the discussion to point out that it is looking for volunteers for a committee that will consider urban wildlife management matters.

“We appreciate the conversation this issue has raised. We are currently seeking volunteers for the Urban Wildlife Management Advisory Committee and would encourage residents to apply so that you can be part of the solution. You can also complete a Record of Concern at our office that will be reviewed by the Committee,” the district posted this morning (Jan. 31).

Here’s a chance to become involved in a municipal decision-making process that needs public input if it is to succeed and not become bogged down by rhetorical ranting, anger and hyper-emotional, righteous displays.

Ian Cobb/e-KNOW

Article Share