Pacer the skunk was rescued and brought to a rehab centre in Tillsonburg, Ont. But after determining that it couldn’t be released into the wild, the MNRF refused a request to use Pacer as a training animal and instead ordered it to be put down.Laurel Beechey/The Globe and Mail
Ontario wildlife rehabilitation centres are growing increasingly frustrated with the provincial ministry that governs their activities. In particular, the rehab workers are discouraged by the inability to appeal rulings made by the ministry.
A case in point: Pacer the skunk arrived at Laurel Beechey's Tillsonburg, Ont., wildlife rehab centre after living for six months in a bathroom in a house in London, Ont. The skunk had been raised illegally until the humane society stepped in to rescue a number of animals.
After taking in Pacer at Skunk Haven, Ms. Beechey said she determined that it couldn't be released into the wild because it was accustomed to humans and couldn't fend for itself. Ms. Beechey asked the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), which oversees wildlife rehabilitation centres in Ontario, if she could use Pacer as a training animal for other rehabilitation workers. The MNRF refused and instead ordered Pacer to be put down.
"I was very disappointed they wanted to put Pacer down, but if I fought more, I could have lost my authorization [to practice]," said Ms. Beechey, who added there have been recent warnings to other wildlife centres about their licenses being revoked. "We haven't got the right of appeal, so I can't go anywhere and say 'I don't think this should happen.'"
Wildlife rehabilitation centres in Ontario are pointing to the skunk's death as the latest example of why they need an appeal process for government decisions. Ontario Wildlife Rescue, an organization that represents Ontario's rehabilitation centres, says an increasing number of rehab centres in Ontario have shut down in the past 10 years because they can't work with what they believe are increasingly unrealistic requests from the government. There's growing tension between the rehab centres and the MNRF, which is responsible for wildlife management and public safety.
An MNRF spokesperson said in an e-mail that the ministry is considering some changes to their procedures because of concerns in the community. Currently, only activities such as commercial fishing and zoo-keeping are able to appeal decisions by the MNRF. Non-commercial activities such as wildlife rescue don't have this option.
The lack of an appeal process is troubling to Ms. Beechey, because while the ministry's representatives have knowledge of the rules and regulations, they don't have Ms. Beechey's years of experience working with animals. She added that using some rehabilitated wildlife as training animals is common practice.
In this case, the ministry said in a statement that Pacer had to be put down because there was no telling where he actually came from and that he could have had rabies.
But Ms. Beechey countered that Pacer would have died if he had rabies, since he was left untreated by the previous illegal owner for six months, more than enough time for the disease to kill a skunk.
Various animal rehabilitation centres throughout Ontario have complained of other issues in dealing with MNRF officials. Carol Ricciuto, who cares for birds of prey at the Open Sky Raptor Foundation, said one official told her that she had to leave out water for birds during the winter.
But Ms. Ricciuto said that these birds get water from consuming their prey and don't use open water sources. And when she told the ministry official that it was impossible to leave water out because it would freeze in the winter, the official told her she would have to change the water every hour.
"There have been a number of times where I've sat back and thought, why am I doing this to myself … when they haven't a clue what they're doing and they're harassing us," Ms. Ricciuto said.
"It's horrific to know that the MNRF, their personnel, will not listen to the ones on the front-lines with the wildlife. We are the ones who are there, who see the animals come in and know the animals."
Sandy Donald, a spokesperson for Ontario Wildlife Rescue, said officials have also told rehab centres that they can't take pictures of wildlife. The MNRF said in a response that photography isn't completely banned, but should be limited because it could "counter" the rehabilitation process.
As well, Mr. Donald said the MNRF refused to allow the use of surrogate parents to raise orphaned wildlife, saying that these orphaned animals should be released or euthanized instead. The MNRF said that while surrogate parents aren't strictly prohibited, their use causes health concerns for disease prevention.
He also said a raccoon rehabilitation worker had been told that she couldn't help out other rehabilitation centres, and that she would lose her license to practice if she didn't comply. The MNRF states that authorized wildlife custodians are responsible for operating within the bounds of the conditions of their licence, otherwise it could be subject to cancellation.
Mr. Donald said that "almost all these centres are run by volunteers. If you're spending a chunk of your time fighting a rearguard action against the ministry, at a certain point, you go 'enough's enough.'"
He said that there used to be 200 rehabilitation centres in Ontario, but there are now around 60. The decrease in centres comes despite a rise in demand for medical treatment for wildlife, which rehab workers said is caused by increasing urban development.
Among the growing number of rehabilitation centres throwing in the towel, Ms. Beechey said that she, too, is ready to close up shop if she can't get the right to appeal the ministry's decisions.
"I hate to use these words, but I would say bullied and harassed are the way too many rehab workers feel they're treated," she said.