This e-mail was sent to the Native PLANT Society of British Columbia mailing list. The solution to remove fruit-bearing plants from Whistler Village (the site of 2010 Winter Olympics) seems to me rather absurd.
Who is right? Thanks, Adolf Ceska, Victoria, BC, Canada -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Brett Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 3:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Advice requested: Whistler plans to remove fruit-bearing plants Hi, I would greatly appreciate advice on how to respond to the following front-page article in the Whistler Question (full text follows at the bottom of this email): "Whistler officials working to reduce fruit-bearing attractants in built-up areas" http://www.squamishchief.com/madison/WQuestion.nsf/WQallstories?OpenView I don't deny we have to do something to reduce bear-human conflicts. I also don't disagree with the premise that large concentrations of berries in high-traffic areas can cause trouble (in our area, extensive planting of rowan trees and red-osier dogwoods might be the main such culprits). But if our Bear Working Group had its way, ALL berry producing bushes would be removed from the village core and all municipal parks. Plus, strata developments and other homeowners are to be encouraged to remove them. This flies in the face of other local initiatives towards NatureScaping and the premise that we do our best to preserve all native species. I'd appreciate any and all information you might be able to send, in particular: -- insects, birds, other mammals, and other animals that rely on berry-producing shrubs; - initiatives elsewhere that found a middle ground between natural plantings and animal-human interactions; Thanks in advance for any help! Bob. **************************************************************************** ************ Of bears and bushes Feature Story Whistler officials working to reduce fruit-bearing attractants in built-up areas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Several prominently placed Saskatoon berry bushes recently were hacked to within about a foot of their lives, leaving behind little more than unsightly sticks protruding from the ground along the boulevard of Blackcomb Way. But this was no wanton act of vandalism. It was, instead, part of a systematic attempt to reduce bear attractants in Whistler one that comes with the blessing of local and provincial government officials and includes a coordinated effort to educate homeowners and strata councils about the dangers of using fruit-bearing plants for landscaping in bear country. While conservation officers are busy chasing bears that have become a public safety risk another bear was destroyed last week after it invaded a home in Alpine while the occupants were sleeping (see related article, page 4) officials with the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) and Get Bear Smart Society are working to reduce the risks posed by outdoor attractants. Fruit-bearing plants used for landscaping are second only to garbage as bear attractants. Their order of importance, in fact, sometimes changes in the late summer and fall as Saskatoons, cherry trees, mountain ash, certain types of dogwoods and even rose bushes begin to bear fruit. Rob Groeger, Whistler bear response officer with the B.C. Conservation Officer Service, said that as an example, officials have been working with the strata council at the Montebello townhouse complex on Blackcomb Way to either have the plants removed or ensure that the fruit is picked before it ripens. Right now we have about three bears going through Montebello destroying those plants to get at the fruit, Groeger said. Paul Beswetherick, RMOW landscape supervisor, said the Montebello owners last year had to incur considerable expense after bears damaged several hot-tub covers in the complex. He said the petroleum products used to make the foam inside the covers was what the bears were seeking to access but added that officials feel the bears would not have been attracted to the site if not for the nearby fruit-bearing plants. It (the damage to the covers) was a very expensive proposition for them, but theyve been very proactive and decided to remove their mountain ashes, he said. Marc Zurbuchen, public education coordinator for the Get Smart Bear Society, said the Whistler Bear Working Group has decided to make Whistler Village, the Upper Village and surrounding areas a no-go zone for bears. That means plants such as the Saskatoon bushes on Blackcomb Way need to be carefully managed and eventually removed. Its an ongoing effort, because some of these plants are naturally occurring, Zurbuchen said. But we do want to keep them away from away from roadways, walkways, etc., and in so doing theyre much less likely to bring bears into conflict with people. Beswetherick said he expects the process of removing fruit-bearing plants from municipal property will take several years, at least partly because the RMOW has no budget for the plants removal and has to incorporate the effort into the existing budget. Whatll probably happen is some plants will be removed or well just cut them back and by the time it re-grows, well hopefully be able to replace it, he said. Groeger said the challenge for the likes of himself and Zurbuchen is to encourage individual homeowners and stratas to act when the plants are on private land without the need for enforcement action. He said that if education efforts fail, officials may issue dangerous wildlife protection orders (DWPOs), which require property owners to rectify the situation within a certain time frame or face fines. For example, a DWPO may require that fruit is completely removed within an hour of the order being issued, he said. If compliance isnt achieved, the owners can be fined up to $570. After three DWPOs, offend ers can be charged under the Wildlife Act and hauled into court, Groeger said. While he recognizes that lots of people enjoy having fruit-bearing trees and shrubs, Groeger said few people actually use the fruit they produce, so it only makes sense for them to remove and/or replace them with other varieties. If we deem it necessary we can order the strata to remove them, but it would be nice if they could take the initiative themselves to remove them, or they can go through and just remove the fruit, Groeger said. We want to do this the nice way. We dont want to be heavy handed. Zurbuchen said the Bear Working Group has compiled a list of plants that should be removed or avoided and has distributed the list to landscapers and landscape architects in the hope that they will voluntarily remove the trees where necessary, or refrain from planting them. As well, hes available to speak to business or strata council representatives about the initiative. I have to say that there is obviously still a garbage issue as well, Zurbuchen said. Its a big part of the issue, but not the only part. We certainly have to make sure that no bins are left open and accessible to bears. Reducing the number of fruit-bearing plants, meanwhile, may eventually lead to the bears not finding garbage or other sources of food. If we can limit their propensity to access food of any kind within the community, it should make it less likely that well see bears and humans come into conflict.
