West Coast Wildlife Research & Education

Research & Education On The West Coast of Canada

2001 - 2025

Advocating, Educating and Researching Locally For The Benefit of Wildlife And Wilderness Emergency Response

West Coast Wildlife (Canada)

QuikSAR Canada

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release
From: Gerald Shaffer, Chairman, on behalf of West Coast Wildlife Research & Education
Date: nov 2025

West Coast Wildlife Research & Education Calls for Immediate Policy Action Following Recent Grizzly Bear Attack in British Columbia

Vancouver, B.C. — West Coast Wildlife Research & Education extends its deepest concern and sympathy to the children, families, and community affected by the recent grizzly bear attack near Bella Coola, where 11 young students and teachers were injured during a school outing.

We stand with every child, educator, parent, and responder impacted by this traumatic event. Their safety, healing, and long-term wellbeing are our first priority.

At the same time, we must be clear: killing the bear responsible will not make anyone safer. Evidence from decades of wildlife-conflict research shows that retaliatory wildlife destruction does not prevent future encounters, nor does it reduce long-term risk. Only human preparedness, strong protocols, and the enforcement of existing regulations improve safety outcomes.

This Was a Failure of Human Systems — Not a Failure of Wildlife

Reports indicate the bear may have been injured prior to the incident, a known factor that can produce unpredictable wildlife behavior.
But even with that possibility, the core issue remains systemic: the human safety framework in place was not sufficient to prevent or mitigate an encounter of this scale.

Schools, districts, and local governments have legally defined responsibilities under bylaws, provincial acts, emergency planning standards, and WorkSafeBC requirements. These responsibilities already outline procedures for wildlife-risk management—yet they were not effectively applied.

The lesson here is not to scapegoat wildlife.
The lesson is that our existing human safety systems must be taken seriously and implemented fully.

Destroying the Bear Will Not Create Safety

Retaliatory removal of apex predators is an outdated and ineffective response that provides no measurable benefit to community protection.

Scientific evidence demonstrates that:

Over 90% of bear–human conflicts stem from preventable human factors, not aggressive wildlife behavior.
Killing an individual grizzly does not statistically reduce the likelihood of future incidents in the same area.
Long-term safety is achieved through education, prevention, preparation, and enforcement, not reactive wildlife destruction.

Furthermore, grizzly bears play a critical ecological role in the coastal forest system. Removing one adult bear means the permanent loss of all reproductive potential it carries—every cub it would have had, and every cub those cubs would have had. This is a multi-generational ecological loss, with trophic impacts that extend far beyond a single animal.

Grizzlies support salmon nutrient cycles, soil enrichment, seed dispersal, and apex species regulation. Their removal weakens ecological stability at every level.

Regional Districts and Municipalities Must Act Now

We call on all regional districts and municipalities within grizzly country to immediately:

Adopt formal Living Safely With Wildlife Guidelines, including school protocols, attractant management, trail-use procedures, and emergency planning.
Enforce existing legal requirements already embedded in:
- municipal bylaws,
- provincial wildlife acts,
- emergency response frameworks,
- WorkSafeBC safety obligations.
Mandate standardized wildlife-safety training for schools, educators, and outdoor program leaders.
Create consistent reporting and evaluation requirements for any outdoor program involving children in bear territory.

These standards exist. The legal tools exist. What is missing is enforcement and implementation.

We Do Not Support the Destruction of This Bear — or Any Wildlife as a Substitute for Policy

This event is not a justification for killing wildlife.
It is a call to responsibility.

We reject the notion that Conservation Officer Service–led lethal responses represent meaningful safety solutions. COS actions are complaint-driven and reactive, not part of a proactive community protection framework.

Safety is created by people doing better — not by removing wildlife.

A Shared Responsibility

This is not about race, culture, or community identity.
It is about species interaction and shared human responsibility.

What keeps people safe is what works:

evidence-based prevention,
rigorous protocols,
strong local governance,
and respect for the ecological systems we live within.

We are all in this together.

Contact

West Coast Wildlife Research & Education
Office of the Chairman

Q&A: Grizzly Bear Incident Response

What is the position of West Coast Wildlife Research & Education on killing the bear involved?

We are firmly opposed to killing the bear. Retaliatory wildlife destruction does not improve public safety and does not prevent future incidents.

Why oppose killing the bear when children were injured?

Because killing the bear does not create safety. Only strong human systems—protocols, policies, and preparedness—reduce risk. Safety comes from proactive measures, not reactive wildlife removal.

Are you saying the school or community is at fault?

We are saying the systems were insufficient. This is about structural responsibilities, not individual blame. Existing regulations and safety standards were not fully implemented.

What should schools do to prevent incidents like this in the future?

Schools must adopt formal wildlife-safety protocols, including staff training, emergency response planning, risk assessments, and proper field trip procedures.

What about the role of the Conservation Officer Service?

The Conservation Officer Service is reactive and complaint-driven. They are not the foundation for effective prevention. Community-level policies and municipal action are more effective.

What actions should regional districts and municipalities take?

They must implement and enforce Living Safely With Wildlife Guidelines, improve attractant management, enforce bylaws, and ensure schools meet safety standards.

Why emphasize ecological impact in your statement?

Removing a grizzly bear causes long-term ecological disruption. It eliminates all reproductive potential and has cascading effects on forest, salmon, and soil systems.

Does the organization blame the community or Nation involved?

No. This is not about race or identity. It is about shared human responsibility. Everyone benefits from strong wildlife-safety systems.

What data supports your position?

Decades of research show that most bear-human conflicts stem from preventable human factors, and that killing bears does not reduce future conflict rates.

What is your call to action?

Regional districts and municipalities must immediately implement and enforce wildlife-safety guidelines and ensure all institutions, including schools, follow legal safety requirements.

Pollution Free Salish Sea Program 2025

Is our campaign dedicated to informing and empowering businesses that serve beverages.

By supporting businesses that supply zero waste products such as OG STRAWS to such venues, we hope to reduce waste entering the Salish Sea.

We have one million Naturally Zero Waste Straws to give away so sign up now.

MUNICIPAL BRIEFING NOTE 2025

Subject: Inclusion of Personal-Use Drinking Straws in Municipal Emergency Preparedness Reserves
From: Gerald Shaffer, West Coast Wildlife / Shaffer Farms Resilience Division / QuikSar Emergency Supplies
Date: November 2025
Prepared For: Regional District Emergency Preparedness Offices, Municipal Councils, Emergency Program Managers

Purpose

To recommend the addition of personal-use drinking straws—specifically biodegradable rye stem straws—to municipal emergency stockpiles and community survival kits. This briefing outlines the rationale, benefits, cost considerations, and implementation options relevant to municipal-level decision-making.

Background

During emergency response operations, water distribution is among the earliest and most universal functions provided by municipalities. In many events—wildfires, floods, earthquakes, infrastructure failures, ferry/road closures—clean drinking water is distributed in bottles, jugs, or communal containers.

A consistent and well-documented problem in these environments is the rapid spread of illness caused by shared drinking vessels. Individuals frequently pass bottles, cups, or improvised containers among one another. In tightly grouped evacuation centers or informal gatherings, this becomes one of the first and most preventable transmission vectors.

Municipal emergency kits currently include masks, gloves, sanitation wipes, and blankets—tools designed to reduce disease spread.
Personal straws are not typically included, despite costing pennies per unit and directly addressing a major contamination pathway.

Key Issue

Shared mouth contact via drinking containers contributes to disease transmission during the first 24–72 hours of a disaster.
A personal-use straw dramatically reduces this risk.

Analysis

1. Disease Prevention & Hygiene

A straw assigned to each individual limits:

Transmission from shared bottles
Mouth-contact contamination
Spread of respiratory droplets onto water containers
Gastrointestinal outbreaks linked to shared utensils

This is a non-medical, low-cost intervention that fits within existing hygiene protocols.

2. Practical Utility in Emergency Situations

In addition to hygiene functions, personal straws serve as:

Water-access tools for awkward containers
Fire-starting aids by directing airflow into tinder
Lightweight survival tools requiring nearly no storage space
Single-use sanitation tools for high-risk environments

Their multi-functionality aligns with practical field needs.

3. Straw Options: Comparative Assessment

Straw Type

Advantages

Limitations

Suitability

Metal

durable

requires sanitation, costly, heavy

low

Glass

reusable

fragile, unsafe in debris

very low

Plastic

cheap, light

creates litter, visible trace, burns toxic

moderate

Paper

biodegradable

dissolves quickly, burns with odor

moderate

Rye Stem

locally sourceable, burn cleanly, low trace, cheapest per unit, biodegradable

best for thin liquids only

high

Rye stem straws offer the strongest balance of cost, safety, and field versatility.

4. Local Sourcing & Resilience

Rye stems can be grown, harvested, and cured locally, supporting:

Local agriculture
Community resilience
Reduced dependence on disrupted supply chains
Low-carbon municipal procurement

In regions with agricultural capacity, communities can grow a year's supply at minimal cost.

5. Environmental and Trace Considerations

Unlike plastic or paper straws:

Rye stems leave no persistent trace in field conditions.
They burn cleanly and quietly, without scent—important for wilderness or stealth operations.
They decompose fully, leaving no microplastics.

This aligns with municipal environmental commitments and emergency site clean-up requirements.

6. Cost Estimate

Approximate recommended stockpile:
One straw per resident + 20% surplus

For a municipality of 30,000 residents:

Approx. 36,000 straws
Bulk cost: $350–$700 depending on supplier and packaging preferences
Storage requirement: one medium-sized bin

This makes straws among the lowest-cost emergency-preparedness items.

Recommendation

That the municipality:

Adopt personal-use drinking straws as a standard component of emergency reserve kits.
Prioritize biodegradable rye stem straws due to cost, safety, and multi-functional value.
Begin procurement through local agricultural suppliers or regional sustainable-goods providers.
Include straws in:
- Water distribution kits
- Community emergency bins
- Evacuation center supplies
- Public “grab-and-go” kits
Provide public education on personal-use straws as a hygiene measure in emergencies.

Rationale

This intervention is:

Low-cost
Low-tech
High-impact
Environmentally safe
Operationally simple
Locally supportable
Immediately actionable

The smallest tool in the kit may prevent the first wave of illness in a disaster.

Prepared By

Gerald Shaffer
West Coast Wildlife / Shaffer Farms Resilience Division
Roberts Creek, British Columbia
press@squintwerks.com

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse