Mass Shooting of UVic Rabbits Planned
for June according to Independent
Reports and Ministry Documents
by Action for UVic Rabbits
 The University of Victoria is planning a mass killing of the campus rabbits sometime this month, according to Tom Smith from Facilities Management. In an interview with Times Colonist writer Judith Lavoie reported in a May 15th article, Smith is quoted as saying "We have said all along that we won't do a major cull until the report comes out, but we've also said that if we need to do minor culls for safety and health reasons, we reserve the right to do that."
At the time of his interview with Lavoie, prior to the May 15 publication, Smith admitted that the university had already killed 94 rabbits. He also admitted the killing had begun in early May, when the university was making public denials of the cull. The article goes on to say "Smith said the cull is not expected to move to other areas of campus until the management report is released in June."
If Smith considers 94 rabbits a "minor cull", how many rabbits will be killed in a "major cull"? Given earlier statements to the media by Smith which placed an "acceptable number" of resident rabbits post-cull at around 200-300, and given the variable estimates of the campus rabbit population, it would seem the university is planning a "major cull" of around 1000 animals or more.
Recently received documents reveal that the university and the Ministry of Environment have been discussing a "cull" using "firearms" since at least 2009. A letter sent from the Ministry to the university provides a response to a previous question posed by UVic inquiring about this deadly option.
In an email from Karen Morrison of the provincial Environment Ministry to Richard Piskor, the head of Occupational Health and Safety and the Environment at UVic, Morrison refers to "the options discussed at our last meeting" and goes on to respond to the options, one of which is "A controlled cull...provincial permit may be required...if firearms are used" The message is copied to Troy Forslund, Gerad Hales, and Micheal J Badry from the BC Environment Ministry, and was sent on November 20, 2009.
In their July 24, 2008 report to Gayle Gorrill, VP Finance and Operations at UVic, LGL Ltd., Environmental Research Associates, in their report exerpted from the Feral Rabbit Inventory in Selected Areas of the University of Victoria Campus" recommended trapping, followed by shooting.
"Each approach has pros and cons. Trapping may be more appealing from the viewpoint of public perception. Conversely, trapping will be fairly labour intensive and the chances of it being a successful method are less certain than shooting. Trapping may, however, be a necessary precursor to a shooting program in order to improve the defensibility of shooting as an appropriate means of population control.
"Trapping would involve the live-capture of animals that would then be euthanized and properly disposed of off-campus. Standard Tomahawk/Havahart style traps could be placed under vegetative cover in the vicinity of rabbit concentrations. To improve capture rates, traps should be pre-baited for a few days with highly palatable foods (e.g., apple, grain). Traps should be set in the evening and checked the following morning. The ability of trapping to efficiently meet the objectives of population reduction should be assessed in a pilot area prior to initiating a trapping program over a broader area of the campus...Night-time shooting using a high-velocity .177 calibre air rifle with scope designed for low-light conditions, is an efficient way to cull rabbits.
"The use of a firearm on campus would require approval from, and up-to date communications with, security and law-enforcement authorities. Although operations would be conducted at night and air rifles are reasonably quiet, illumination (street, parking lot, security, athletic field) plus the fact that the project in in an urban environment would enhance the chances that one or more members of the general public would observe and report the shooter. Carcasses would be properly disposed of off-campus."
Other options mentioned in the MOE letter to UVic include the possibility of the rabbits being sterilized and re-released within 1 km of their capture site, and the option of sanctuaries taking the rabbits from UVic. The sterilization and release option was never tried by UVic, as they said were unwilling to bear the responsibility for the rabbits. In fact, in one of their earliest press releases about the rabbits the university stated they were unwilling to spend any money on a problem they considered to be a community issue and not their responsibility. However rescue groups have for years been trying to get the university's permission to remove abandoned pet rabbits from campus, something which falls outside of the Wildlife Act and does not require a MOE permit. As ministry officials confirm, abandoned pet rabbits do not fall under the Wildlife Act until they have been abandoned for a period of 30 days.
The sanctuary option was supposedly explored in the Feral Rabbit Pilot Project contracted out to Common Ground, a wildlife harm-reduction company, but the university has long put out the story that animal sanctuaries were unwilling to take in the UVic rabbits.
However, in a recent article published in the UVic student newspaper the Martlet, on Thursday June 10, the project manager for the FRPP, Susan Vickery of Common Ground refuted this contention.
Vickery said “I knew we were going to be able to see the other side of [the permitting issue]. UVic could have got allowances,†she said. “We ran into a minor obstacle with the ministry, but a major obstacle with the university administration, who didn’t see it through.†The university's contention that it has done its due diligence with regard to non-lethal options Vickery compared to teenagers telling you they have cleaned their room, when in fact they have just kicked their pile of reeking gym clothes under the bed. Vickery feels betrayed that the university didnt see the pilot project through to the end. "I don't think they've even begun to look at the non-lethal approaches to managing that population problem," she said. "I don't think they've seriously engaged the community and all that support. I don't think they've come halfway at all."
The fact is a number of sanctuaries were willing to take the animals, but the university halted the project one third of the way through, calling it a failure, despite clear evidence to the contrary. Negotiations were underway at the time the project was halted by UVic to provide MOE permits to interested groups and individuals and relax regulations which were not in the interest of the animals or the spirit of the Wildlife Act. In fact, Ministry officials have indicated their hope that non-lethal methods be employed if at all possible, and a sustainable management plan be developed in the interest of the animals and the community. The MOE is also considering changes to the Wildlife Act pertaining to domestic rabbits, in large part due to the controversy which has erupted at UVic.
In fact, at the time the Feral Rabbit Pilot Project was prematurely halted by UVic, a number of animals were already in the care of EARS Sanctuary on Saltspring Island, and will remain there for life. This fact is never acknowledged by UVic. Ten of the rabbits from the aborted Feral Rabbit Pilot Project were relocated to EARS. Most importantly, this registered animal welfare charity pursued the permitting process through the Ministry of the Environment and currently holds a 5-year permit for capturing, housing, sterilizing and providing life-long sanctuary care for UVic rabbits.
The misinformation being disseminated by the university about the animal rescue groups does a disservice to the attempts being made in the community to help these animals, and misrepresents the situation in a fundamental way. The deliberate and false statements put out by the university on this matter are clearly an attempt by the university to present itself in a good light, instead of the reality, which is very grim. The university's killing of these animals is not only unconscionable, it is also completely avoidable. Had the university accepted to work with community groups on this issue, most of the rabbits would have been removed and rehomed, and the remainder sterilized. The remaining infertile population would have eventually disappeared through attrition. The university would have got its wish to rid itself of rabbits, and it could all have been done in an ethical, economical, sustainable, non-lethal, and humane manner.
Instead, the university maintains a stance of deliberate ignorance and persists in its nasty brutish plan to kill the rabbits.
Many in the community point to missed, dissed, or ignored non-lethal options from the community, the most recent being the offer from veterinarian Nick Shaw, who offered to vasectomize the entire male population of campus rabbits, and do a research project involving UVic students to boot. Shaw's generous offer comes at no cost to the university, and, it could be argued, would simultaneously improve UVic's disintegrating public image. But, as they say, you can lead a horse to water...
Having failed to locate the hearts or brains or moral centers of the UVic administrators, concerned citizens soon noticed a bigger bulge further down, in their pocketbooks, and decided to take aim there. An international boycott is being organized, financial supporters are beginning to withdraw, and UVic alumni are taking aim at their old alma mater on a number of levels.
Killing the rabbits will only, in the end, kill UVic.
PLEASE POST, SHARE, CIRCULATE, AND DISTRIBUTE FAR AND WIDE
Media
Release -
Copyright Roslyn Cassells 2010. All or part of this article may be reprinted for any purpose at any time as long as correctly attributed. Please reprint, copy, share, and disseminate widely.
Prepared by Roslyn Cassells
778-223-7442
roslyncassells@yahoo.ca
Action for UVic Rabbits
Susan Vickery, Common Ground
Feral Rabbit Pilot Project Contractor
250-538-8003
email: susanvickery7@gmail.com
Dr. Nick Shaw - Shaw Pet Hospitals
Veterinarian, proposing Vasectomy Project for UVic Rabbits
tel: 250-652-4312
email: nshawdvm@shaw.ca
BC Rabbit Advocacy Group
President Carmina Gooch
email: rabbitadbc@shaw.ca
Tom Smith
tomfmgt@uvic.ca
Facilities Management UVic
250-721-7591
Gayle Gorrill
vpfo@uvic.ca
VP Finance and Operations
250-721-7018
Dave Turpin
President UVic
dturpin@uvic.ca
250-721-7002
Reference documents below:
Letter from BC Ministry of Environment to UVic in 2009 confirming planned shooting
Excerpt from LGL 2008 report confirming shooting plan
Times Colonist article May 15 2010 confirming major cull planned for June 2010
UVic student paper - Martlet article June 13 2010 and community members' comments
Letter from BC Ministry of Environment to UVic confirming planned shooting
From: Morrison, Karen ENV:EX
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 3:34 PM
To: 'rpiskor@uvic.ca'
Cc: Forslund, Troy ENV:EX; Hales, Gerad S ENV:EX; Badry, Micheal J ENV:EX
Subject: UVic feral rabbits
FYI, the following is the information I have compiled to date following our meeting. I apologise for the delay in responding.
Schedule A of the Wildlife Act Designation and Exemption Regulation lists all species of the family Leporidae -hares and rabbits -as "wildlife. This means that any rabbit in BC is "wildlife" and human interference with them is regulated under the Wildlife Act. Ownership in all "wildlife" is vested in the government of BC and a person does not acquire a right of property in any wildlife except in accordance with a permit or licence.
The ministry does not give out possession permits to keep wildlife as pets, except for the following uses:
· For use in zoos [for commercial use where such use does not adversely affect the public interest];
· To an individual with recognized qualifications or a scientific institution to conduct research in a region [only the Director may issue a permit where scientific research is to be conducted in more than one region];
· The keeping of wildlife under the provisions of the Game Farm Act or the Fur Farm Act are not covered by this policy.
A person can take a feral rabbit from the wild, and keep it without a possession permit, once taken they can also transport this feral rabbit without a permit. They cannot release this feral rabbit back to the wild without a permit [unless they are releasing the rabbit within 1 km of capture site and within 24 hours of capture], nor can they give this feral rabbit to another person, without that person requiring a possession permit to do so.
The following are the options discussed at our last meeting which I discussed with regional wildlife staff, and which comply with current ministry policy and provincial regulation:
Ø An agency or person takes the feral rabbits from the wild, keep the rabbits in their possession long enough to be sterilized, and then release these rabbits within 1 km of capture site on U Vic properties (this is in compliance of one of the provincial regulations which allows a person to capture and either euthanize or relocated within 1 km of capture site ).
Ø UVic proposal included holding sterilized feral rabbits in large wired defined enclosures or “sanctuaries†which are escape proof to live out their life. No permit is required if the agency or person owns the feral rabbit sanctuary into which the rabbits are placed. However, if the sanctuary is owned by someone other than the agency or individual who took the rabbits from the wild, that “someone†would need a possession permit.
Ø A controlled cull (which could take a number of forms) with a public education component. Provincial permit may be required related if firearms are used (discharge of firearms within a closed area); also need to addressing local area bylaws with regard to discharge of firearms would need to be addressed.
Please advise us of the direction you wish to proceed. Please feel free to contact us if you require further input/clarification of the above.
Regards
Karen
Excerpt from LGL report confirming shooting plan:
Topic: Report from exterminators LGL, commissioned by the VP Finance and Operations, Gayle Gorrill
Excerpt From: Feral Rabbit Inventory in Selected Areas of the University of Victoria Campus
Submitted to: Office fo the Vice-President Finance and Operations, University of Victoria
Submitted by: LGL Limited; Environmental Research Associates July 24, 2008
Direct animal control can be approached in at least two different ways: live-trapping and shooting. Each approach has pros and cons. Trapping may be more appealing from the viewpoint of public perception. Conversely, trapping will be fairly labour intensive and the chances of it being a successful method are less certain than shooting. Trapping may, however, be a necessary precursor to a shooting program in order to improve the defensibility of shooting as an appropriate means of population control.
Trapping would involve the live-capture of animals that would then be euthanized and properly disposed of off-campus. Standard Tomahawk/Havahart style traps could be placed under vegetative cover in the vicinity of rabbit concentrations. To improve capture rates, traps should be pre-baited for a few days with highly palatable foods (e.g., apple, grain). Traps should be set in the evening and checked the following morning. The ability of trapping to efficiently meet the objectives of population reduction should be assessed in a pilot area prior to initiating a trapping program over a broader area of the campus. Live-capture using hand-held fishing nets could also be attempted in areas where rabbits can be approached closely, but the effectiveness of this technique would likely diminish rapidly after the first few animals were caught.
Night-time shooting using a high-velocity .177 calibre air rifle with scope designed for low-light conditions, is an efficient way to cull rabbits. The use of a firearm on campus would require approval from, and up-to date communications with, security and law-enforcement authorities. Although operations would be conducted at night and air rifles are reasonably quiet, illumination (street, parking lot, security, athletic field) plus the fact that the project in in an urban environment would enhance the chances that one or more members of the general public would observe and report the shooter. Carcasses would be properly disposed of off-campus.
Times Colonist article confirming plan for "major cull" in June 2010
UVic capturing rabbits, giving them lethal injections
Judith Lavoie, Victoria Times Colonist: Saturday, May 15, 2010
Rabbit overpopulation has been blamed for damage to the grounds at the University of Victoria
The University of Victoria has started killing rabbits around its sports fields, although a plan to manage the rapidly growing population will not be completed until next month.
Tom Smith, UVic’s facilities management director, said so far, 94 feral rabbits have been trapped live and taken to a local veterinarian for a lethal injection.
Trapping started last weekend, he said. “We have said all along that we won’t do a major cull until the report comes out, but we’ve also said that if we need to do minor culls for safety and health reasons, we reserve the right to do that.â€
Smith said the rabbits have seen a recent population boom, and the population in the sports fields has grown to at least 200. Burrows are a danger to athletes, he said. “You walk along the grass and the ground collapses under your feet.â€
Smith said the cull is not expected to move to other areas of campus until the management report is released in June.
Rabbit activist groups are planning a protest today at 1 p.m., with a march from Centennial Square to the legislature.
Although spaying and neutering will be part of the final plan, which is likely to recommend rabbit-control zones inside the ring road and bunny-free areas outside, there are too many rabbits to rely entirely on sterilization, Smith said.
An estimated 1,500 to 2,000 feral rabbits live on the university’s grounds, almost all descendants of abandoned pets.
An earlier pilot project designed to trap and sterilize rabbits was abandoned after 51 animals were trapped, partially because provincial regulations would not allow the animals to be adopted to private homes or to sanctuaries that had not been provincially approved.
Smith said the cull program is taking up where the pilot left off.
However, Susan Vickery of Common Ground, the company contracted for the pilot, called the cull a betrayal.
“This is abusing the goodwill of everyone in the community, who assumed there was not going to be a cull until the report was out,†she said.
Animal-rights activist Roslyn Cassells said the university has lied about its rabbit killings and an international boycott of the university is gaining steam.
“These are healthy, adoptable animals,†she said, calling the cull cruel. “There is no mention of the fate of the nursing baby bunnies of killed mother rabbits. They will be starving to death in their burrows or dying from dehydration.â€
Veterinarian Nick Shaw, who has offered to vasectomize the rabbits free of charge, said he’s not sure if he is still willing to be involved. “This is not a situation we wanted to see unfold. There are likely to be some significant protests that the university might have to listen to.â€
Sara Dubois, B.C. SPCA manager of wildlife services, said lethal injection is better than shooting.
“Our philosophy is that we don’t support a cull, but we don’t have the authority to stop it,†she said.
It would be impossible to find homes for 2,000 rabbits and the real villains are those who abandoned their pets, Dubois said.
This week, the B.C. SPCA sent letters to all Greater Victoria municipalities urging them to bring in bylaws to stop the sale of rabbits in pet stores.
Saanich South MLA Lana Popham is putting the finishing touches on a private member’s bill she hopes to introduce next week that would ban the sale of unsterilized rabbits in B.C.
Although private member’s bills almost never become law, Popham is optimistic, since some Liberals have said they will support her bill.
“It’s such a timely issue and it’s non-partisan.â€
© Copyright (c) CW Media Inc.
UVic student paper - Martlet article June 13 2010 and community members' comments:
June 13th, 2010 | Just This Issue
Rabbit cull miffs UVic community members
Display_rabbit-trap_web
Andrew Allen
Traps such as the one above are being used in the university's cull of rabbits around athletic fields.
Print
Jun 10, 2010 07:57 PM
Kailey Willetts
Some campus community members feel the university hasn’t exhausted all the options for controlling UVic’s rabbit population, but their voices aren’t being heard.
The university began culling its rabbit population, which is estimated between 1,500 and 1,600 rabbits, on May 8. So far, more than 100 rabbits have been culled.
Susan Vickery of Common Ground, which led a pilot project to sterilize rabbits around the athletic field last year, said the university administration pulled the plug on the project before it was complete.
“We got a lot of [community] support,†she said. “I was actually in shock when they pulled it.â€
Vickery said the pilot project was really a feasibility study. The plan was to trap, spay or neuter, and then rehouse rabbits, as well as track the population. The pilot project was expected to target approximately 150 rabbits, although the number was closer to 200 after the spring population increase.
“We were gathering a lot of info that we didn’t previously have.â€
The pilot project was cut short, about 50 rabbits in, when an issue arose with the Ministry of Environment. The rabbits were to be taken to sanctuaries, but in order to do so, special permits were required.
“There was no place to take the rabbits,†said Tom Smith, UVic’s executive director of Facilities Management. “The sanctuaries that were hoping to take them were unwilling to go through the licensing process.â€
He added that 40 of the spayed and neutered rabbits were returned to campus.
However, Vickery said Common Ground was still working with the sanctuaries and negotiating with the ministry when the pilot project was ended.
“I knew we were going to be able to see the other side of [the permitting issue]. UVic could have got allowances,†she said. “We ran into a minor obstacle with the ministry, but a major obstacle with the university administration, who didn’t want it to go through.â€
Smith said the university began the cull because there are simply too many rabbits, and the university has a responsibility to control the population. Currently, they are focusing on the area around the athletic fields out of concern for the safety of athletes.
“Sometimes you see this tiny little hole, but the hole actually goes underground three or four feet and it goes parallel to the surface so when you walk along you step on the grass and it collapses under your feet,†said Smith. “So if you’re an athlete running and you do that, you could break your ankle or get seriously injured.â€
Smith said the university also has a responsibility to keep the fields safe for members of the community who are using the fields on evenings and weekends. The university hopes to establish the athletic field area, as well as all other university property outside of Ring Road, as a rabbit-free zone. Inside Ring Road they plan to establish rabbit controlled zones.
However, many campus community members feel that culling the rabbit population outside of Ring Road isn’t the best option.
Vickery feels betrayed that the university didn’t see the pilot project through to the end.
“I don’t think they’ve even begun to look at the non-lethal approaches to managing that population problem,†she said. “I don’t think they’ve seriously engaged the community and all that support. I don’t think they’ve come halfway at all.â€
Vickery isn’t alone. Facebook groups have sprung up opposing the cull, such as “Support Saving The UVic Bunnies,†which has 387 members, and “UVic Buns Management,†— a group dedicated to finding a non-lethal solution to rabbit overpopulation — which has 354 members. People opposed to the cull have also held marches and encouraged people to write to the university to try and get the attention of administrators.
Some rabbit activists have established chains of communication, and have come out to try and prevent rabbits from entering traps. One woman even offered to take a captured baby rabbit home with her.
The university is aware of the resistance to the cull.
“We respect that this is a sensitive issue for many people; many people care for the rabbits and we understand that,†said Smith. “This isn’t something that we want to do; this is something that we have to do.â€
Smith said that while the university wants to be as respectful as possible of people’s opinions, it will be establishing its right to trap rabbits.
“These rabbits are considered wildlife under the Wildlife Act in B.C.,†he said. “The Wildlife Act states that its unlawful to interfere with legally set traps and there are fines that can be levied against people that interfere with legally set traps.â€
Joey Fearon, a UVic Law student and representative of the UVic Vegan Association, says people need to take a step back and think about why the cull is happening.
“I think that generally speaking, when it comes to animals, most people are very confused, especially when it comes to how we should or shouldn’t treat animals.â€
Fearon said that people often act in a contradictory fashion when it comes to animals — on one hand, treating them like family members and taking their welfare very seriously, and on the other, causing them extreme amounts of harm on a daily basis, such as through the meat industry or animal testing.
“I think from this framework where we claim to take animal interests seriously, but it’s very easy for us to be extremely violent to animals, I think that’s also at play in the situation with the UVic rabbits,†he said.
Fearon says that most people, when they see the rabbits, don’t want to harm them.
“[However], when they become an inconvenience, it becomes very easy to harm them,†he added. “If we claim to hold that we shouldn’t unnecessarily cause suffering and we shouldn’t unnecessarily kill animals, how does that play out with the UVic rabbits?â€
Fearon said there are still many things the university could do, such as better fencing around the fields, to co-habit on campus with the rabbits.
“It doesn’t mean that the rabbits are never going to cause an inconvenience,†he said, “but that’s what it means to share the land with others. Humans cause us great inconvenience all the time.â€
Comments
Sara wrote:
If you're going to mention Facebook groups, why would you omit "Action for UVic Rabbits" with 1253 members. Way bigger than the other two.
Yesterday at 05:10 AM
Post | Flag as inappropriate Flagged
Bill wrote:
Going to keep the rabbits inside the Ring Road. Great idea - NOT! What is to prevent them from crossing to the Dark Side? More fences around the Ring Road? Memos to all rabbits to "not Cross the Road"? Why not think of the other options? UVic's reputation in this matter is on par with Campbell's HST! Methinks Mr Smith's real agenda is to kill off as many as they can, rabbit zones or not.
Yesterday at 04:45 PM
Post | Flag as inappropriate Flagged
Charles wrote:
Humane killing? How can anyone hold a strong, frightened rabbit long enough to inject a needle into the vein in its ear? What about the babies where the vein is hardly visible? Sorry I don't buy that method. Its too time consuming and too costly and truly what vet would want to euthanize a healthy creature? Aren't they supposed to provide health care, not kill? I hate to think of what other, crueler methods are being used.
Yesterday at 06:13 PM
Post | Flag as inappropriate Flagged
Joey wrote:
“The sanctuaries that were hoping to take them were unwilling to go through the licensing process.†Correction.
Ten of the rabbits were relocated to EARS on Salt Spring Island. The registered animal welfare charity pursued the permitting process through the MOE and currently holds a 5-year permit for capturing, housing, sterilizing and providing life-long sanctuary care for UVic rabbits.
Yesterday at 09:11 PM
Post | Flag as inappropriate Flagged
Jean wrote:
Of the four (that I know of) Facebook groups opposing the ‘Convenience Kill’ the Martlet has chosen to mention not the largest group, “SAVE THE UVIC BUNNIES†with 1,408 members, or the second largest, “Action for UVic Rabbits†at 1,252 members - for a combined total of 2,660 people - but only the two smallest groups, with on the order of 350 members each.
Even more disturbing is the omission of any mention of Dr. Nick Shaw’s offer to vasectomise the male rabbits - at no cost to the University.
As the European Domestic rabbits that inhabit UVic are:
a) monogamous, and mate for life b) fiercely territorial. (Both buck and doe will violently repel a ‘strange’ rabbit - thus keeping fertile intruders out of the niche they occupy.)
Uvic’s rabbits also have a very short lifespan - so in any given period, a substantial number will die, and not be replaced.
The implications of these facts, with respect to the vasectomy program are: a)If the male of a pair is vasectomised, the pair will have no more offspring. b) The UVic rabbit population will implode.
Why has the Martlet misrepresented the extent of the opposition to the rabbit ‘Convenience Killing’?
Why has the Martlet omitted any mention of the most effective, humane and cost effective solution?
Why?
Yesterday at 11:04 PM
Post | Flag as inappropriate Flagged
Post a Comment
Copyright © Martlet.ca 2010
Roslyn Cassells is a BC based social justice activist and Canada's first elected Green. She is an ardent animal and human rights activist, and writes, teaches and campaigns for positive social, economic and ecological change everywhere.
|
