A. Species
Scientific name: Ursus arctos horribilis
Common name(s): Grizzly bear
Global IUCN Red List Threat Status:
B. Location of use
Geographic location(s):
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Northwest Territories
- Nunavut
- Yukon
Country/Region:
C. Scale of assessment
Scale of assessment: National Level
Name/Details of location: northwestern Canada
D. Timescale of use
Start Year: 2008
End Year: 2008
E. Information about the use
How is the wild species sourced?: Wild species sourced from its natural habitat
Type of use: Extractive
Practice of use: Hunting and/or Trapping of live terrestrial and aerial animals
Lethal or non-lethal: Lethal
Does this use involve take/extraction of: The whole entire organism
Purpose(s) of end use: Medicine and hygiene, Collection/display, Decorative and aesthetic and retribution killing
Motivation of use: Income generation from trade (individual/household/community) and Recreational
Is this use legal or illegal?: Some use is legal and some is illegal
F. Information about the Users
Which stakeholder(s) does the record primarily focus on?: not recorded
G. Information about the sustainability of use
Is there evidence that the use is having an impact on the target species?: Wild species sourced from its natural habitat
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an ecological perspective been recorded?: Yes, considered sustainable
Details of assessment carried out: CITES Non detriment findings
Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: illegal harvest is in addition to legal harvest under sustainable management; illegal harvest often in areas where legal harvest not permitted due to low population density etc - thus, illegal harvest appears to have potentially detrimental impacts on some local subpopulations. Authors state: "Recovery efforts are required in 9 Grizzly Bear populations in British Columbia and throughout Alberta to prevent localized extirpation." Nevertheless, they come to the conclusion that "For grizzly bear in Canada there is currently a positive NDF (i.e. harvest of grizzly bear is considered non-detrimental to the species in the wild)."
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an economic perspective been recorded?: Yes, considered sustainable
Details of assessment carried out: CITES Non detriment findings
Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: Authors show that bear hunting is a lucrative business: Between 2002 and 2005, Canada issued approximately 250 CITES export permits annually for grizzly bear hunting trophies. Sport hunting is a lucrative industry in Canada as grizzly bear trophies are highly prized. An annual average of about $2.8 million is spent on grizzly bear hunting in the province of British Columbia alone (Province of British Columbia, 1995).
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from a social perspective been recorded?: not recorded
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from a human health perspective been recorded?: not recorded
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an animal health/welfare perspective been recorded?: not recorded
Recommendations provided in the record to maintain or enhance the sustainability of the use of the target species
Due to the large geographical area in which grizzly bears reside it can be difficult to determine their exact population size and demographics. A variety of methods must be utilised to gather accurate information and data analyses are complex. Undocumented mortalities may contribute to uncertainty when determining population estimates and sustainable harvest levels.
Record source
Information about the record source: formal_data_stats
Date of publication/issue/production: 2008-01-01T00:00:00+0000
Source Reference(s):
Date of record entry: 2023-10-06