I, too, at one time wondered about the term 'Conservation' when the mandate of the Office is to 'protect people and property' above all else. In the late Fall of 2004 a senior Conservation Officer went against 'policy' and took a orphaned and dying cub to a Lower Mainland wildlife shelter. The usual protocol at the time was to euthanize cubs whenever found. This protocol had been established years ago due to the belief that the Lower Mainland was devoid of wilderness in which rehabbed cubs could be released. Sadly, this first cub died but since then the Shelter has rescued, rehabbed and released 6 orphaned cubs to more remote areas of the Lower Mainland. The actions of this one Officer to do the right thing has furthered conservation efforts of bears in a region where bears had almost been written off as nuisance wildlife and not worth saving. Since 2004, I look at each individual Conservation Officer differently and give them the benefit of the doubt. And FYI,this same Conservation Officer was head investigator on the eagle poaching case in North Vancouver where more than 11 people have been charged with criminal offenses. I would like to ask the question why do we only hear about negative responses by Conservation Officers in the media and not any positive ones? Perhaps doing good things in the line of duty does not sell papers or make for 'dramatic' news coverage?!

Have Some Faith,
Barb Murray
Bear Matters BC
North Vancouver
www.bearmatters.com