Location: Southwestern Alberta

Producers have until July 6 to share predation data that could reshape provincial compensation

Southwestern Alberta ranchers have long absorbed losses they couldn’t prove — calves that vanished into the bush or carcasses too picked-over to confirm a predator kill. A survey now underway could reveal ranchers’ true livestock losses and help set a multiplier to determine fair compensation.

Waterton Biosphere Region is asking livestock producers to share five years of predation data, with the goal of calculating a compensation multiplier to recommend to the province. The adjustment is intended to better reflect livestock losses producers believe were caused by predators but could not be confirmed or found.

It’s a question the organization has been working to answer since 2011, when its carnivore working group identified gaps in Alberta’s Wildlife Predator Compensation Program. A first survey produced a figure of 2.5 — meaning for every confirmed predator kill, ranchers were actually losing an estimated 2.5 animals.

That figure went to the province in 2013 and, more than a decade later, the work is still unfinished.

Where the program falls short

Alberta’s Wildlife Predator Compensation Program pays ranchers when livestock are killed by bears, wolves, cougars or eagles. Claims are investigated by Fish and Wildlife officers before compensation is paid.

There are three possible outcomes: the kill is confirmed and the producer is paid full market value; it is denied and no payment is made; or it is ruled probable, with enough evidence to suggest a predator, but not enough to confirm it.

A probable ruling pays at 50 per cent. Even then, two conditions must be met: a second kill by the same species within 90 days and 10 kilometres. If those criteria aren’t met, nothing is paid.

Many animal losses that ranchers believe were taken by predators, but couldn’t prove, go uncompensated entirely.

“Sometimes when they find the carcass, it can be difficult for Fish and Wildlife officers to confirm whether the animal was killed by a predator or only scavenged,” says Jeff Bectell, WBR’s Carnivore and Communities Program co-ordinator. “And in treed landscapes, it can be difficult to find everything that predators kill.”

The case for a multiplier

A multiplier would address the gap directly. If a producer finds one confirmed predator kill, the program would recognize that more animals were likely lost.

“The purpose of the multiplier is that you understand that the losses the livestock owner is experiencing are greater than the single animal or animals that have been found,” Bectell says. “It accounts for the missing animals, or for the ones where the carcass was so eaten up that you couldn’t confirm it.”

The state of Wyoming uses such a system and Bectell says multipliers have reached as high as seven in some jurisdictions.

WBR’s 2013 recommendations proposed a multiplier of 2.5. It also recommended probable kills be paid at 100 per cent rather than 50, and that the 90-day and 10-kilometre criteria be removed. Compensation for livestock guardian dogs killed by predators was also proposed.

Of those recommendations, the multiplier carried the largest potential cost to the program.

The province did not act on any of them.

Fifteen years of near-misses

WBR has taken its recommendations to ministers, departments and governments.

“At times, we felt like we were making progress,” Bectell says. “But every time there was traction gained, the process was slow. Before things could be completed, there would be staff changes or an election, or a pandemic that would just derail everything.”

The program itself has shifted jurisdictions. It was formerly administered by Forestry and Parks. In January, it moved to the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation. WBR is now working with that ministry.

“Currently the government is giving some attention to this request,” he says. “They’ve said, well, let’s look at this together, and something that we think would be valuable is to look again at the multiplier level. So that’s why we’re asking these questions of producers.”

He says no commitment has been made; the province has not promised to adopt a multiplier.

What the survey asks

The survey is open to livestock producers in the MD of Pincher Creek, the MD of Ranchland, the MD of Willow Creek and Cardston County, and covers the years 2021 through 2025.

Producers are asked to provide total herd size, total death loss from all causes, perceived predator death loss, and the number of kills confirmed or ruled probable by Fish and Wildlife.

The first two questions provide context, demonstrating not every death is being attributed to predators.

The last two are the core of the exercise. The gap between what producers believe they lost and what was formally confirmed is precisely what the multiplier is designed to close.

Once the data is collected and averaged across all respondents, WBR will present the results to Agriculture and Irrigation. The submission will include not just a single multiplier figure but a range — reflecting that some producers experience heavier losses than others.

Producer identities will not be shared with the province and individual data will remain with WBR.

Who should fill it out

Bectell is clear about who the survey is for: producers of cattle, sheep or goats who believe they have experienced losses to bears, wolves or cougars at any point in the past five years — even once. Partial responses covering fewer than five years are still welcome.

Coyote predation is not covered under the provincial program, nor are poultry losses, and neither should be included.

“This does take a little time,” Bectell acknowledges. “People need to dig through their records. But this matters.”

The survey deadline is July 6. Paper copies are available at local MD and county offices. The online version is at forms.office.com/r/uTFKq4X4GY.

The bigger picture

Alberta’s predator compensation program handles between 250 and 300 claims a year across the province, Bectell says.

A decade ago, the total provincial payout was about $250,000. Rising cattle prices have pushed that figure closer to $350,000 — not because there are dramatically more claims, but because animals are worth more.

The multiplier, if adopted, would increase those costs. But Bectell frames compensation as one piece of a larger effort, not the whole answer.

WBR’s carnivore program includes on-farm predator-deterrent projects, bear safety workshops, public education and support for research into predator populations. The goal, as Bectell puts it, is for people and large carnivores to share the landscape.

“We don’t hang our hat on any single solution,” he says. “Not lethal control alone, not electric fences alone, not compensation alone. We need all of those elements working together.”

But compensation, he says, has consistently been the area where producers feel most shortchanged.

If the province moves forward, it has not yet decided whether changes would roll out provincially or be piloted in a limited area first. Either option is possible.

Preliminary results of the current survey are expected to be submitted to Agriculture and Irrigation by mid July.

Questions can be directed to Bectell at jbectell@watertonbiosphere.com or 403-653-2267.