American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign

was a lack of support by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
and the provincial governments. In July 2006, The Federal
Minister of the Environment recommended that plains bison
not be listed because of potential economic implications for
the Canadian bison industry (http://canadagazette.gc.ca/
partII/2005/20050727/html/si72-e.html).
There are several potential complications that would accompany
the process of listing plains bison in North America. One
complication regarding the legal status of bison is the issue
of hybridisation with cattle. There is considerable uncertainty
concerning if, and how, endangered species status should be
applied to hybrids in Canada and the U.S. (Boyd and Gates
2006; Campton and Kaeding, 2005). Hybrids are exempt from
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when propagated in captivity,
and when they are the progeny from one listed and one non-
listed parent (O’Brien and Mayr 1991). A second complication is
the consideration of commercial bison production in evaluating
the numerical status of this species. A third complication is the
legal distinction and status of wild and captive bison should
listing be considered for the wild form (Boyd 2003).
Bison often enjoy protected status in Canadian and U.S.
national parks as a result of the legal status of the habitat.
The Canadian National Parks Act protects bison and their
habitat in national parks. In Canada, provincial and territorial
governments can also use the federal Wildlife Trade Act to
control the movement of bison across their borders. In the
U.S., enabling legislation attached to each national park when
it was established, typically protect bison as wildlife unless
they are not considered native to the region. Where they are
not considered native to a region, or are known to be cattle
hybrids, national parks often consider them invasive and may
consider removal or eradication.
The United Stated Forest Service (USFS) classifies the American
Bison as “Not Sensitive in Region 2 and Not of Concern” by
its Species Conservation Program assessment (USDA Forest
Service 2009). The rationale for this classification is that
populations and habitats are currently stable or increasing.
This USFS review suggests that while the species may warrant
restoration as an ecological keystone species, it does not
warrant sensitive status.
Conservation and restoration programmes for American bison
are confounded by socioeconomic challenges resulting from
the confusing legal status for this species. The legal status of
bison ranges from domestic livestock to wildlife among various
federal, state, and provincial jurisdictions across North America
(Table 8.1). The legal recognition of bison as wildlife is often
impeded by their historic, or in many cases dual, classification
as domestic livestock. Where they have attained their status
as wildlife, they are routinely managed within fenced preserves
where some, if not all, natural selective processes are curtailed.
66 American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010
Ten states in the U.S., four provinces in Canada, and one
state in Mexico classify bison as wildlife (Table 8.1). All other
states and provinces within their original range designate
bison solely as domestic livestock. Plains bison are designated
and managed as wildlife in Alaska, Arizona, Utah, Montana,
Wyoming, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and
Chihuahua. Four other states consider bison as wildlife, but do
not have free ranging populations to manage; Idaho (extreme
rarity), Missouri (extirpated), New Mexico (no longer occurring),
and Texas (extirpated). Plains bison are listed and managed
as wildlife, but are considered extirpated, in Alberta and
Manitoba. Wild bison are preserved, as a public trust resource,
managed to protect natural selection processes, and hunted
as free roaming wildlife in Alaska, Arizona, Utah, Montana,
Wyoming, British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. Wood
bison are designated and managed as wildlife under provincial
statutes in Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon, and the
Northwest Territories. Wood bison enjoy protected status in all
of these provinces. There are legal restrictions on hunting and
other activities such as capture and harassment. Subsistence
hunting by aboriginal peoples is allowed under strict regulation
in Northwest Territories and Yukon.
Under Mexican law, wildlife belongs to the nation. However,
Mexico has only recently developed a wildlife conservation and
management system that entitles a landowner to be registered
in the programme (Unidades de Manejo y Aprovechamiento)
and to receive the benefits of harvest and commercial use
of wildlife. This programme has doubled the landscape
available for wildlife protection in Mexico. In 1995, the federal
government established a bureau managed by the Secretary
of the Environment. Within this organisation is a department
for the administration of wildlife conservation programmes. In
2007, the conservation of threatened species is becoming the
responsibility of the National System of Protected Natural Areas.
There is only a limited state or local wildlife management
infrastructure to support federal wildlife conservation efforts
in Mexico. Local communities are only now beginning to
accept and appreciate the value of free-ranging wildlife on
landscapes that they own and manage. Until a broader legal
and policy infrastructure is established, federal law and policy
will continue to direct wildlife management conservation
in Mexico. Federal policy is primarily aimed at developing
partnerships with landowners and cooperatively identifies
conservation measures acceptable to individual landowners.
In addition, federal conservation law and policy drives the
protection of land to establish “Natural Protected Areas” to
conserve species associated with those landscapes. Public
interest has increased in developing wildlife programmes for
economic and conservation purposes. Interest in conservation
continued on page 73