I don’t know when it happened. I wish I was blogging when it did. Perhaps, it is because it seems easier to discuss with children when we use terms like mommy deer and baby bear to discuss wildlife interactions. We put animals and people in the same category and teach our children that animals should behave like humans.

I have been going through some bear curriculum that the Ontario MNR have published for our school children. I have only just read the material for grade 2 children. I will reserve my detailed comments for another post, but I feel the material demonstrates what I talked about in my opening paragraph.

Comments like,

The family group breaks up the following May or June when the cubs (now yearlings) are 17 to 18 months old.” (pg.41)

There is an activity where the students are asked to compare human mothers and babies to mommy bears and cubs. See photo to the right. Harmless enough I suppose, but I feel it moves children to associate animals with human families. A relationship that ant-hunting groups like PETA capitalize to spread their message. This makes it difficult to discuss important wildlife management tools, like hunting, with children. Instead, of killing just animals, the indirect message children are getting is that dad (or mom) is killing a mommy bear or a daddy deer. This is something that repulses children even more. If we want to change perspectives on hunting, we need to start teaching our children the facts of wildlife management and the harsh realities of the wild. This bear curriculum does not even mention hunting as a tool to prevent nuisance bears. My hunting money probably went into its creation!

In reality, wildlife ‘family units’ are nothing like your everyday human family. Yesterday, I watched with curiosity as a friend put out some corn to winter feed some deer. Within seconds, deer emerged from the surrounding forest and walked towards the corn piles.

It did not take long to shatter the motherly love myth.

I saw does (female deer) with fawns (yearling deer) approach the feed. One would expect (like all good family units) that ‘mommy’ deer would let baby deer eat first. I mean, all good moms would do that right?

Nope!

As soon as the fawns reached out for the corn, the does would ‘hoof’ them out of the way while mommy feasted on the corn. I, then, expected the bucks (male deer) or ‘daddy’ deer to stick up for their kids and tell mom to let the little ones get some food. After all, they are a family unit.

Nope.

The young deer met the same hostile reaction from their ‘dads’. The kids got what was left over from mom and dad’s greed.

It is survival of the fittest out there. The comfort, love, and concern for children found in most human families is not seen in wildlife ‘family’ units. Let’s not teach children that wildlife live in family units.

If humans and animals were on the same ‘level’ there would be no need for statements in the bear curriculum like this,

People can change. Bears cannot. Therefore, it is people who must take responsible action to make sure that unnatural food sources are not accessible to bears.” (page 5)

Surely, after my mom talks to mommy bear they could find a way through the nuisance bear problem. I mean, they both understand motherly love don’t they?