Photo by Get Bear Smart Society
Black bears are killed year-round by the BC Conservation Officer Service (BC COS) but September and October can be the most deadly months – and the intentional misuse of the term euthanasia could influence how the public perceives this ongoing crisis.
As black bears prepare for their hibernation periods (torpor) they enter a phase known as hyperphagia – a period of intense eating where they can consume up to 20,000 calories per day to build up fat reserves for winter. Unfortunately, as bears seek out these resources they may have negative encounters with people, or simply access anthropogenic (human-based) food sources instead of natural ones. Negative encounters or accessing garbage can mark bears for death by the BC COS – despite the fact that many of the killings are avoidable. But the manner in which these killings are addressed by the BC COS, government, and media adds a layer of unnecessary harm – the widespread misuse of the term “euthanasia.”
Bears are killed, not euthanized
Euthanasia is defined as “the act of humanely ending the life of an animal to relieve pain or suffering, typically when they are terminally ill or injured beyond recovery.”
It’s a compassionate decision made with the well-being of the animal in mind. On the other hand, killing is the act of ending the life of an animal that is often healthy but deemed a threat to human safety or property by government agents.
In the case of black bears in BC, many are killed not because they are injured or suffering, but because their presence is inconvenient or perceived as dangerous. To call these killings “euthanasia” is a blatant misuse of the term. It sanitizes the reality of what’s happening and obscures the accountability of both the authorities and the public.
Photo by Jillian Cooper / Getty Images
The role of individual conservation officers
Last year, the BC COS killed 603 black bears. Since 2011, over 6,500 black bears have been killed in our province, with the BC COS killing an average of 500 bears per year.
While many factors contribute to a bear being killed—improper waste management, the availability of foods and attractants, or increasing bear-human interactions—the final decision rests with each individual conservation officer. This is where things get murky. Some officers may be more tolerant and solution-oriented, exploring non-lethal options like relocation or deterrence, but others may be quicker to use lethal force. While provincial guidelines and policy can influence their decision-making, a conservation officer is a special provincial constable, giving them full authority and control over their service weapon. It’s up to their discretion when and when not to pull the trigger.
Furthermore, if a bear has been seen eating garbage, some officers may pre-emptively label the animal a danger, assuming it will inevitably become a threat to humans. This mindset leads to bears being killed not because they have posed an immediate danger, but because of the belief that they might in the future. This is also where the language of “euthanasia” becomes especially problematic – it implies that the bear was already beyond saving, when in many cases, more tolerant or creative solutions could have been pursued.
The harm of misinformation
Referring to these killings as euthanasia does more than just verbally sanitize the act – it misinforms the public about the nature of human-wildlife interactions and places the burden solely on the animals. By framing these killings as compassionate or necessary, the language lets the public and policymakers off the hook from addressing the root of the problem: human behaviour and a culture of killing inherent within many government agencies.
Call for change
It’s crucial for both the BC COS and the media to stop using the term “euthanasia” when it is not applicable. This misuse of language only serves to dull public understanding and prevent meaningful change. Wildlife related issues are complex, but the way forward isn’t through euphemisms; it’s through honest conversation, accountability, and a collective effort to protect both people and wildlife – and to change government policies that promote a culture of killing.
This autumn, as black bear killings mount, let’s call it what it is—killing. And more importantly, let’s acknowledge that black bears are peaceful by nature, and they are deserving of our compassion and respect.
Interested in helping your community understand black bear behaviour and ensure attractants are being managed? Check out our black bear door hangers on our resources page by clicking here.
