Photo by davidfillion / Getty Images
According to a recent CBC article, a Winnipeg woman has been fined $300 under the Migratory Birds Convention Act for “harassing” a Canada goose after throwing an object at the bird while they blocked her entry to a building.
The law makes it illegal to disturb, harass, or harm migratory birds or their nests, with penalties that can include significant fines.
This case raises questions about how “harassment” is defined in wildlife law, how intent is considered, and what lawful methods exist to deter animals from certain areas.
We connected with animal rights lawyer Victoria Shroff to help unpack the legal implications of this case and explore how any lessons could be applied to the protection and management of fur-bearing animals.
Q: The Winnipeg goose case shows how “harassment” can lead to penalties. How does federal or provincial law define “harassment” of wildlife, and would that definition apply to fur-bearing animals such as beavers, foxes, or raccoons?
A: Canada Geese, like many migratory birds, are protected under the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA), 1994, rooted in a historic 1916 treaty between Canada and the U.S. This law makes it illegal to:
- Disturb, harass, or harm migratory birds,
- Damage or destroy their nests or eggs,
- Or handle them without a federal permit.
Violations can result in hefty fines, sometimes reaching into the thousands of dollars (Learn more: Canada Geese FAQs – Environment and Climate Change Canada).
While the Canada Goose is federally protected, fur-bearing animals like foxes, raccoons, and beavers are mostly governed by provincial laws, which means protections vary depending on where you are in Canada. The MBCA is a strong federal law. In contrast, fur-bearing mammals are protected somewhat inconsistently through provincial laws, which are more patchwork and often seem to be more concerned with resource ‘management’ than conservation.
Q: What counts as “harassment” of wild animals?
A: This differs across legislation. For example under BC’s Wildlife Statute: “harass” includes worry, exhaust, fatigue, annoy, plague, pester, tease or torment, but does not include the lawful hunting, trapping or capturing of wildlife (BC Wildlife Act).
Discrepancy and lack of harmony across provinces leaves gaps and many species vulnerable, especially when people (wrongly in my view) perceive them as pests or commodities.
Photo by LaSalle-Photo / Getty Images
Q: What lawful options exist for deterring wildlife like geese or raccoons?
A: First, people should stop feeding wild animals and remove attractants (like garbage, pet food, or birdseed). For geese, habitat modifications such as low fencing, landscaping changes, or flashing devices can be effective and legal. When dealing with all wild animals, gentle, humane deterrents and exclusion methods are recommended.
People need to think before they act. They need to learn to coexist kindly with all animals. Animals should not be seen as an inconvenience. Coexistence means using non-lethal, legal tools — not aggression.
Q: What happens if someone says they harmed wildlife to protect themselves or their property?
A: Generally, this is handled on a case-by-case basis depending on the governing law. If alternatives existed or the action by a person was excessive or cruel, their defence for their behaviour may likely fail and charges and fines may follow. It depends. There are various considerations and differing laws that would go into a case including if the animal were endangered or at risk.
Overall, I think high fines are a very good idea for deterring bad human behaviour.
Photo by Harry Collins / Getty Images
Q: How can we change public attitudes that treat wildlife as a nuisance?
A: Education and policy must work together. Key steps include:
- Re-framing wildlife as neighbours, not nuisances
- Youth education and public outreach
- Supporting non-lethal conflict resolution
- Integrating habitat protection into urban planning
- Funding ethical wildlife rehabilitation and discouraging unnecessary relocation or killing of animals.
Even simple actions, like securing your garbage, can make a huge difference.
Final Thoughts
The goose case in Winnipeg is a reminder that wildlife law isn’t just about punishment. Rather, it’s about coexistence, education, and respect for wild animals.
Whether it’s a nesting goose, a family of raccoons, or a curious fox, animals deserve safe passage through shared spaces. The laws are there to protect them and to guide us toward more compassionate solutions.
About Victoria Shroff, KC
Victoria Shroff, KC is one of Canada’s longest-serving animal law practitioners and a recognized pioneer in animal law and education. Vancouver based, she has practiced animal law for over two decades at Shroff Animal Law and is a strong national voice for the legal protection of animals. Shroff is notably the first (and only) lawyer in Canada to be appointed King’s Counsel (KC) for her animal law work and public service. Shroff also teaches animal law at the UBC’s Allard School of Law, Capilano University and frequently appears in media and legal forums to discuss the intersection of law, ethics, and animal welfare. Shroff is the recipient of several accolades including being voted one of Canada’s ‘Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers’. She delivered a TEDx talk titled “Why Animals Need Law” where she explains the importance of recognizing animals as sentient beings and coexistence between humans and animals. She is the author of Canadian Animal Law (2nd Ed., 2025). Learn more at www.ShroffAnimalLaw.com.
