UC Observer logo
UCObserver on SoundCloud UCObserver on YouTube UCObserver on Facebook UCObserver on Twitter UCObserver's RSS Feeds
(Photo: cuatrok77/Flickr via Creative Commons)

Cormorants aren't the devil

Ontario's proposed new measures amount to a slaughter of an entire native bird species for no scientifically compelling reason, says this writer

By Douglas Hunter

When I first wrote about the controversy surrounding double-crested cormorants in the Great Lakes for Seasons (now ON Nature) magazine in 2002, a scientist with the provincial government assured me: “We view these birds as an important part of the ecosystem, and we don’t want to see them disappear.” That no longer seems to be the case.

Last December, Ontario’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) proposed new measures for controlling cormorant numbers. If adopted, they will be nothing less than a means for recreational hunters to exterminate the species in the province. The plan is a retrograde expression of our notion of having dominion over animals.

Cormorants have been unfairly hated worldwide for centuries. The poet John Milton didn’t help matters in 1667 by casting a cormorant, with its black plumage and serpentine neck, as the devil in Paradise Lost. Today, some anglers and commercial fishermen insist that the “devil bird” negatively impacts fish species, such as perch and bass. Other people don’t like the messiness of cormorant colonies and have blamed them for limiting numbers of black-crowned night herons in certain areas.

But the science in support of these claims has been thin at best. If anything, cormorants in the Great Lakes may be critical to controlling an invasive fish species, the alewife, that competes with desirable fish. Linda Wires, a conservation biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has long criticized the methodology of the science that’s pitted against these winged creatures. In her 2013 book, Double-Crested Cormorant: Plight of a Feathered Pariah, she writes: “It is my hope that by revealing aspects of the double-crested cormorant’s biology and history, along with the politics shaping its management, some will rethink its role in the ecosystem.”

This rethinking hasn’t happened in Ontario. The MNRF’s latest policy proposal, which cites no scientific literature, will classify the double-crested cormorant as a “game” species. But they will be treated much differently than other game birds. Their hunting season will run for nine months, across the entire province, with hunters allowed to kill up to 50 birds a day, with no seasonal limit.

Hunters will also be permitted to let the meat spoil (although they’ll have to retrieve carcasses), something not permitted with normal game species. The plan allows for a mass slaughter, with hunters free to approach flocks or nesting colonies in boats and blast away at young and old, male and female.

Culls like this are an old song that we still insist on singing. In the 1920s, we poisoned wolves in Ontario’s Algonquin Park in a misguided effort to support deer populations for sport hunters. In the 20th century, orcas were considered a threat to the B.C. salmon fishery and shot on sight. In 2019, we seem to think an entire native bird species should be slaughtered for no scientifically compelling reason.

We almost lost cormorants in the Great Lakes to toxic DDT pesticides in the 1970s, and their recovery was a triumph of environmentalism. Now, we can’t seem to wait to get rid of them. If the new regulations are approved, many people across all political spectrums will be delighted. It is what people are asking for these days: permission to be cruel, to satisfy their own narrow interests of what is right and necessary.

Douglas Hunter is a writer in Port McNicoll, Ont.

This story originally appeared in the March/April 2019 issue of The Observer. For more of The United Church Observer's award-winning content, subscribe to the magazine today.

Readers’ advisory: The discussion below is moderated by The UC Observer and facilitated by Intense Debate (ID), an online commentary system. The Observer reserves the right to edit or reject any comment it deems to be inappropriate. Approved comments may be further edited for length, clarity and accuracy, and published in the print edition of the magazine. Please note: readers do not need to sign up with ID to post their comments on ucobserver.org. We require only your user name and e-mail address. Your comments will be posted from Monday to Friday between 9:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Join the discussion today!


(Photo: cuatrok77/Flickr via Creative Commons)

Cormorants aren't the devil

by Douglas Hunter

Ontario's proposed new measures amount to a slaughter of an entire native bird species for no scientifically compelling reason, says this writer

Promotional Image


The United Church Observer's editor and publisher, Jocelyn Bell. (Photo: Lindsay Palmer)

The new name of 'The Observer' revealed!

by Jocelyn Bell

"United Church" will no longer be on the cover, but our commitment to sharing denominational news and perspectives remains the same

Promotional Image


Meet beloved church cats Mable and Mouse

by Observer Staff

They're a fixture of Kirk United Church Centre in Edmonton.

Promotional Image


February 2019

Marriage problems: Is the ancient tradition worth saving?

by Pieta Woolley

Bitterness and boredom seem to define many mid-life marriages, but we might not have to settle for apathy ever after


February 2019

A Yukon artist and a Tlingit trapper create this stunning jewelry

by Amy van den Berg

The fur jewelry in Whitehorse boutique store V. Ægirsdóttir is creating a new possibility for future partnerships with the region's trappers


February 2019

Why white people need to stop asking, 'where are you from?'

by Mike Sholars

"...For all intents and purposes, Canada is the only home I really recognize or remember. But none of that matters if I look like I don’t belong, and that single question makes that abundantly clear every single time."

Promotional Image