In 2015, the British Columbia (B.C.) government launched a taxpayer-funded wolf cull as part of its caribou recovery strategy, claiming that reducing predator numbers would help protect endangered herds. Under this program, the Province contracts private marksmen to carry out the systemic killing of grey wolves (Canis lupus)—primarily through aerial gunning from helicopters.
From the outset, the B.C. government presented the cull as a humane, scientifically supported, and temporary measure. Officials assured the public that the program would be closely monitored and adjusted as needed. A decade later, the cull continues with no clear end in sight—and growing evidence suggests that it is neither humane nor effective.
In response to growing concerns about the program’s efficacy and ethics, Pacific Wild filed 18 Freedom of Information (FOI) requests for government documents related to the cull since January 2024. Between February and April of 2025 alone, we reviewed more than 1,600 pages of newly released records—including field notes, contractor communications, caribou necropsy reports, and animal care guidelines.
Through this comprehensive review, Pacific Wild has uncovered troubling truths about the B.C. wolf cull, including inhumane methods and significant discrepancies between the government’s public claims and the reality of the operation.
Using Unfair and (Usually) Illegal Advantages
Pacific Wild challenged the legality of the wolf cull—specifically the use of helicopters—in court in 2020, bringing national attention to the lack of oversight and ethical failures behind the program.
However, the B.C. Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that the program could continue. During the proceedings, the government amended its regulations and obtained federal exemptions—allowing contractors to continue practices that would otherwise violate provincial and federal aviation regulations that ban the use of firearms from aircraft.
The British Columbia government’s Wildlife Act includes many regulations intended to protect animals from undue suffering and ensure that hunters do not have an unfair advantage over their prey. Yet the B.C. wolf cull abandons this philosophy entirely, employing every trick in the book in its war on wolves.
Helicopters & Planes
The B.C. government hires aerial snipers to shoot wolves from helicopters (Figure 1), contravening their own regulations in the Wildlife Act, Section 27 of which reads as follows:
Use of conveyance
27 (1)A person who discharges a firearm or wounds or kills wildlife from a motor vehicle or from a boat that is propelled by a motor commits an offence.
(2)A person commits an offence if the person
(a)hunts wildlife from an aircraft, or
(b)uses a helicopter for the purposes of transporting hunters or game, or while on a hunting expedition, except as authorized by regulation.
Hazing
In a field note dated February 1, 2024, a contractor records that “we managed to haze one of the pack down to the meadows” (Figure 2). Hazing is the practice of harassing and scaring animals, for example by flying a helicopter very close to them, until they change their behaviour. It is also prohibited under the Wildlife Act:
(3)A person who herds or harasses wildlife with the use of a motor vehicle, aircraft, boat or other mechanical device commits an offence.
The B.C. wolf cull program gets around this by simply issuing permits that exempt contractors from these regulations (Figure 3).
Snow
Even the time of year when the wolf cull takes place provides a tactical advantage for contracted marksmen. The Province chose the winter months for the wolf cull because the snow-covered landscapes provide greater visibility and tracking benefits. Aerial snipers, often using helicopters, can find and follow wolves with relative ease in the snow since their tracks are more visible and wolves are less camouflaged in the winter landscape.
The winter offers another tactical advantage for hunters: running in deep snow slows wolves down. The wolves are run to exhaustion and unable to escape their hunters’ relentless pursuit by air. As described in Figure 2, wolves can escape their hunters more easily when there is no snow cover.
Game Cameras
Contractor comments within FOI documents reference using game cameras to help them locate packs. Figure 4 shows a field note in which a contractor describes searching Snowshoe Creek after a “game cam had caught an image of a wolf yesterday there.”
Wildlife, or game, cameras are useful for non-invasive research. Cameras are usually installed on trees or other natural features in areas where evidence of animal activity, such as scat, has been found in order to verify and record species’ behaviours. Most of these cameras have large memory chips that need to be checked manually. However, some wildlife cameras can send videos or photos directly to cellular devices whenever the camera is triggered by heat and movement. This type of real-time animal surveillance is considered an unfair hunting advantage, and so the use of cameras with cellular capabilities is prohibited under the Wildlife Act according to the B.C. Hunting and Trapping Synopsis.
The specific model of the camera mentioned in the wolf cull field notes could not be confirmed, but since the wolf cull has employed illegal hunting activities in the form of motorized vehicles, hazing, and bait piles, the onus should be on the Province to demonstrate that its contractors are following the law in this instance.
dead Piles
There are numerous records of communication between contractors and ranchers reporting wolves visiting “dead piles”—heaps of deceased livestock on a rancher’s property. These carcasses act as a powerful lure for wolves, who are opportunistic scavengers by nature.
While some farming practices are protected under the Farm Practices Protection (Right to Farm) Act, leaving such attractants exposed constitutes a violation of the Wildlife Act, Section 33.1:
Attracting dangerous wildlife
33.1 (1)A person must not
(a)intentionally feed or attempt to feed dangerous wildlife, or
(b)provide, leave or place an attractant in, on or about any land or premises with the intent of attracting dangerous wildlife.
(2)A person must not leave or place an attractant in, on or about any land or premises where there are or where there are likely to be people, in a manner in which the attractant could
(a)attract dangerous wildlife to the land or premises, and
(b)be accessible to dangerous wildlife.
(3)Subject to subsections (5) and (6), a person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) commits an offence.
(4)If an offence under this section continues for more than one day, separate fines, each not exceeding the maximum fine for that offence, may be imposed for each day the offence continues.
(5)A person does not contravene subsection (1) (b) or (2) by providing, leaving or placing an attractant in, on or about any land or premises for the purposes of hunting or trapping wildlife in accordance with all other applicable provisions of this Act and the regulations.
(6)A person does not contravene subsection (2)
(a)by conducting a farm operation, as defined in section 1 of the Farm Practices Protection (Right to Farm) Act, if the person
(i)conducts the farm operation on, in or over land anywhere in British Columbia, and
(ii)meets the requirements set out in section 2 (2) (a) and (c) of that Act, or
(b)by operating a facility for the disposal of waste, that is operated in accordance with the Environmental Management Act by a municipality, as defined in section 1 (1) of that Act.
(7)For the purposes of this section, “leave”, in relation to a person who is an owner, tenant or occupant of land or premises, includes to fail to remove an attractant from or to allow an attractant to remain in, on or about that land or those premises.
These methods contribute to the systematic entrapment of wolves, forcing them into vulnerable positions where they can be killed with minimal resistance. The use of these tools highlights the cruelty inherent in the culling program, exacerbating concerns about the ethics of wildlife management within the province.
Net Captures
FOI documents reveal other troubling practices, such as the use of helicopters to net wolves so that they can be fitted with radio collars. Contractors describe shooting nets from helicopters to entangle wolves: an experience which can cause immense stress and result in serious injury or trauma to the animal.
The Canadian Council on Animal Care lists net gunning wildlife as an activity which causes “moderate to severe distress or discomfort.” The FOIs also infer that wolves can be gravely wounded in the process, and may need to be euthanized (Figure 7).
Figures 8 and 9. A publicly-available video posted on a government contractor’s personal social media page shows a wolf attempting to bite one of the helicopter’s landing skids, highlighting the intense fear and agitation the wolf is likely experiencing from the helicopter’s proximity.
The government provides animal care guidelines to contractors to “reduce stress to wolves” when capturing them with net guns. However these guidelines, which recommend wrapping duct tape around the wolf’s muzzle, read more like something out of a kidnapping handbook than a guide to humane “animal care.” The “Animal Care Applications” recommend that handlers attempting to capture wolves should use a catch-pole snare around the animal’s mouth, tighten the snare until it is securely closed, and secure the wolf’s jaw with “a muzzle or multiple wraps of strong duct tape […] in order to eliminate the risk of a wolf biting any crew.” At this point, “a blindfold will then be applied to reduce stress.”
Radio Collars
Radio collars are usually used to track and monitor the health of animal populations for their recovery and scientific study. However, the B.C. government is using this highly sophisticated technology to destroy wolf social structure and kill entire families.
After government contractors shoot and subdue wolves from the air with a net gun, they will place a radio collar on its neck and set it free. Contractors call these wolves “Judas wolves,” since they unknowingly put their packs in lethal danger. Since wolves are social animals, collared wolves will return to their families once the helicopter has left. The contractors can then use the signal emitted by the radio collar to track the collared wolf to the rest of its family and easily kill the whole pack in one go.
One FOI excerpt revealed that even puppies are collared and forced to betray their families.
Marksmen often kill the entire pack except for the collared wolf, which they leave alive in hopes that it will join up with different wolves the next season. Collared wolves often face further culling of their new packs in subsequent years.
The use of these collars for hunting wolves rather than protecting them has turned a tool of conservation into an instrument of death. The emotional toll this hunting technique takes on wolves will never be fully known, but we can guess the horror that these social animals must experience. One contractor’s note describes how some collars have been chewed off by other pack members (Figure 12), suggesting that some wolves may have started to associate the collar with its dark consequences.
Between January and March of 2024, thirty-four individual packs were eradicated from British Columbia. Many of these packs were located and killed using collared Judas wolves.
Weaponized Suffering
The provincial government has repeatedly claimed that the wolf cull is humane since hunters “euthanize” wolves with a single gunshot, which, according to American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) guidelines, is the most humane way to kill an animal with a gun. However, FOI documents reveal that many wolves endure multiple shots with significant delays between each one, causing prolonged suffering.
One particularly disturbing record uncovered through FOI WLR-2024-41566 showed that in less than one month, contractors shot 17 wolves, and ten were shot with more than one bullet. Only one wolf was fatally wounded by a single shot to the head.
The weaponry used in these culls contributes to this agony. Contractors use semi-automatic firearms originally designed for war and combat, not hunting.
The guns are equipped with magazines 6 times larger than the legal size. There are intentional restrictions put on powerful weapons of this kind, and the RCMP prohibits anyone to use this type of semi-automatic firearm with a magazine larger than 5 rounds (ie. capable of shooting more than 5 bullets before reloading). The B.C. government is skirting yet another important regulation to enable the wolf cull by encouraging contractors to get special permits and use these prohibited weapons capable of riddling the landscape with 30 rounds in the matter of seconds.
Semi-automatic weapons are by design less accurate than regular hunting rifles. These weapons are not intended to ensure a quick and humane death, but instead maximize the chances of hitting a target in a chaotic, high-speed aerial operation. This lack of precision increases the likelihood of multiple shots being needed to kill a wolf, leading to unnecessary pain and distress. The government’s insistence on calling this a “humane” cull, despite the clear evidence to the contrary, is nothing short of deceptive.
Caribou Mortality Investigations and Necropsy Reports
FOI FNR-2019-90747 revealed a series of caribou mortality investigations and necropsy reports. Of the 21 reports available for review, wolves were identified or suspected to be responsible for just three of those mortality events—only 13%.
To determine causes of death, field investigators conduct necropsies that often include collecting DNA swabs from wounds, bite marks, and surrounding areas. These samples are analyzed to identify predator species involved in the mortality event. Additional samples, such as scat, hair, and tissue, may also be collected to assess overall health and potential contributing factors. This comprehensive approach ensures accurate identification of mortality causes, highlighting that wolves are not the predominant threat to caribou populations.
This finding indicates that, contrary to the narrative often used to justify the wolf cull, wolves are not the primary threat to caribou populations.
The discrepancy between the perceived and actual impact of wolves on caribou herds raises significant questions about the validity of the ongoing predator reduction program.
While predators, including wolves, play a role in ecosystem dynamics, it is clear from these necropsy reports that multiple other factors—such as different predators, habitat loss, starvation, and human activity—are contributing far more to caribou mortality than wolves.
The Need for Transparency and Ethical Reform
The revelations uncovered so far through our FOI requests have shed a bright light on the ongoing wolf cull, exposing the inhumane methods and lack of transparency surrounding its operation. The evidence paints a troubling picture of a program that prioritizes the elimination of wolves over their well-being and the ecosystems they support.
Pacific Wild is committed to demanding transparency from the B.C. government—and when it’s not provided, we pursue it through formal FOI requests.
In our investigation into the wolf cull, we’ve encountered significant challenges: delayed responses, missing documents, and files returned with entire sections heavily redacted. In some cases, we’ve been charged thousands of dollars just to access public information. Despite these obstacles, we remain committed to uncovering the full truth.
This work is essential. The evidence we’ve uncovered to date reveals a disturbing pattern of inhumane practices, legal grey areas, and flawed science used to justify the ongoing eradication of a keystone species.
The need for government accountability, ethical reform, and a transparent, science-based approach to wildlife management has never been more urgent. The Province of British Columbia must end this cruelty and replace it with a truly humane and ecologically sound strategy.
