When Wildlife Hits the Bottom Line

Thursday, August 27, 2026

More damage claims are raising hard questions about coverage & gaps.

By Mary Loggan

Across the Prairies, wildlife continues to take a bite out of crops and livestock, putting added strain on already tight margins.

As elk, deer, waterfowl, and predators cause mounting losses, more attention is turning to whether provincial wildlife compensation programs accurately reflect real on farm damage, the time and effort required to document and claim it, and the changes needed to address increasing damages in the future.

Wildlife damages

In Alberta, ungulates — especially deer and elk — are the primary sources of crop damage reported to the Agriculture Financial Services Corporation (AFSC).

Leslie McEachern, product coordinator at AFSC, explains these species are particularly troublesome for producers.

“They create trails and bedding areas in unharvested fields, trampling and consuming standing crops.

“When crops have been swathed, their excreta may be picked up by the combine during harvest and end up stored with the grain, requiring cleaning before the crop can be marketed.”

Annual crops and perennial hay are eligible under Alberta’s Wildlife Damage Compensation Program, but grazing land and native pasture do not qualify.

She says waterfowl damage is a common wildlife challenge, especially in the spring, when emerging crops are easily accessible, and again in the fall, particularly when harvest is delayed, extending the risk period for Alberta producers.

In Manitoba, farms often face a broader mix of species, with strong regional variation.

“Farms in Manitoba encounter damage from a wide variety of wildlife species, and this varies based on the region of the province,” says Jill Verwey, president of Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP).

“Overall, elk tends to be the biggest issue for wildlife damage on Manitoba farms, although farmers also report damage from deer, moose, bear, bison, ducks, geese, and sandhill cranes.

“We are seeing a general increase overall, and that when KAP talks with members, the feedback we receive is mostly related to elk damage.”

Local reports, she explains, “indicate elk populations are shifting and moving across the province, causing increased damage.

“We’ve seen videos of elk herds in south central Manitoba that local farmers say are larger than they’ve ever seen — and overall, this trend has continued across that region.”

Also, Verwey says they continue to hear about predator wildlife, such as wolves, targeting livestock across the province.

“Identifying locations of increased wildlife damage is something that we continue to prioritize and informs our advocacy work.”

Manitoba’s Wildlife Damage Compensation program, administered by Manitoba Agricultural Services Corporation (MASC), covers crop damage from big game and migratory waterfowl, including deer, elk, moose, bear, wood bison, ducks, geese and sandhill cranes.

Saskatchewan producers report similar pressure from elk, deer and waterfowl, along with concern about predators and stored feed.

Predators such as coyotes, bears, cougars and wolves are common causes of livestock losses across the province, and stored hay and silage are vulnerable when wildlife move closer to farmyards during long winters or when natural forage is limited.

Impacts & support programs

McEachern stresses that wildlife damage directly leads to lower yields, reduced quality, lost feed, and additional work.

She says, “Yield losses can vary significantly depending on factors such as crop type, growth stage, length of wildlife presence, the species involved, and the size of the wildlife group causing damage.”

In feed yards, damage to stacked hay, as well as silage stored in pits or tubes, is another common issue.

“Wildlife damage can be very frustrating for a producer, reducing crop yield or feed supplies, and those reductions lead to financial losses caused by unexpected production loss.”

To respond, AFSC’s Wildlife Damage Compensation Program and related risk management tools come into play once losses are reported.

When a producer detects wildlife damage, they must contact their preferred AFSC branch office to initiate a wildlife claim.

“An adjuster then inspects the crop and estimates the total affected acreage by assessing wildlife beds and trails, and in many cases, AFSC also uses drone technology to capture field imagery and remotely assess the extent of the damage.”

For clients with crop insurance, “claims are settled based on the actual harvested production of the damaged crop, while for uninsured clients, compensation is calculated using area average harvested yields once regional averages are established.”

Clients who experience damage to stacked hay or silage will receive compensation based on the market value of the feed consumed or destroyed.

“Some limitations exist, such as maximum claim amounts and subsequent claims in repeat cases.”

McEachern emphasizes that AFSC’s risk management programs, “in conjunction with the Wildlife Damage Compensation Program, help to provide peace of mind to producers experiencing these sorts of losses.

“Producers are not required to have crop insurance in order to be eligible for wildlife damage compensation in Alberta.”

Manitoba producers are facing similar economic pressure under different coverage levels.

Verwey says, “We continue to see an increase in damage that impacts Manitoba farmers, with wildlife damage compensation at a record high last year.”

She attributes this to “a steep increase in compensation related to livestock predation, as you can see from the data provided by MASC.”

Wildlife damage on farms leads to yield losses and livestock losses, which not only cost farmers money but also take up their time and effort to manage.

She says under MASC’s Wildlife Damage Compensation program, most eligible losses are covered at 90 per cent.

“While MASC does compensate 90 per cent of the loss, producers are still losing overall because they are losing out on the full value they would have otherwise received without the damage occurring.

“Extended grazing is at 45 per cent coverage, which means losses will vary depending on the commodity.”

Livestock predation adds further cost and risk.

Verwey explains that “the provincial government has recently expanded coverage under the Livestock Predation Prevention Program through MASC, with the maximum value increased in 2025 to $7,000 per animal.” This is a change she describes as positive because “it allowed for compensation that better reflects current market values for livestock.”

Even with higher maximums, producers still carry the burden of detection, documentation and, in some cases, repeated attacks.

She says KAP has asked MASC to increase its wildlife damage compensation rate to 100 per cent in previous years and will continue to advocate for this increase.

In Saskatchewan, wildlife damage claims have also been significant, especially in years when harvest is delayed.

SCIC’s Wildlife Damage Compensation program provides up to full compensation on yield loss in damaged crop areas once an adjuster has assessed the field, and its Predation Compensation program pays up to 100 per cent compensation for injury or death to eligible livestock, fowl or specialty animals by predators and up to 80 per cent of veterinary costs when animals are injured.

A look at the future

Mitigation and management will remain central as producers and governments work together to contain wildlife impacts.

In Alberta, McEachern explains that AFSC “relies on Alberta Fish and Wildlife’s expertise for mitigation recommendations for producers.

“Recommendations may be specific to each situation based on the species involved, intensity of damage, and other mitigation efforts previously used.”

Alberta Fish and Wildlife guidance highlights tools such as fencing, stacked feed, alternative feeding sites, scare devices, and repellents, and notes that implementing recommended measures can affect eligibility for future compensation.

Manitoba producers are using a mix of on farm tactics and policy advocacy.

Verwey notes that “producers can lure crops, or propane cannons can be used to reduce crop damage done by waterfowl.

“Other strategies include straight-cutting instead of swathing to reduce crops lying in the open.”

On the livestock side, “other methods include using donkeys, llamas, and livestock guard dogs to reduce livestock losses.”

She also stresses the value of collective action.

“Another way is to make sure you get involved with farm groups like KAP to have your voice heard and advocate for insurance program improvements that meet your needs.”

The recent expansion of the Livestock Predation Prevention Program, including a higher maximum value per animal, demonstrates how advocacy can translate into concrete changes.

McEachern sees that shifting wildlife patterns are adding complexity.

“AFSC’s records indicate that over the past 20 years, the number of damaged acres has shown a slight upward trend.

“This may partly reflect greater producer awareness of the program rather than an actual increase in damage. Indemnity payments have also risen modestly during this period, largely due to higher commodity prices.”

Looking ahead, Prairie organizations emphasize the importance of relationships and responsive programs.

McEachern says, “We see a future where wildlife damage management is supported by strong relationships between departments, farmers, and their communities.

“AFSC will continue to build trust with our clients, provide support where possible, and develop solutions that benefit producers, taxpayers and the environment.”

Verwey emphasizes that “KAP continues to advocate for practical solutions to meet the needs of farmers in collaboration with continuing to hear local feedback from farmers across the province.

“We will continue to advocate for higher compensation rates and better aligned programs for the future.” BF