In defense of salmon…

heidi08 Uncategorized January 23, 2009

[youtube:http://youtube.com/watch?v=jtEqN2Vfhyw]

Our wise beaver-salmon friend William Hughes-Games in New Zealand worries that fish-ladder devices create the impression that beaver dams obstruct passage when in fact we used to have millions more beavers and millions more salmon and they got along just fine, thank you very much. He’s working with the reintroduction in Scotland to help them realize they should invest only in watchful good will, so they can document that the salmon manage the dams, and see the population changes as they happen.

This particular video shows a waterless earthen dam, unusual perhaps because its an unnatural creek. I think William would say that there are some dams that may be salmon obstacles, (and there are solutions to deal with those) but there are far fewer than we imagine, and they benefits to young salmonids far outweigh the risks.

Here are some of his ideas offered in correspondence with concerned salmon watchers in Scotland:

I take your point and have full sympathy with your concerns regarding the effect of beaver dams on the upward migration of adult salmon. I also admit that the opinion held by people like myself that beavers greatly enhance salmon runs is based to a large extent on historical, sometimes anecdotal information and on logic. Let me state as someone who has worked as a marine biologist most of my life that I am very aware that simple logic, such as a physicist would depend on, doesn’t always serve the purpose when it comes to biology. Biological systems are complicated and as much as you apply logic, the only final criteria is observation of what actually occurs. You then apply logic in hindsight and we all know that hindsight is an exact science.

I think we have one common point of agreement if I read correctly between the lines of your last e-mail – namely that putting in devices to allow salmon to pass beaver dams is a non starter. In my case, I would disagree with putting in such devices because I don’t think they are needed. In your case (I would assume) you would not put them in because they are expensive and in that I quite agree with you. the only place I can see using any devices with beaver dams would be to stop the flooding of some vital road or facility but never to help salmon ovee the dam. For the most part, in most locations, that very flooding is what makes beavers so valuable in an ecosystem for a whole suit of reasons. I would add that if such devices are put in place and the salmon do pass, then everyone will assume that these devices are needed for salmon to pass beaver dams. That would put a totally unjustified cloud over the introduction of beavers.

There are a couple of places in the world, including Argyle where the effect of beaver dams on a variety of salmon species will be observed and documented. Hopefully this will be done without any effort to help salmon artificially over the beaver dams. It is a shame that in Argyle there is not a numerical base line already established for the extent of salmon runs although I am sure there is a body of anecdotal information available. If it is shown over the long term that the beaver dams that are built in these catchments have the detrimental effects on salmon as you believe, I will be the first to reverse my opinion on the relationship between these two animals. I’m sure the reverse is also true. In a decade or so, when the results are in, I’m sure we will be in complete agreement one way or the other.

My contention is partially based on the following. In pre-European North America, with beaver dams in every possible location where one could be built, the salmon runs of all the species that existed on both coasts were legendary. First People fertilized their fields with salmon, would you believe. The extirpation of the beavers from the Columbia catchment following 1818 caused a precipitous drop in the salmon runs at a time when none of the other factors were in place that we associate with the demise of the salmon.

I know we will both be watching the Argyle experiment and others of a similar ilk with great interest. Let the results observed in the field determine our future course of action.

Best wishes in your quest to enhance salmon runs
We both have the same goal
We only disagree on the path to that goal

Regards
William

I’ll see you in your dreams…

heidi08 Uncategorized January 22, 2009

Saying it has been a public relations nightmare, the Pinnacle Ridge (Mutual 59) board voted to stop the shooting of woodpeckers for two months.

What? Bad dreams at Rossmoor? Disrupting the rest of the most deserving? I realize this is the best news that we pesky “think of solutions other than killing” types can hope for. Give them enough spotlights that it gets very difficult to be stupid under the glare of them. Hmm.

Pinnacle Ridge puts off shooting woodpeckers for two months

By Cathy Tallyn Staff writer

The two months will give the Audubon Society time to implement its suggestions on how to keep the pesky birds from pecking at the Styrofoam on buildings in the Mutual. It will be a temporary fix until the Mutual replaces the Styrofoam, said Mutual President Walt Foskett at the board’s meeting last Tuesday.

It could take the Mutual as long as five years to remove the tempting Styrofoam (at last they admit it) because that’s when scaffolding will be erected to paint the three-story buildings, said Bill Friesen, building maintenance manager.

It’s very expensive to put up scaffolding, he said. It would also be expensive to put a man on a 40-foot ladder to do the job.

(You hear that? Its hard work to put up scaffolding, it’s much easier to pull a trigger. We are innocent victims of Audubondage!)

The woodpecker problem also affects buildings in Eagle Ridge (Mutual 68). The two Mutuals have spent seven years and $170,000 trying to solve the problem of the woodpeckers pecking into the synthetic stucco homes as well as on the wood trim.

Representatives of the Audubon Society met with Mutual 59 officials recently to discuss possible solutions that don’t involve shooting the woodpeckers.

Among other things, the nature group suggested putting in artificial granaries to attract the birds away from the buildings as well as putting nets on the buildings to stop the birds from nesting. It also said it would work to get grants of up to $500,000 to pay for the mitigation measures.

“They’re saying, ‘Stop (the shooting) and we’ll help,’” said Mutual Operations Director Paul Donner. He suggested the two-month break.

Foskett said, “We’re throwing the ball back to them.” If the Audubon Society doesn’t do anything, the board will re-evaluate its position on shooting the woodpeckers, he said.

The vote to temporarily put the permit in abeyance was 4 to 1 with Shirley Magarian casting the dissenting vote. (shirley my friend, we need to talk)

The Mutual has three months left on its depredation permit from the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife, which allows up to 25 woodpeckers to be shot by a marksman from the Department of Agriculture.

It’s doubtful that Fish and Wildlife will issue another permit when this one expires, said Donner. “I don’t think you’ll get a permit next year because of all the negative publicity.” (Ohhh those pesky wildlife publicity hounds. If only people didn’t watch what we did we could do it easier!)

Foskett said no matter what the board does, it will generate bad publicity. “The press is not going to be kind to us,” he said. (Really? You don’t think a clever ad exec could turn this press momentum into a massive Rossmoor media coup? Rossmoor: Because we listen. Rossmore: Its in your Nature. Rossmoor: Where creative mind solve life’s toughest problems.)

Rossmoor’s shooting of the woodpeckers has become a national story, said Mutual 59 board Director Sara Cornell.(hahahahaha)

Fellow board member Jo Fasciona noted there have been a number of negative letters to the editor about the bird problem. “We’re going to get a lot of flack,” she said. (You could also get alot of praise and goodwill, Jo. Remember.)

Well that has made my little animal rights day. We’ll visit this again I’m sure! For now pat your fellow birdbrains on the back. Well done!

Something to sink your teeth into…

heidi08 Educational January 21, 2009

Apparently Beaver teeth are so sharp and strong, they were used as tools by the Native Americans.

These archaeological specimens show evidence of having been used in the same fashion as crooked knives, chisels or small gouges. Sections A and B show modified beaver teeth from the Carson Site, Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick, 1000 BP. Section C shows beaver mandibles from the Sand Point Site, St. Croix River.

Image courtesy of David Sanger, The Carson Site and the Late Ceramic Period in Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick,Canadian Museum of Civilization, Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada, Paper no. 135, 1987.

Click here to visit the Crooked Knife Image Gallery

“Indigenous to the Northeast, the bikahtagenigan, or the crooked knife, was an essential tool and the ability to make one, a necessary life-skill. The earliest crooked knives were made from a beaver incisor left imbedded in a portion of the mandible or a beaver or porcupine incisor hafted into a handle. After European contact, Native Peoples had access to a variety of metal blade forms that could be modified to make crooked knives. Some companies, such as the Hudson Bay Company, stocked blades for crooked knives. By the 1700s, Maine Indians made crooked knives with metal blades. Handles for these knives were either left plain or ornamented with elaborate carvings or incised decorations produced by chip-carving or etching.

Crooked knives were integral to making birchbark canoes and canoe paddles and poles. They were also used in the production of brown ash splint basketry, in the shaping of snowshoe frames, and in carving root clubs.”

From Exhibit: Crooked Knives Tools of the Trade

The Hudson Museum extends its graditude to the Maine Antique Dealers Association

I just thought it was worth thinking about the constantly sharpening chisels that give us those beaver “chews”.

A Chip off the Old Block?

heidi08 Beaver News January 20, 2009

Twiggy and Woody are a famous beaver pair in Lancashire England. While Mom and Dad were movie stars with “autumn watch” (an amazing BBC program documenting seasonal activities of Wildlife) junior was found injured and nearly starved and taken to a special enclosure to be handreared. He is, for what its worth, the first known beaver to be born in that part of England in 500 years. Family members are fed on willow, carrots and apples, and live the good life. Check out Jr looking very interested in his surroudings.

[youtube:http://youtube.com/watch?v=9dWQqpMfdoY]

Notice the very slight differences in size and head shape from our beavers. Jr is Castor Fiber, ours are Castor Canadensis.