Fantastic letter from Jennifer Lovett of “Beavers Away” fame.  Just check out the solid topical arguments she lays our for cooperating versus killing beavers.

COMMENTARY: Humane beaver management could save Vt. towns thousands of dollars

Beavers are remarkable animals who are both admired for their industrious engineering skills and disliked when their activities flood roads and fields. But our often-contentious relationship with them is long overdue for change.  

Recently, several studies have demonstrated the remarkable financial benefits of managing beavers humanely with Beaver Deceivers, pond levelers, and fences rather than traditional methods of trapping, shooting or blowing up dams. Now that federal disaster relief is not guaranteed and emergency funds may not be available to towns for infrastructure protection and flood remediation, towns could save thousands of dollars by employing non-lethal beaver controls. 

As a keystone species, beavers create, enhance, and maintain habitat that countless other species rely on for survival. And as ecosystem engineers, beavers change the landscape by converting small streams into vast, dynamic wetlands, swamps, and meadows. Beaver wetlands slow the rate of snowmelt and runoff; they store and cool vast amounts of water underground, which reduces the erosive impact of floods and can be released during droughts. Wetlands also act as firebreaks and critical places of refuge for wildlife during wildfires. Moreover, the sediment at the bottom of ponds filters out pollutants and improves water quality downstream. 

While beavers could be among our best allies in the ongoing battle with the changing climate, I admit that they can be frustrating and can cause serious problems in areas prone to flooding. Flooded roads, farm fields, building sites, and blocked culverts are often extremely expensive and recurring problems for towns and landowners.  

Beaver conflicts are generally handled by killing the beavers and destroying their dams. But this is rarely a permanent solution, as any good territory will be claimed by new beavers, resulting in a continual cycle of flooding, road or culvert damage, infrastructure repairs, and repeated annual killing of numerous animals. 

Alternatively, non-lethal means of controlling beaver activity are achieved by simply regulating the flow of water out of ponds or wetlands through devices that allow water to flow through a dam or culvert without the beavers’ desire or ability to block it. This permits the many benefits beavers provide to ecosystems and biodiversity to remain in place while also protecting infrastructure.  

Great letter Jennifer, smart work to tie it all to the destruction of FEMA and the loss of rescue calamity rescue funds,

In Alberta, Canada, researchers assessed the efficacy of pond-leveling devices and fencing to manage beaver activity in areas with chronic flooding. A cost-benefit analysis compared the cost of traditional management approaches (i.e., trapping, etc.) with non-lethal alternatives. The differential was remarkable. For 7 years, traditional management cost the province over $3 million, while the installation of non-lethal devices cost $179,440!  

In Billerica, Massachusetts, 55 beaver conflict sites were studied from 2000-2019. Again, results showed that the sites managed with non-lethal controls cost much less than those managed by lethal removal. While it costs $409 to trap beavers at each site per year, installations of flow devices at each site cost on average $229 per year. Thus, the town saves $7,740 annually with non-lethal management.  

Another study analyzed the efficacy and comparative costs of using flow devices to resolve beaver conflicts along roads in seven counties in the coastal plain of Virginia. Flow devices were installed in 14 sites damaged by beavers. The average maintenance cost at each site was less than $20 after flow devices were installed, compared to $21,490 per site per year for maintenance, road repairs, and population control prior to this installation. 

The work on this project was executed by Skip Lisle, inventor of the Beaver Deceiver device and president of Beaver Deceivers International, based in Grafton, Vermont. Lisle has successfully installed his flow devices, with lifespans estimated at 30-40 years, all over the country, including Vermont, and in several locations in Europe. With such a resource here in Vermont, this state should be leading the transition away from lethal management toward coexistence.

Cost-benefit studies have not been done in Vermont. But the small town of Andover, New Hampshire, resolved decades of costly beaver conflicts by rejecting traditional lethal management in favor of beaver deceivers and coexistence. In 2007, the town hired Lisle, who, over 10 years, installed protective devices at eight sites where culverts had been repeatedly blocked and roads damaged by flooding. 

The single thing I would have changed about this letter is that I would have placed Glynnis studdy last and highlighted the fact that it was an academic rigorous study subject to peer review. People always scoff Mike and Skips data because they say it wasn’t scientific,

Although financial considerations were paramount, Andover’s transition from lethal management strategies also reflects changing attitudes toward beavers and the critical role they play in wetland ecosystems. Andover town officials estimated that over 10 years, the town saved about $130,000 and projected a savings of almost $500,000 to town coffers over 30 years. Alternatively, a case study found that repeated killing of the beavers and the associated repairs to infrastructure would cost the town well over that amount. 

Fiscal savings are quantifiable when it comes to the time, equipment, and labor involved in repairing culverts and roads, but the value of a functional, ecologically balanced wetland system is immeasurable. Sadly, traditional methods for controlling beaver activity are still commonplace and seem to be the first choice of towns, landowners, and wildlife managers. 

The resulting loss of wetlands has dire ecological detriments. Floods, droughts, biodiversity losses, and wildfires are all symptomatic of our rapidly changing environment. 

Clearly, harnessing the beaver’s ability to mitigate impacts from climate change makes enormous sense and is far preferable to removing them again and again from the landscape in a way that harms ecosystems and needlessly drains municipal funds. 

Fantasticwork Jennifer! That is a letter for the ages. I love how you so seriously and frankly clarify that beavers CAN cause damages and how you make it clear that we can address those in smarter ways.