A few months back I was contacted by Sarahbeth Maney who introduced herself as a 3rd year photojournalism student at San Francisco State that happened to grow up in Martinez. She needed to do a multimedia project for school and wanted to interview local women who had made a difference. A recent article in the times made her think that me and the Martinez Beaver story was just what she was looking for.
She came by before earth day and we spent the morning chatting about the story and looking through the scrapbook, then I sent her footage of the beavers. Sarahbeth was very nice, engaging, responsible and startlingly young. (I think her mom and I are the same age.) It was one of those interviews where I was answering specific questions that you never hear in the video, but I think it mostly works when you see it.
Of course, I said way more than made it to the finish line, about salmon and frogs and birds. I’m pretty sure I even mentioned nitrogen removal. There’s never enough time to say all the good things about beavers. I’m glad the surviving footage mentioned climate change and California’s water problems specifically. I’m also really happy about saying there was a dramatic difference between how long it took to solve the actual problem rather than the fear of the problem!
Yesterday she sent the finished product which is a short retelling (2.5 minutes) and fun to see. It puts things together nicely using bits and pieces from the story, her video, photographs and my footage. I never love watching myself on camera but I’m fairly content that I don’t look or sound too insane or tired in this. (Let’s face it though, I’m grading on a wide curve.)
Thanks Sarahbeth, for sharing your talents with our beavers, and letting me tell their story.
More silly mulling from the Scottish countyside: Should beavers be allowed or not? A reader on the Tayside group pointed out that this same argument could have been made 15 years ago, I say probably longer than that.
Their reputation as strong swimmers and prodigious engineers is not an understatement. Their large incisors and clawed front feet enable them to construct dams and lodges that can extend for hundreds of metres, as well as burrows of up to 20 metres into the riverbank.
“Any species introduction, particularly if it has not been in this country for hundreds of years, can have a massive impact on the many benefits that the countryside delivers,” Mark Pope, an arable farmer from Somerset who has instigated numerous initiatives to provide habitat and food for birds and insects and encourage diverse plant species on his farm, said.
“In the case of beavers, the NFU has concerns about the damage to farmland and the landscape caused by their physical activities.” Mark, who is also chair of the NFU Environment Forum, added. “Farmers and the public must have the tools to manage the impacts beavers will have to farmland, the countryside, flood defences and urban areas.
“Beavers can add biodiversity, as well as the interest, enjoyment and socio-economic benefits they can provide to many people. What the NFU is very clear on is that in some locations there is a clear need to manage this species to minimise undesirable impacts on agriculture, forestry, inland waters and other land uses.”
There is increasing interest in the beneficial role beavers could bring to habitats. The natural activities of beavers could help to regulate flooding and improve water quality, if managed properly. The Devon trial on the River Otter, led by the Devon Wildlife Trust in partnership with Clinton Devon Estates, the University of Exeter and the Derek Gow Partnership, has been exploring the role of beavers in managing and creating wetland habitats, the impacts on water quality, and influence on water flow and flood risk.
Tolkein once wrote “Go not to the elves for council, for they will say both ‘No’ and ‘Yes’.” Mostly no, though.
On the other hand, beaver burrows near watercourses can weaken river embankments and flood defences. Material felled and gathered by beavers for dams and lodges can create flood risk downstream and block drains upstream. The potential consequences of this for farmland and the rural economy is a cause for concern.
It is estimated that the costs of the 2007 and 2013-14 floods on agricultural businesses alone were £50m and £19m respectively, not to mention the wider economic impacts on local employment, infrastructure and utilities and the damage caused to people’s homes and communities.
The knock-on effects can be wide-ranging. The loss of productive farmland, for instance, would have a detrimental effect on food production and supply.
The Scottish Beaver Trial was a five-year project between the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, the Scottish Wildlife Trust and Forestry Commission Scotland to undertake a trial reintroduction of beavers to Knapdale, Mid-Argyll. The trial concluded in 2014 and as a result the Scottish government is considering recognising the European beaver as a native species.
A change in the legal status of beavers raises additional concerns. This is because beavers have no natural predators in the UK so it is important that populations can be managed, particularly if they are present in extensive low-lying areas such as East Anglia, Wiltshire and the Somerset Levels where their activities could block field drains leading to waterlogging (known as ‘wetting up’) of productive farmland.
Clarification: Beavers might benefit us if they don’t kills us all first. “We killed off all their natural predators in the UK so there’s nothing left to kill them and their numbers will swell like taxes with national health”. Are there no otters? No bacteria? No vehicles in your land? Beavers just don’t get killed by predators you know. And honestly, why act like you want to explore an issue and ONLY speak to one farming fiend from the National Farmers Union?
Who’s going to list all the many benefits for fish, wildlife, birds and water storage that come with beavers? Who’s going to talk about how much you can learn about nature by watching them? Who’s going to say how much they improve the health and vitality of urban waterways?
Happy Friday! We’re off to Safari West today so I can talk beavers to families after dinner. It’s always a lot of fun, because we get to stay in one of their luxury tents and drink wine on the deck listening to exotic animals or crazy birds making noises there is no word for. On the way back we are stopping at Molly Eckler’s studio in Sebastopol to pick up her donation for the silent auction! In the mean time there is a startling amount of news on this end. I was notified yesterday that we were getting donated tickets to the Oakland Zoo and Academy of Sciences. And Coyote Brush Studios just finished the artwork for our temporary tattoos. (They say Tina is half way done with the Ecosystem poster).
They are going to look SO cool on the nature Journals, I had to try a mock up to see. Obviously Tina Curiel is a great talent and with Lindsey Moore managing the business side they make a great team. In the meantime we’re heading to the mountains on Monday week where we will gather a mere 150 8 inch sticks for children to use as the bindings and make each one have ‘beaver chews’ on my father’s grinder.
So I feel full of purpose.
To top it all off we weren’t the only ones irritated by that trapper-fan-fiction article last week. Settle back with a second cup and enjoy.
Re “On the trap line” by Leila Philip (Opinion, May 5): Of course animal rights people “demonize” trappers. Why shouldn’t they? Methods of controlling beaver damage abound, including beaver deceivers, baffles, and PVC pipes. Philip should pay attention to her own instinctive resistance to the cruelty of trapping; to her, the beaver is a “token of the wild.” Consider the animal that has been trapped: Perhaps the night is icy, and yet he cannot escape. He is in a great deal of pain. He tries to chew off his paw in order to rid himself of the painful trap.
Nothing can be said in favor of trapping other than by people who do not care about the animal’s suffering. That’s why we demonize trappers.
As for the trapper: Who cares if he is “the ultimate locavore,” using the defenseless animal in every possible way? He may be deeply rooted in nature, but of what significance is that when he accepts cruelty?
Virginia Fuller
Nice job, Virginia. When I read a letter like this I, of course, wish it talked less about ‘cruelty’ and more about what removing a beaver is taking away from the community in terms of ecosystem services. Every beaver you trap means a bird that won’t nest there, a trout that won’t survive, a frog that won’t reproduce. That dead beaver carcass is weighted down with ghosts, like Marley’s chains in Scrooge, or like the tin cans on a just married car, expect they make no sound and it’s more like a ‘just buried’ car, instead.
Hmmm, that would be a more complicated graphic to create, but worth thinking about.
Installing a pressure transducer (inside the white pvc pipe) which is used to measure flow. Restoration treatments are assessed through monitoring water flows.
Beginning as early as the 17th century, beavers have struggled to find safe places to build their homes. Initially, hunters trapped beaver extensively to keep up with the popular beaver fashions in Europe.Then as settlers began moving west, they considered the beavers annoying because of their tendency to cause flooding and damage trees – so the trapping continued.
However, today in many parts of the American West, the beaver’s 400-year-old struggle is fading, because of their ability to keep water on dry land in an efficient manner.
While beavers may not be welcome in most city limits, ranchers and wildlife managers are re-introducing them to rural areas where the benefits of their dams far outweigh the inconveniences.
When Jay Tanner learned of the potential benefit of beavers, he drove to Utah State University and met with scientists and researchers who had experienced success in restoring beavers in the west.
Eric Thacker, Rangeland Management Extension Specialist at USU said, “A beaver dam provides a buffer or mitigation for drought.”
Kent Sorenson, habitat biologist from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources described the financial benefit of the beavers, “[When beaver manage the dams] our operation and maintenance costs go to zero — they do all the work. They are 24/7 – 365-day maintenance crews that do not require a Corps of Engineers 404 permit.
And that! ladies an gentlemen, is what we call “good beaver press”. Share this site with your friends or nonbelievers because its a good big of persuasion from a pretty rugged source. Hopefully the judge in the McAdams case will accidentally hear it over coffee and waffles this morning. I don’t think it counts as ‘ex parte contact’ since it doesn’t star Kelly or his beavers, right?
Another nice beaver report in the form of a letter regarding depredation from the president of Protect Our Wildlife in Vermont.
Some of you may be familiar with official trapping season each year, but did you know that trapping occurs all year long under the guise of “nuisance” wildlife control? This unregulated, year-round trapping and killing occurs at biologically inappropriate times when animals like foxes, raccoons and others are raising their young. This means, among other things, animals are left orphaned with little chance of survival when their mothers are killed.
There are no set parameters as to what constitutes a “nuisance” animal. A warden once told me that a raccoon could be defecating in your garden and that could be considered a nuisance and therefore an excuse to kill the animal. There are many non-lethal ways to address wild animals causing damage that don’t involve killing, but the state seems to be mired in a trap/kill/repeat loop. Tragically, beavers are one of the most heavily trapped animals, leaving entire family units broken. Beaver kits stay with the parents for two years so the loss of a parent can be detrimental to the survival of offspring. Water flow control devices, exclusion fencing and wrapping trees are all long-lasting, humane options to address beaver damage.
Not only is this unjustified trapping and killing bad for wildlife, it’s bad for people. Unlicensed, unregistered “nuisance” wildlife control operators can collect payment to trap and kill animals, but these operators are not even required to have a trapping license. This means that they haven’t undergone the trapper education program nor are they familiar with best management practices. Animals trapped and killed as “nuisances” aren’t reported to the Fish & Wildlife Department so there is no data collection or controls in place to monitor what kinds of animals are killed, how many and why. For a Department who is responsible for protecting wildlife for the benefit of all Vermonters, including future generations, this seems to be a lapse in responsibility.
We are thankful for bill, H.262, An act relating to the licensing of nuisance wildlife control operators, introduced by Representative Jim McCullough, which will hopefully close some of these loopholes, if the bill is successful. When unlicensed trappers set leghold and body gripping traps during the warmer months when people are out recreating with their dogs, that presents an unintended threat. A baited trap for a raccoon will just as likely trap a dog or cat. We must emerge from the dark ages and find a better way.
Good letter Brenna! We here in California agree that beaver nuisance depredation is the unregulated, unobserved practice that kills far, far too many beavers. Near as I can tell looking at the text of the bill, H. 262 requires even nuisance trappers to have a license and to show the reason why lethal means are needed and what will be done to discourage wildlife in the future.
Since depredation takes resources away from EVERYONE in the state, it seems pretty reasonable to ask for these things, doesn’t it?
There is a lot of beaver news to catch up on this morning. I got behind on earthday and let our usual beaver-ticker slide. It’s monday and I think we should start with the good news and grim our way down the ladder from there, okay? (And yes I know that ‘grim’ isn’t a verb, but it just seems right today.)
Long time readers of this website might remember that a while ago Washington passed a ‘beaver bill’ that allowed them to relocate problem beavers in the Eastern (driest) part of the state. (Our beaver friends Joe Cannon and Amanda Parish of the Lands Council worked on that.) It was a pretty big deal at the time and was a struggle to pass. Well, on Thursday the governor signed into law a change stating that beavers could be relocated in WESTERN Washington as well.
This is Chompski, a beaver relocated in Bodie Creek outside Wauconda, Washington in 2012. (Chandra Hutsel / Courtesy of state Rep. Joel Kretz)
Western Washington beavers who are trapped by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife can be relocated to a more opportune location west of the Cascades, a bill signed into law by Gov. Jay Inslee Thursday says.
The department has had a program to relocate nuisance beavers it traps in Eastern Washington for several years, with the restriction that they can’t be shipped over the mountains to the “wet side” of the state. The program started when Rep. Joel Kretz, R-Wauconda, thought some of the toothy rodents that the department was already trapping might be sent to land owners that were trying to improve their water tables by impounding creeks or streams.
This year, some Western Washington landowners decided they wanted to try it, too. The original bill took Kretz several tries to make it through the Legislature. This bill passed the House 98-0, and the Senate 45-1.
It was 2012 when the Eastern law finally passed – years after it had been promoted and voted down many times. In fact in 2005 a bill allowing it was vetoed by the governor of the state. What a difference 12 years makes, eh? I guess the state is finally recognizing the good things that beavers do for fish, water and wildlife. Now they just need to learn to leave the beavers where they are and change the people instead – making them use the tools that will let them to coexist.
Another dozen years maybe?
Meanwhile in Canada the “Beaver Whisperer” is teaching folks how to manage beaver conflicts using a ‘baffler’. Mostly good news, although we’re not thrilled by his protege’s statement that beavers damage water quality.
Learn how to manage beavers and create a peaceful co-existence on May 11 at the Beaver Management Workshop, hosted by the North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority (NBMCA) and Friends of Laurier Woods.
NBMCA staff install a beaver pond leveller known as a “beaver baffle” summer 2015 at Laurier Woods Conservation Area.
“Beavers can be a benefit and a bur
den,” explains Troy Storms, NBMCA’s Supervisor, Field Operations.
“They help maintain important wetland ecosystems. They create habitat for themselves, as well as several other species. But they can damage vegetation, farmland, municipal infrastructure and water quality,” he added.
This workshop includes a morning presentation by “beaver whisperer” Michel Leclair, followed by an afternoon field trip to Laurier Woods Conservation Area to see a “beaver baffle” in action.
Two steps forward one step back. I’m pretty sure that even if beavers are important to other species damaging water quality is kind of deal-breaker. That’s what we call very bad advertising. I’m sure he’s referring to the bogus concern that they cause ‘beaver fever’ which we all know MUST be true because it rhymes. I wish someone was on hand to talk about how much they IMPROVE water quality or how their dams act as a filter to remove toxins and nitrates from the water.
Is it too much to ask?
Finally a very ugly story from North Carolina where they believe they proudly have discovered that beaver dams can be destroyed with a machete.
LINDEN — Flooding across from a neighborhood near Lake Teresa has greatly diminished after members of the community and other helpers tore down beaver dams nearby. Bob Hathcock, who lives on Canal Street, said the swamp that had formed in a wooded area between the street and a field off Lane Road near Linden has gone down.
“I’d say it’s down two feet and still draining,” he said.
He described the work as a community effort that involved four neighborhood residents and three people who live elsewhere. “We got out there with axes, shovels and machetes, and started busting things up,” he said. “The people kind of enjoyed it.”
Hathcock said the destruction of three dams, including one that was about 200 feet wide, did not reduce the swamp near the neighborhood. When a fourth was tore down, the water started receding. It went down even more after a fifth dam was removed.
“Everything is flowing out now,” he said. “We are so relieved.” Hathcock said eight beavers have been trapped. Some weighed more than 50 pounds each, he said.
“We’ve still got traps out there,” he said. One person managed to catch a beaver the day after he put out a trap, Hathcock said. “He was like a kid at Christmas trapping that beaver,” he said.
Hathcock said several companies offered to deal with the problem, but were going to charge up to thousands of dollars. The USDA charged the residents $25, he said.
How much do I hate this article? Let me count the ways.
So Jimbob and Billybud got all their axes and pitchforks and ripped out 5 (five!) beaver dams to make the water flow again. (Just because he lives on Canal street, Bob never expected there to be WATER on it.) Remember that this is a state we gave countless FEMA dollars in drought relief a couple years ago, but never mind, because who needs to save water anyway? Now it’s free like aMurica! Never mind the dying fish, frogs or the wood duck hatchlings whose nests are now too far from the water to make the jump safely. What matters is that 8 beavers are dead, the folk had fun destroying their wetlans and someone celebrated Christmas early.
I am curious though, if folks ripped out the dams and trapped the beavers themselves, what exactly the USDA was charging 25 dollars for?
A few months back I was contacted by Sarahbeth Maney who introduced herself as a 3rd year photojournalism student at San Francisco State that happened to grow up in Martinez. She needed to do a multimedia project for school and wanted to interview local women who had made a difference. A recent article in the times made her think that me and the Martinez Beaver story was just what she was looking for.
Eric Thacker, Rangeland Management Extension Specialist at USU said, “A beaver dam provides a buffer or mitigation for drought.”
