Sometimes I fear we are in such a new beaver world that there is no need for Worth A Dam any more. Then I read something like this and I realize nothing ever really changes in beaver world.
Thanks Mountain View.
Bergen beaver dam to be removed to protect road
MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY – In a split decision, Mountain View County council has approved the removal of a beaver dam on the Fallen Timber Trail in the Bergen area south of Sundre.
The move came by way of motion during the Sept. 10 regularly-scheduled council meeting.
On Aug. 13, council carried a motion directing administration to bring forward a cost estimate for guardrails and alternative options for the removal of the dam at SW 28-31-5-5.
“The loss of this road is a concern,” Ryan Morrison, director of operations, said in a briefing note presented to council on Sept. 10. “During large rain events, water levels (in the pond) can rise significantly, reaching the shoulder of the road.
“Detours in the area are large distances because the road network is not as complete as in other areas of the county. Traffic would have to be diverted from (Range Road) 53 to either (Range Road) 60 to the west or Range Road 45 to the east and around to (Township Road) 310.”
The landowner of the property where the dam is located has been consulted by administration, he said.
“They indicated a preference for keeping the dam in place to retain water in that area for the cattle grazing in the adjacent field, he said “However, they would support the county removing the dam if it was necessary to prevent structural damage to the road due to water sitting in the ditch.”
As per council instructions, operational services brought forward three options and comments on each:
Gosh the property owners want to keep it to water their cattle. But the city wants it gone. The more things change the more they stay the same.
As per council instructions, operational services brought forward three options and comments on each:
• Option 1: Leave the dam in place.
“Leaving the dam in place does have risks. If water cannot travel through the culvert, it will travel through the roadway itself causing the road to become soft and eventually tunnelling will occur causing failure during large rain events. There has been concern expressed to the county that a water pond adjacent to the road is a concern is someone was to hit the ditch.”
• Option 2: Install a 140 metre guardrail along Fallen Timber Trail.
“The estimated cost of this option is $48,670. This estimate includes mobilization, excavation, sub grade preparation, installation of strong posts and W-beam guardrail, and gradual fill.”
• Remove the dam and install a beaver cone – a device that allows water flow while discouraging further damming – at an estimated cost of $12,500.
Operational services also identified other risks with leaving the dam in place, including muskrat/beaver tunnelling into the bank of the road, damage to other infrastructure located with the right-of-way, and increased risk of ice buildup and culvert blockage, he said.
OMG! Three council positions presented as straw man alternatives just like Martinez all those years ago. That is SO sweet, I almost feel young again.
Of course only one would fix the problem. The other two are crazy inflated figures that would line only line interested pockets.
I don’t know if you are old enough to remember the beaver cone scam but the “inventor” threatened to sue me and Mike Callahan if I didn’t stop crowing about it so it’s nice to see he’s made a name for himself.
I believe I referred to them at the time as Madonna Bras,
During discussion of the matter, Coun. Tiffany Nixon said she was opposed to removal of the dam.
“I definitely am opposed to that option,” Nixon said. “I think that is the least viable of the options that were presented and I think there are other things that can be done in place. Removing the dam will lessen and diminish the available of water at that location to be used for infrastructure projects and road projects in the area.
“It would also affect FireSmart. It would also affect wildlife. I would affect cattle that are currently drinking from that pond. And it would affect all of the other wildlife that has settled in around there.
“Many of the residents in Bergen have a preference to leave it.”
Coun. Peggy Johnson also spoke against removing the dam.
“Here we have the excellent resource of a pond of water and I certainly would support leaving it there,” said Johnson.
Coun. Greg Harris spoke in favour of having the dam removed to protect the county infrastructure at the site.
“I get the emotional connection to having the beavers,” said Harris. “We are certainly not in short supply of beavers. I get more complaints all the time about the amount of grazing land that their dams will cover with water.
“The truth is that if this dam is taken out all the water is not going to disappear. I think we have to look at protecting our infrastructure as our number one concern.”
Coun. Jennifer Lutz said, in part, “Because the beaver dam is blocking (water flow), there’s other users downstream that aren’t getting that water. It’s not that the water is disappearing but I imagine downstream that there are some ag producers that are missing the water and would probably support removing the beaver dam to keep the water flowing. There is that consideration.”
Reeve Angela Aalbers and councillors Dwayne Fulton, Alan Miller, Lutz and Harris voted in favour of the motion to remove the dam, with councillors Johnson and Nixon voting against.
The motion to remove the dam did not include the installation of a beaver cone.
“That was not included in council’s motion,” Jeff Holmes, chief administrative officer, told the Albertan. “We will continue to monitor the site and if in the future the beaver cone is deemed necessary by operational services to protect the road infrastructure we will determine if that addition falls within approved budgets or would require future budget approvals.
“No cost estimate was provided for the beaver dam removal as it falls within existing infrastructure maintenance budgets and does not require additional funding motions from council.”
Removal of the dam will be funded through existing maintenance budgets, council heard.
Doing what we want is free, Every thing else costs money. That makes sense doesn’t it?
Never mind that the township is about 13 miles from Cows and Fish and they could have experts out there fixing this issue for the long term with a phone call.
Never mind that the pond is helping raise the waater table and the folks down stream will get MORE not less stream flow because of it.
Never mind that ripping the dam out is a temporary solution and the pond will be repaired immediately by the beavers because winter is coming and they need cover for their lodge before it freezes.
Never mind that two of your council members and lots of residents including the property owners want the pond to remain.
Our minds are made up and our back hoes are hungry.
