The issue of Beaver relocation continues to be discussed. The subcommittee’s report will be reviewed by the larger City Council in March and the determination as to whether the beavers can remain will be finally decided. No one should be confused into thinking that our beavers are “safe” or that the dynamic November meeting was the final word. Public support and response remains necessary and will be even more important at the March meeting.
Of particular importance is the myth that relocation is somehow “good for beavers” or a humane solution. In the hands of an expert like Sherri Tippie it can be, but left to the devices of local trappers it is more likely to be a prolonged death sentence. Here is what happened to the beavers trapped at the very high profile Lake Skinner case in Riverside, CA.
“Thirteen beavers were trapped live and removed, one died struggling in a snare, and one was killed by a predator while held in a snare.. Virtually all mortality could have been avoided if Hancock traps had been used (and properly deployed).The end result was not satisfactory to the majority of opponents because of the Reserve’s failure to engage the underlying scientific questions, the mortality during trapping, and philosophical opposition to the exploitative placement of the relocated animals. Six beavers were confined in zoos or other captive display facilities (one beaver subsequently died in a fight resulting from inappropriately co-housing two males), four were relocated to a reserve in Texas, and three went to a movie production company.
Clearly our beavers do not need to be in a zoo or a movie set. Relocation is not a simple fix, and not the humane solution in is often presented to be. Make sure you spread the word that this is not an acceptable solution.
