Ever notice how city officials are very selective on where they can ‘comment’? If the issue happens to be in their interest or in accord with what they want the public to know they’re eager to offer their thoughts. We got so many comments from our city about why beavers were going to cause flooding. We could barely shut them up.
But when it’s something they don’t want to talk about they’re as tight-lipped as an oyster bed. Just sayin’.
Report on beaver trapping in Framingham still pending
Framingham officials would not say how many beavers were killed in the recent trapping operation aimed at flood prevention.They said they would not comment until a DPW report about the operation is complete.
In response to questions from the Daily News, officials from both the Conservation Commission and the Department of Public Works said they aren’t ready to discuss what occurred.
“We are in the process of filing a report with the Conservation Commission as part of a requirement of the emergency permit process,” a DPW spokesman wrote. Rob McArthur, the city’s conservation administrator, said his office is waiting for the report. McArthur said he does not know how many beavers were killed last month. He did not respond to questions regarding the effect of the beaver trapping on flooding.
Do you hear that rattling sound? That’s the sound of the proverbial can being kicked down the road a ways. Framingham got A LOT of attention and press about killing these particular beavers. They are hoping to wait until no one cares anymore before they tell them how many.
I was in the hospital while all these shenanagins went on. So depending on how you look at it, they either missed an opportunity or lucked out completely.
Well, not completely.
But the decision to eliminate the beavers upset some residents and drew criticism from the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which urged the city to consider alternatives. The group contacted Mayor Yvonne Spicer and city councilors in December, urging them to consider alternatives to trapping, such as culvert protectors and devices that restore the flow of water.
Sometimes called “beaver deceivers,” the devices use pipes to allow water to pass through areas with beaver dams without triggering the animals’ natural instinct to impede running water. More than 1,000 such devices are now in use throughout Massachusetts, providing a more humane and inexpensive way to regulate beaver-related flooding, according to animal rights advocates.
Ahh it’s nice to see this made it all the way into the human socity’s attention and the papers. Good for everyone involved. I hope at least our website helped some bystander looking for information. You know, Martinez, the city on the hill and all that.
However, beaver trapping remains controversial. Opponents say water flow devices provide a better, cheaper alternative, since beavers will quickly repopulate an area and build dams after the population there is thinned.
Dave Wattles, a furbearer biologist at the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife, said the circumstances in each body of water are different, and trapping is sometimes the best solution.
“Every situation cannot be solved with those flow devices,” he said, “so in reality, in order to prevent conflict with modern society, doing what they did and removing the beaver is … probably the best case scenario.”
Remind me to have a conversation with Mr. Wattles. and to introduce him to Mr. Callahan. Never you mind that this city is an hour drive from Beaver Solutions and they still couldn’t find their way out of a paper bag.
I hope you continue to have lots of media questions about this and that your egos are still bruised when the NEXT family of beavers settle in, because it will not be long.
