Yesterday’s interview was much less surreal than I expected it to be – partly because I had so little sleep the night(s) before I was feeling too unreal myself to notice! Still I did learn a few things from the experience. I had a strange sense of freedom to say whatever I wanted, but another equally powerful feeling of responsibility for the interview. Dave was an enthusiastic interviewer, but I realized when I listened again that he often asked me several questions at once, so it was up to me to decide what to answer. In the commercial breaks I would pause and think about what I most wanted to emphasize with the remaining time, and since his questions were very plentiful, I could pick and choose, or, as I did with the salmon issue at the end, just interject.
Hearing Mark Ross on the other line was also interesting, partly because I think he did a really nice job, and partly because I (surprisingly!) didn’t feel angry at him. Since the sheetpile-palooza I have (at the very least) rolled my eyes at the mention of any council person’s name. Yesterday I was just felt happy we were there, and happy the beavers had given him this new experience.
Which leads me to the MOST important thing I realized yesterday, and of course its personal. Given that I understood fairly early on that I could steer the interview where ever I wanted, and that Mark Ross would have to deal with my fall out, I could have spent the whole 40 minutes blasting the city for their stupidity or explained why the tunneling issue was bogus, or explained how we had been harassed even about planting trees, but I didn’t.
Why not?
It wasn’t because I was afraid the city would retaliate against the beavers or me personally. (They do constantly.) It wasn’t because I thought if I was nice they’d be nice, because even I have had ample time to realize that doesn’t work. It wasn’t because I didn’t care anymore or it didn’t upset me anymore, because it still does and I can still do a pretty feeling rant about it.
It was, strangely, because I was more interested in helping ALL beavers than in hurting the city.
I was very aware of the possibility in the interview that someone, somewhere, in Idaho or Maine or Utah, was dealing with similar issues and could be helped by hearing that there are actual solutions that work. I imagined him or her wondering whether this was worth doing and arming them with a list of reasons why beavers are an investment in the watershed. Maybe I imagined myself, three years ago, and what it would have meant for me to hear that interview before I embarked on this “epic tail”.
Anyway, it was a learning experience on many levels. If you’d like to listen, I’ve put it on youtube without comercials. Part I tells the story of the historic importance of the prominence of beavers in the watershed. Part 2 tells how I got involved with our beavers and the way they’ve changed the habitat. Part 3 about the city’s response and the unintended political effects, and Part 4 let’s call “don’t forget the salmon!”
