England's first wild beavers for 400 years allowed to live on River Otter

[Exfarmer]

The things you see when you dont have yer gun


but Seriously tho, what actually is a beaver deceiver?

I think that is a questionnfor @Baldrick

 

[Jackov Altraids]

The things you see when you dont have yer gun


but Seriously tho, what actually is a beaver deceiver?

An expensive way of counteracting the affects of the Beavers dams which was the reason for them being released in the first place.
<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/h36vh423PiV9K" width="480" height="471" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="

">via GIPHY</a></p>

 

[Muddyroads]

The things you see when you dont have yer gun


but Seriously tho, what actually is a beaver deceiver?

My understanding is as follows:
They build dams in tributaries and ditches to create the habitat they want. If the dam breaches, they hear the change in water flow and repair the breach, so we can’t just lower dams if the location doesn’t suit us. Instead, we buried a 6 metre pipe (apparently it has to be this long to confuse the beaver) at the level we wanted the water to stabilise at, with a large mesh basket to stop them from blocking it with vegetation. The outlet end was then laid at water level to avoid a “waterfall“ sound. The trick was to get the right size pipe to cope with the average stream flow, and to get the height correct at the inlet point. Once successful, the dam remains intact but the water level is lower than before. The beaver is therefore deemed to have been deceibed!

 

[Bury the Trash]

My understanding is as follows:
They build dams in tributaries and ditches to create the habitat they want. If the dam breaches, they hear the change in water flow and repair the breach, so we can’t just lower dams if the location doesn’t suit us. Instead, we buried a 6 metre pipe (apparently it has to be this long to confuse the beaver) at the level we wanted the water to stabilise at, with a large mesh basket to stop them from blocking it with vegetation. The outlet end was then laid at water level to avoid a “waterfall“ sound. The trick was to get the right size pipe to cope with the average stream flow, and to get the height correct at the inlet point. Once successful, the dam remains intact but the water level is lower than before. The beaver is therefore deemed to have been deceibed!

Thanks thats interesting.





We still dont know what's happened up on the Hunnycutt....

 

[Danllan]

I find that a rather poor retort. Attempting to find fault with me and the way I've framed the argument rather than the argument itself.

I am not 'from the left'. I am an old school pragmatic liberal who is rather tired of neo-liberal gesture politics/virtue signalling, especially when it involves them writing cheques that others have to cash.

I have done very little reading on the introduction of Beavers and only posted to make the very simple points;

1) It should be a fact based decision [emotion/ morals are not relevant]

2) To decide to introduce a species there needs to be a very good chance of positive outcomes given the costs and risks of the unnecessary action having serious and unpredictable repercussions.


I am offended and object strongly to the suggestion that I'm interested in cash and can be 'bought off'. You have merely highlighted the motive of many involved in such schemes with "As I wrote earlier, once sub's have gone there will be more cash around for good causes".
The costs I refer to are for society, habitats and native species that have evolved with centuries of absence.

You accuse me of bias while I've never explicitly stated that I oppose introducing Beavers.
Given the countless examples of ecological and environmental disasters from introducing fresh species in to an ecosystem, it would be foolhardy to not think the bar should be set quite high for it to be considered.

You think it's a 'poor retort', so what? I've found your efforts utterly vapid and internally inconsistent. And you need to read more carefully, because I haven't accused you of being on the left; I did write that you were using leftist tactics.

You're being 'offended' by something counts for nothing and I can't see how it in anyway has relevance to the matter at hand; I find it offensive that anyone can be so revoltingly self-obsessed (as a human per se, not as an individual chap) so as not to want beavers here again - but my anger and being offended at that is irrelevant too. Feel free to object away, and see what good it does you - you'll be as well to fart in a bottle and paint it.

Have you the moral courage to explicitly state your opposition to beavers?

(And, again, they aren't a fresh species, and no matter how many times you write it, they can't be )

 

[Bury the Trash]

I just so love all this sh.it man....☺

 

[Longlowdog]

According to the government advice on releasing beavers any release is a trial not an indefinite re-introduction. Proposals have to include biodiversity impact studies and socio-economic studies. I fail to see how such an introduction can take place if it deprives another person of their livelihood by flooding or waterlogging their land. I'd suggest anyone with the threat of beavers starts planting high value cricket bat willow.
Every application has to include an exit plan if the trial is a failure, I'd love to see how that was worded by the applicants and how vague the definition of failure is.
Beavers were released in to the Tay river system illegally, no-one was prosecuted for irregularities pertaining to their licence to keep captive beavers. This shows that these projects have the tacit approval of government ministers and no-one will be able to lift a finger to stop it.
In Scotland The Sacred Cow is so anti gun, shooting, estate ownership, land owners and capitalism that she will permit anything that she thinks will inconvenience us.
A friend not one mile from my place as the crow flies was approached a month ago to see if he would be amenable to being a lynx friendly corridor. Beaver and lynx are coming and coming quicker than an legislation would have you think was moral or legal.
I bet there is a lynx sighting in Clashindarroch and beavers in Aberdeenshire within a year and that they will be long before any official announcement of a release date.

 

[Bald Rick]

Seriously tho, what actually is a beaver deceiver?

Philip Schofield says Hello

 

[Jackov Altraids]

You think it's a 'poor retort', so what? I've found your efforts utterly vapid and internally inconsistent. And you need to read more carefully, because I haven't accused you of being on the left; I did write that you were using leftist tactics.

You're being 'offended' by something counts for nothing and I can't see how it in anyway has relevance to the matter at hand; I find it offensive that anyone can be so revoltingly self-obsessed (as a human per se, not as an individual chap) so as not to want beavers here again - but my anger and being offended at that is irrelevant too. Feel free to object away, and see what good it does you - you'll be as well to fart in a bottle and paint it.

Have you the moral courage to explicitly state your opposition to beavers?

(And, again, they aren't a fresh species, and no matter how many times you write it, they can't be )

I have the moral courage to always tell the truth. That would be that I'm currently not convinced in the merits of introducing Beavers into an environment that has spent centuries evolving in their absence.
I'm sure there are specific areas which may benefit and I would assume that the trial sites would be chosen as being particular suitable.
A general release means no plans or controls whatsoever and it is likely to become very evident that there are huge areas for which they are not suited.
I can only speak for this area but Beavers would have a severe affect on the birds, mammals and insects that choose to live along the river banks.
The fish that come here to spawn certainly don't need any extra obstacles.
Keeping the rush pastures waterlogged will make flooding worse rather than better.
Roads and tracks follow waterways and will be potentially affected as will SSSI's in the vicinity.
I have followed my moral obligation to protect and enhance my local environment and that could be completely undermined by some misplaced guilt for maybe mistreating a rodent centuries ago.
Maybe we should re-introduce small pox. It was only 50 years ago that it was eradicated from the UK. Surely there must be a moral case for letting it control the population of the animal species that is unquestionably responsible for more damage to the planet than the rest combined.

 

[matthew]

Thanks for the explanantion carried out in Devon to try and prevent swamp creation from @Muddyroads

"For info, I built a beaver deceiver upstream of Otterton on Bicton College ground a few years ago when they were first being monitored. It seemed quite effective, but not cheap if you have to do a lot of them. "

This reminds me of another 'bright idea' to fix a man made problem. That of fencing badgers out of ruminant grazed land. The cost was outrageous as badger proof fencing was dug many feet into the ground and turned at a right angle to prevent ingress. All labour done by students of course, in pursuit of their studies. At Bicton, they forgot the gateway, and had to concrete its base and realign the posts.

In the real world, 'beaver deceivers' are as impractical as they are expensive: and with beavers roaming around our waterways, would be months or years after the event and subsequent land damage.

This 'damage' seems to be a blind spot to conservationists. Seen as flood prevention, when in reality it alters the landscape for many, floods habitat for other species, and encourages the problem to move to 'another place'. Out of sight?

To reintroduce these animals, including lynx and wolves into an island already groaning under the weight of 56m people in England (66m in the UK) which is unable to support that population with basic food production, is an act of unbelievable stupidity. Imho - of course.

 

[egbert]

Thanks for the explanantion carried out in Devon to try and prevent swamp creation from @Muddyroads

"For info, I built a beaver deceiver upstream of Otterton on Bicton College ground a few years ago when they were first being monitored. It seemed quite effective, but not cheap if you have to do a lot of them. "

This reminds me of another 'bright idea' to fix a man made problem. That of fencing badgers out of ruminant grazed land. The cost was outrageous as badger proof fencing was dug many feet into the ground and turned at a right angle to prevent ingress. All labour done by students of course, in pursuit of their studies. At Bicton, they forgot the gateway, and had to concrete its base and realign the posts.

In the real world, 'beaver deceivers' are as impractical as they are expensive: and with beavers roaming around our waterways, would be months or years after the event and subsequent land damage.

This 'damage' seems to be a blind spot to conservationists. Seen as flood prevention, when in reality it alters the landscape for many, floods habitat for other species, and encourages the problem to move to 'another place'. Out of sight?

To reintroduce these animals, including lynx and wolves into an island already groaning under the weight of 56m people in England (66m in the UK) which is unable to support that population with basic food production, is an act of unbelievable stupidity. Imho - of course.

^^^^^spot on Matthew.

I object to the beavers creeping reintroduction for these reasons, but also because of the mindset it's fostering, IE that if we all hold hands round the camp fire and sing kum by ah, all the nastiness of the world will go away.

The beavers protected in Germany are already causing all kinds of problems, just doing what beavers do.
And as protecting badgers here has led to them becoming a problem, so it will be with these creatures.
worse, the mindset grows and flowers, and seeds the idea that predators are a good idea.

A German 'green' type was telling me just yesterday that the reason the wolves are killing all the sheep on the continent* is that their packs haven't grown big enough to tackle deer yet.
When I pointed out that the wolves will always take the easiest meal, and that's currently domesticated sheep, she had to concede - but evidently that is their argument.

*And if you haven't seen the photos coming out of Germany et al, it is hideous.
Repeated attacks leaving dead sheep scattered across the land in droves.
Likewise cattle, pet donkeys, grazing ponies.............all of them.
Death and gore don't overly perturb me- i've seen ample thanks- but this is just so pointless. Such a waste.

I'm sorry for those who cling to the idea that unicorns will once more frolic in sylvan glades if we just but give them the chance.
The underlying reasons for clinging to 'rewilding' are to do with displacing their own guilt about what humanity is dong now, and in recent decades.
(As opposed to what was done hundreds of years ago)
It also seem to be a thing that they like to post stuff here to get us arguing....what makes people like that tick?
It's like pishheads who go out looking for a punch-up.
(I'm not trained in unravelling what goes on in peoples heads, but by gum there's a rich thread there to be explored)

When the same people work as hard to stop economic growth, curb cheap travel, and stamp out population growth,....
...then they can come back to me for a chat about how I manage the land under my hand.
Otherwise, they can fudge off. Pointlessly attack my culture and me, expect outright hostility and hatred in return.

 

[Danllan]

I just so love all this sh.it man....☺

Fair comment, but it begs the question: 'Does a beaver sh!t in the dam?'

I have the moral courage to always tell the truth. That would be that I'm currently not convinced in the merits of introducing Beavers into an environment that has spent centuries evolving in their absence.
I'm sure there are specific areas which may benefit and I would assume that the trial sites would be chosen as being particular suitable.
A general release means no plans or controls whatsoever and it is likely to become very evident that there are huge areas for which they are not suited.
I can only speak for this area but Beavers would have a severe affect on the birds, mammals and insects that choose to live along the river banks.
The fish that come here to spawn certainly don't need any extra obstacles.
Keeping the rush pastures waterlogged will make flooding worse rather than better.
Roads and tracks follow waterways and will be potentially affected as will SSSI's in the vicinity.
I have followed my moral obligation to protect and enhance my local environment and that could be completely undermined by some misplaced guilt for maybe mistreating a rodent centuries ago.
Maybe we should re-introduce small pox. It was only 50 years ago that it was eradicated from the UK. Surely there must be a moral case for letting it control the population of the animal species that is unquestionably responsible for more damage to the planet than the rest combined.

Those first four emboldened words, just those, again demonstrate your bias in this, you claim not to be dead against, but your phraseology says otherwise, the 'centuries' of absence is an evolutionary moment and inferring otherwise is just daft, because it's demonstrably wrong.

Hmm, it seems to me that bringing up the reintroduction of small pox in this argument is the re re-wilding equivalent of Godwin's Law in political discussions, perhaps we should call it 'Jack's Law'... Yep, I think that's established a precedent, you'll be (in)famous!

 

[An Gof]

^^^^^spot on Matthew.

I object to the beavers creeping reintroduction for these reasons, but also because of the mindset it's fostering, IE that if we all hold hands round the camp fire and sing kum by ah, all the nastiness of the world will go away.

The beavers protected in Germany are already causing all kinds of problems, just doing what beavers do.
And as protecting badgers here has led to them becoming a problem, so it will be with these creatures.
worse, the mindset grows and flowers, and seeds the idea that predators are a good idea.

A German 'green' type was telling me just yesterday that the reason the wolves are killing all the sheep on the continent* is that their packs haven't grown big enough to tackle deer yet.
When I pointed out that the wolves will always take the easiest meal, and that's currently domesticated sheep, she had to concede - but evidently that is their argument.

*And if you haven't seen the photos coming out of Germany et al, it is hideous.
Repeated attacks leaving dead sheep scattered across the land in droves.
Likewise cattle, pet donkeys, grazing ponies.............all of them.
Death and gore don't overly perturb me- i've seen ample thanks- but this is just so pointless. Such a waste.

I'm sorry for those who cling to the idea that unicorns will once more frolic in sylvan glades if we just but give them the chance.
The underlying reasons for clinging to 'rewilding' are to do with displacing their own guilt about what humanity is dong now, and in recent decades.
(As opposed to what was done hundreds of years ago)
It also seem to be a thing that they like to post stuff here to get us arguing....what makes people like that tick?
It's like pishheads who go out looking for a punch-up.
(I'm not trained in unravelling what goes on in peoples heads, but by gum there's a rich thread there to be explored)

When the same people work as hard to stop economic growth, curb cheap travel, and stamp out population growth,....
...then they can come back to me for a chat about how I manage the land under my hand.
Otherwise, they can fudge off. Pointlessly attack my culture and me, expect outright hostility and hatred in return.

Top post ...... from someone who REALLY understands his land and environment ..... these are the sort of people that those making the rules need to listen to not the academics and wishful thinkers.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Fair comment, but it begs the question: 'Does a beaver sh!t in the dam?'


Those first four emboldened words, just those, again demonstrate your bias in this, you claim not to be dead against, but your phraseology says otherwise, the 'centuries' of absence is an evolutionary moment and inferring otherwise is just daft, because it's demonstrably wrong.

Hmm, it seems to me that bringing up the reintroduction of small pox in this argument is the re re-wilding equivalent of Godwin's Law in political discussions, perhaps we should call it 'Jack's Law'... Yep, I think that's established a precedent, you'll be (in)famous!

Is
this
you
@Danllan ?

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/Ve9pOjJRxkW2c" width="480" height="270" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="

">via GIPHY</a></p>

 

[Bury the Trash]

Fair comment, but it begs the question: 'Does a beaver sh!t in the dam?'


Those first four emboldened words, just those, again demonstrate your bias in this, you claim not to be dead against, but your phraseology says otherwise, the 'centuries' of absence is an evolutionary moment and inferring otherwise is just daft, because it's demonstrably wrong.

Hmm, it seems to me that bringing up the reintroduction of small pox in this argument is the re re-wilding equivalent of Godwin's Law in political discussions, perhaps we should call it 'Jack's Law'... Yep, I think that's established a precedent, you'll be (in)famous!

Especjally In drinking water catchments...People are going to hope they dont. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giardiasis

Health risk fears after man claims to fall ill with 'beaver fever' in Tayside

Scotland's wildlife watchdog has been urged to take action after a Tayside river worker - and his dog - fell ill with a suspected case of so-called Beaver

www.thecourier.co.uk

 

[Bury the Trash]

....and dont say cattle and sheep can spoil the water quality , because they dont around here as weve fenced them out

 

[Bury the Trash]

Thanks for the explanantion carried out in Devon to try and prevent swamp creation from @Muddyroads

"For info, I built a beaver deceiver upstream of Otterton on Bicton College ground a few years ago when they were first being monitored. It seemed quite effective, but not cheap if you have to do a lot of them. "

This reminds me of another 'bright idea' to fix a man made problem. That of fencing badgers out of ruminant grazed land. The cost was outrageous as badger proof fencing was dug many feet into the ground and turned at a right angle to prevent ingress. All labour done by students of course, in pursuit of their studies. At Bicton, they forgot the gateway, and had to concrete its base and realign the posts.

In the real world, 'beaver deceivers' are as impractical as they are expensive: and with beavers roaming around our waterways, would be months or years after the event and subsequent land damage.

This 'damage' seems to be a blind spot to conservationists. Seen as flood prevention, when in reality it alters the landscape for many, floods habitat for other species, and encourages the problem to move to 'another place'. Out of sight?

To reintroduce these animals, including lynx and wolves into an island already groaning under the weight of 56m people in England (66m in the UK) which is unable to support that population with basic food production, is an act of unbelievable stupidity. Imho - of course.

Tbh I've been thinking about building some sort of weir , and using certain amount of water for irrigation , not quite sure if this sort of thing would help or hinder ...

 

[Danllan]

Is
this
you
@Danllan ?

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/Ve9pOjJRxkW2c" width="480" height="270" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="

">via GIPHY</a></p>

Nope, home movie?

 

[Muddyroads]

Why does Beaver Fever make me think of @Baldrick ??

 

[Bury the Trash]

My understanding is as follows:
They build dams in tributaries and ditches to create the habitat they want. If the dam breaches, they hear the change in water flow and repair the breach, so we can’t just lower dams if the location doesn’t suit us. Instead, we buried a 6 metre pipe (apparently it has to be this long to confuse the beaver) at the level we wanted the water to stabilise at, with a large mesh basket to stop them from blocking it with vegetation. The outlet end was then laid at water level to avoid a “waterfall“ sound. The trick was to get the right size pipe to cope with the average stream flow, and to get the height correct at the inlet point. Once successful, the dam remains intact but the water level is lower than before. The beaver is therefore deemed to have been deceibed!

I guess if a breach kept appearing they would eventually give up and move on ...