Editor's note: This is a letter to Squamish's mayor and council, District of Squamish CAO Kevin Ramsay and other district officials. It was copied to The Chief for publication.
Re: Beaver Study by EBB Environmental Consulting Inc.
First of all I'd like to thank you all for taking the concerns of the community seriously last year and initiating this study. It is an excellent start to resolving our human vs. rodent conflicts.
However, after reviewing the report I have several areas of concern.
EBB Environmental has a history of beaver maintenance plans around the province. In every report it seems that the word "cull" is used excessively. This report is no exception. Judd Slough, Horse Creek, Dryden Creek, Brackendale Creek and Brennan Channels all had "culling" as an important part of the solution. I'm not sure how much time was spent in the field observing, but I question the "assumption" that all but the Brackendale colony were made up of six to eight or more individuals. I would challenge that number is high.
To date Squamish has had little conflict with beavers and for the most part we have learned to live in harmony with them. We do not have any areas of major concern yet, and the current population seems manageable. The secret hiring of a trapper and the destruction of a beaver wetland last year initiated the current study. While relocation of beavers is not currently allowed, it seems that this may be under review. Beavers need the right habitat for relocation or it is not successful. Hopefully relocation can be considered for our excess animals as an alternative to culling.
In the meantime, to avoid another "Squamish Beaver War," I would encourage the district to keep the Squamish River Watershed Society, Squamish Environment Society, Streamkeepers and concerned individuals in the community in the loop as you begin the planning process to implement some of the recommendations. After culling heavily last year I would also strongly urge that no culling is undertaken this year and that some of the alternatives like beaver cones, beaver bafflers, and pond levelers be put in place in the problem areas. These alternatives could be monitored and adjusted as necessary. Culling is the absolutely last resort, and only after evidence of overpopulation (who will decide?) and if relocation is not an option.
Some of the costs associated with the study seem quite high, and there are residents in the community that would be willing to supply free labour to assist with work parties and maintenance in order to keep the beavers as part of our community. Residents living near active areas can monitor on behalf of the district. It would be beneficial to address the more active sites first and historical sites as money allows. Bringing the community into the plan will make it more economical and inclusive.
While beavers have no economic value like fish, they are still valuable creatures. They make great wetlands for fish nurseries and ensure food and habitat for nature, birds, mammals and water fowl. We as humans need nature (studies have shown access to nature makes humans happy), but most of us have lost that connection. We need the beavers to maintain our wetlands for us, and we need to change our mentality of "kill it" and learn to co-exist.
I look forward to hearing how the district will proceed with the recommendations of the consultant's report, and ask that I be kept informed as the plan is implemented.
Mary Mitchell
Squamish
