[Closed] SNH and beavers

Where was WCA during all this? 🤔

I think a beaver would struggle to fit in that trap.

Put it another way. A few years back there were zero beavers in the Tay catchment. Now there are at least 343 of them. And don't forget that they are rodents and breed like rodents, so be careful what you wish for....

PS I have nothing against beavers. But since we live in the UK, by and large in a managed landscape (certainly the Tay Valley is one), it is not unreasonable that we manage all aspects of that landscape for the compromised benefit of everyone who needs to use it.

No trap but I have a special 'beaver lure' 🙂

As well as what welsh farmer says the Tay valley beavers were not reintroduced in a controlled fashion. Its an accidental or even deliberate unsanctioned release. Its not the sort of land they would have been reintroduced on deliberately. Beavers do a great deal of good for the environment in wildish land. A pest in cultivated land. I'd rather they trapped them in live traps and relocated them tho.

Its all about compromise. Beavers have no natural predators in Scotland ( I don't think?)

I get that there’s a need for control (and in some cases lethal control) but killing 20% of the population in the 7 months since they became protected seems a tad excessive.

It would be interesting to know why some/all of those that were shot couldn’t have been relocated, either to the smaller officially sanctioned population in Knapdale or to the various English/Welsh reintroduction schemes (as it’s no longer possible to import from European populations).

Also remember that the Tay never floods and so wouldn't benefit from the sort of upstream damming and pool flooding that beavers carry out naturally and that might otherwise mitigate the effects of intensive farming and forestry.

SNH have also been somewhat closer to landowner interests than conservation ones in the past.

Roseanna Cunningham is the Perthshire MSP, and environment minister. She is trying to keep a few of the local farmers happy.

it is not unreasonable that we manage all aspects of that landscape for the compromised benefit of everyone who needs to use it.

Well, provided that happens in a way that is forward looking and doesn't perpetuate practices that are demonstrably harmful or only benefit narrow interests, of course. That's why reintroductions need to have widespread buy-in to be successful.

Wildlife licensing is really about legal compliance and demonstrating the minimum requirements have been met though.

Were they near salmon rivers?

I get that there’s a need for control (and in some cases lethal control) but killing 20% of the population in the 7 months since they became protected seems a tad excessive

What percentage did the population exspand in those 7 months?

@WorldClassAccident Even if they were, the evidence apparently says they increase the populations of salmonids.

@Cheesybeanz Don’t know the answer to that, but I’d be surprised if it was by anything approaching 20%

There have been wild beavers on the Tay for almost 20 years. They are not a new arrival. They are thriving, as the environment is well suited to them. Just as they would have a few hundred years ago.
As the population expands, they will spread out further onto tributaries. Doesn't necessarily mean more in particular area.

Seems SNH are embarrassed that they are doing so well. Unlike the over-managed damp squib at Knapdale.

They have been hugely successful in the Tay catchment. They are present in all the tributaries and much of the standing water in the catchment - far more successful than those in the Knapdale trial. A licensed kill of 87 is not going to damage the population, but may help with landowner relations which may result in better wider ranging environmental outcomes.

@oldtennisshoes So why not translocations some of the Tay ones to Knapdale?

I'm a beaver fan.

[strong]ratherbeintobago[/strong] wrote:

So why not translocations some of the Tay ones to Knapdale?

You mean like the English did with the Scottish Highlanders during the clearances? 😉
Not sure what effect that had on the local populations in the areas they were moved to but I am bettin it wasn't all positive!

Roseanna Cunningham is the Perthshire MSP, and environment minister

As well as appeasing local farmers she's also keen on a Sea Eagle cull in the western isles at a time when the rest of the world is wondering why so many raptors are being killed in Scotland.

@welshfarmer More likely hybrid vigour or something.

@munrobiker It’s good to see that Westminster hasn’t got all the idiots.

SNH have managed to kill most of the beavers they tried to relocate. eg when wiping out the population on the River Beauly.

I am a fan of the beavers being there.
But I am also a fan of balancing how quickly the things are breeding - the Tay catchment is my local paddling spot, and you can see the huge impact quickly.
I am told, by SNH source, that the Knapdale population and Tay population will mix within a couple of years. They also suggest they will be in Aviemore and the Spey pretty pronto at the rate they are going too...

If a cull helps appease the landowner/human concerns, and they are still succesful, then that is fine. I suspect (but couldn't prove) that if we don't cull then like the deer death by starvation is worse.

Also remember that the Tay never floods

uhuh.

I thought they were spreading into the Forth now?

Deer are slightly different as there are a lot of rivers in the UK with no beavers.

Also remember that the Tay never floods

uhuh.

🙂  I suspect you know I was taking the piss.

@oldtennisshoes So why not translocations some of the Tay ones to Knapdale?

Until relatively recently there was a question about them being the same species or subspecies - I can't remember the details, but there was bit of subspecieisism going on.

Also, it appears that Knapdale isn't really that great an environment for beavers. Which is impressive considering how well they've done in every scrappy bit of water course in the Tay catchment.

Plus, thinking back to the Uist Wader Project - there's always been unease about mammal translocations.

I suspect (but couldn’t prove) that if we don’t cull then like the deer death by starvation is worse.

I suspect we are a very long way from that.

@oldtennisshoes Ah - right. I don’t think the beavers in the UK are going to be of the same subspecies though, as much as it matters (ie. Eurasian rather than N American) - IIRC most of them are from Bavaria but then there are other populations (e.g. Tay) where no-one really knows where they came from.

For whatever reason there doesn’t appear to be as much documentation of what’s happening in Scotland (or Wales for that matter) compared with England where BACE have a blog detailing what’s going on.

For whatever reason there doesn’t appear to be as much documentation of what’s happening in Scotland

From some things I've been told, beavers aren't the only under the radar project slowly moving along...

I'm curious - why do landowners want them killed? I've only ever spoken to one farmer with beavers on his land and he was delighted.

@matt_outandabout I gather the lynx project is having another go?

@stevious According to e.g. Gow, there are a lot of farmers who’re sold on the idea but don’t live in areas where there are beavers, either because they’ve not spread there, or because it’s England/Wales. Don’t know how accurate that is, or whether translocations are possible. I suppose it might depend on whether increased groundwater is a benefit, or whether dammed drainage is a pain.

Stevoius
Flooding grazing?

lynx

Yes.

And Boar.

Trossachs to Cairngorms forest connection and reforestation all over (with matching exclusion of deer).

Meant to ask earlier - isn’t there something about beavers not being able to spread past the great glen?

(e.g. Tay) where no-one really knows where they came from.

A man with a van from Alyth - allegedly.

@oldtennisshoes Where did he get them from, though?

Norway and Poland - allegedly

Rewilding is happening all over the UK as marginal agricultural areas are falling out of production due to low commodity prices and the fact that no one wants the hassle of the (very hard) work involved in using said areas for production. I have a 30 acre woodland on my farm that is very steep and over 1000 ft above sea level. Traditionally it was used for sheep grazing. I have barely used it for such for the past 20 years, and have fenced 3/4 of it to exclude stock completely. The other day, while walking through the wood I came across a Roe deer. This is the first roe deer seen in the valley for over 100 years. I have also seen 3 hares, 2 red kites, and otters within he past week on the farm. Even 20 years ago none of those species were here.

The Knapdale beavers were brought in from Norway. Supposedly they are most similar to the native Scottish beavers, and similar climate etc.
Whereas most other private collections are from Germany. And probably most of the Tay beavers.
I'm not sure if there is any real difference between them.

There are other ways of controlling beaver impacts. ie putting diverter pipes into dams. Instead of just killing them.

Your right @welshfarmer.

I think it's well overdue looking to support land use like you small woodland, which benefits us all, not just pure food production.

Up here I do think we have some chuffing difficult decisions about how we move from current situation to one that's more diverse, while earning income for rural communities and playing the long and balanced game.

I'm glad beavers are here, hoping I'm going to see one this year while out paddling. I think some dawn floats down the Earn are needed.

Beavers have no natural predators in Scotland

[tongue in cheek] Lynx re-introduction?..wolf?...Bear? [/tongue in cheek]

Wolf has been proposed, IIRC.

I think the difficulty was that enclosing them in a big enough enclosure was problematic, and if they eat some hikers…

I have no moral issues with reintroduced apex predators but local people need to buy in. Fencing them in is wrong. That's a zoo not rewilding and who pays for the sheep that get eaten?

I'm with TJ.

Our country hasn't had to deal with big predators for so long, it's just not acceptable to the population.

Imo, the lynx is pushing it.
Boars I'm good with.
Frankly we should put the effort into our existing wildcat.

Who pays for the environmental destruction caused by sheep farming? Sheep farmers are reliant on subsidies, why not pay them to improve the environment instead.
https://www.monbiot.com/2017/01/04/the-hills-are-dead/

^that's the way it should be.

Round here everyone us bitching because the sheep that have grazed the hills for "hundreds of years" are being moved for forestry. Couldn't make it up. ****ing idiots.

The lynx project folk are numpties

Which is a shame, as I’d love to see Lynx in Scotland

The estates would likely poison them back into extinction mind you

Also, that video of a Bear up there has the text Bear Chases.

If that’s the speed of a Bear chasing someone, I’ll completely reassess the level of risk of travelling in Bear country. As it seems walking very slowly is enough to outpace them.

Frankly we should put the effort into our existing wildcat.

Ive not looked so this is a question rather than a statement. But isn’t the Wildcat basically about done? Simply not enough genetic stock left to survive?

That’s a zoo not rewilding and who pays for the sheep that get eaten?

Tax payer surely?

There is a lot of effort being put into wildcats and recently a previously unknown pure wildcat female has been found and added to the breeding programme. The population of wildcats is very precarious and inbreeding with feral domestics cats is a huge issue but they might just survive.

Piemonster -indeed but the lynx project claimed enough money would be made from tourism to pay for eaten sheep - and also denied that lynx would eat sheep anyway.

Local "buy in" to rewilding projects is essential - look at the success of sea eagles on Mull to see this. Ecotourism to Mull is worth millions of pounds.

The lynx - truly Schrodingers cat.

Will create lots of income via eco-tourism as folk come to the area in the hope of seeing one.

So secretive that they'll shy away from any contact with humans.

I live the idea of trying to re-balance the environment and the flaura and fauna it contains but I can't see any point in introducing lynx until we've sorted out the habitat problem and that will require intervention and legislation on a scale we've not seen since the Clearances.

The Cairngorms Connect project probably gives us our only real chance at sorting some of this out but the area identified is ring-fenced by stripped grouse moor and a deer population way in excess of what the land can comfortably support.

The not-entirely-unbiased Beaver Trust weigh in:

https://twitter.com/beavertrust/status/1266326925045268480?s=21

On boars, I thought the ones gone feral in Gloucestershire were causing devastation?

The lynx project folk are numpties

How so?

uhuh

If I'm being pedantic, that's not the Tay, it's the Dochart... 😉

(I watched some friends paddle it at that level. One got a good kicking in the wave just below the bridge...)

I've been in Matts (old) house and felt it trembling when the water was quite a bit lower than that.

[strong]CraigW[/strong] wrote:

Who pays for the environmental destruction caused by sheep farming?

Point of contention here. Sheep are not causing environmental destruction as you call it. They are maintaining a managed landscape that has been created by us (humans), for our benefit (food creation) over the past millennia.

If you want to talk about environmental destruction look no further than the out of town shopping complexes (I am sure you have used them) and the new sprawling housing developments (maybe you live in one), or the airports built so you can go on holiday to places where prime coastal areas are now covered in hotels. Or maybe the rainforest being burnt to grow soya for a vegan to have his "milk". That is environmental destruction.

If you want a return to a more natural landscape than that that grazing with sheep produces then fine. Let us have that dialogue. But to come at it from the starting point that sheep on the hills are destroying the environment is not going to make you many friends amongst those who you most need to have on board if change is indeed what the bulk of society wants.

I don't really know much about the issue, but I live in an area where beavers now inhabit. This photo was taken by me in April. When I moved here five years ago this was thickly wooded up to the waters edge, as you can see, all the trees have been felled by the beavers. Five years ago the trees were full of birds nesting, now there is no birdsong to be heard. I think it would be hard to convince me that this is good environmentally.

[img] [/img]

The education officer at the Highland Wildlife Park was adamant that there was no chance of Lynx all whilst wildcats still existed as the competition for territory would mean the immediate extinction of the wildcats.

If you want to talk about environmental destruction look no further than the out of town shopping complexes (I am sure you have used them) and the new sprawling housing developments (maybe you live in one), or the airports built so you can go on holiday to places where prime coastal areas are now covered in hotels. Or maybe the rainforest being burnt to grow soya for a vegan to have his “milk”. That is environmental destruction.

Totally agree. When I think about environmental destruction, the Scottish highlands are not the first place that comes to mind.

When I think about environmental destruction, the Scottish highlands are not the first place that comes to mind.

Yes, but aren’t large parts of the highlands an overgrazed wasteland (either by sheep or excessive deer populations), or forestry monoculture?

Roseanna Cunningham is the Perthshire MSP, and environment minister

she also has a terrible track record regarding the fish farming industry, but unfortunately snp can do no wrong so gets away with it

The lynx project folk are numpties

How so?

The "information" they were putting out was laughable. They were being pressed by some sheep farmers and what they were saying was ridiculous including that the sheep farmers would have to get guard llamas and that the money from eco tourism would be enough to pay for compensation but had no idea of what the mechanism would be.

Also see the point on wildcats

There was also a proposal to fence off big chunks of the highlands to "reintroduce" all sorts of animals completely against scots law and the ethics of mountains as access would be restricted.

Again - I have no issue with reintroduction but it can only be done with complete transparency and community buy in.

boriselbrus

Thats damaged the woodland yes - but opening it up like that allows a more varied flora and fauna to colonise the area - so less dense woodland at the waters edge but more habitat for other species. Overall they improve biodiversity

Some of that looks to be saw cut as well but might just be the pic

ratherbeintobago
Subscriber

yes, but aren’t large parts of the highlands an overgrazed wasteland (either by sheep or excessive deer populations), or forestry monoculture?

Correct. The Glen Feshie estate has shown what reduction of grazing pressure can do.

https://thecaledonianforestersletters.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/recovery-of-an-overgrazed-locality-glen-feshie/

I first visited Glen Feshie with my dad in the early 1970s. It was hoaching with deer. There were virtually no young trees outside fenced plantations though. It was a bit of a grass and heather desert with a dying scattered Scots Pine forest. Now you can walk through the Feshie and see young trees and other new growth everywhere.

TJAgain:

All the trees have been felled by Beavers - they all have the "sharpened pencil" ends.

This Loch had been fenced off to stop deer from killing new trees, apparently the aim was to increase biodiversity in an area which has very few trees to encourage more variation including hopefully Ospreys. The surrounding area (thousands of hectares) has many lochans and very few trees especially round the water. All the beavers have done is turned the habitat around this lochan into the same as the rest of the area. They have reduced biodiversity not increased it.

As I say, I don't know much about it and the Beatrix Potter in me likes the idea of having more furry mammals around but I think we do have to be very careful. Th simplistic thoughts of "too many deer, let's introduce wolves or lynx!" does worry me, much as I'd love to see these animals in the wild.

Point of contention here. Sheep are not causing environmental destruction as you call it. They are maintaining a managed landscape that has been created by us (humans), for our benefit (food creation) over the past millennia.

The usual argument from farmers, blaming it all on the townies. Plenty of people living and working in the countryside can see the problems caused by sheep.
Yes, destroying the rainforest is bad (most of it is for animal feed). Just as destroying the forests in the UK is bad. Even though much of it happened a few hundred years ago, why would you want to 'maintain' this landscape?

Sheep farming is a remarkably inefficient way of producing food, which hardly anyone wants to eat. Sheep is about 1% of the diet, yet uses 75% of the land in Wales.

Please list these problems caused by sheep on 75% of the area of Wales and I will try and address them for you if I can.

If you want to see open grassland then sheep farming will maintain that. If you want to see woodland regeneration then the sheep have to go.

It's about what you want to have happen

Sheep farming is a remarkably inefficient way of producing food, which hardly anyone wants to eat. Sheep is about 1% of the diet, yet uses 75% of the land in Wales.

I don't know about Wales, but here in Highland Perthshire the land used for sheep can't be used for pretty much any other type of food production. It's steep and rocky, you can't plough it and climate means not much grows but grass, gorse and Heather. It's not like you could grow wheat or cabbages there.

Yes, destroying the rainforest is bad (most of it is for animal feed).

Do you have evidence for that?

I don’t know about Wales, but here in Highland Perthshire the land used for sheep can’t be used for pretty much any other type of food production. It’s steep and rocky, you can’t plough it and climate means not much grows but grass, gorse and Heather. It’s not like you could grow wheat or cabbages there.

Or you could grow trees. The natural tree line in most of Scotland is over 1000m. If you reduce grazing pressure, woodland will grow just about everywhere.

80% of Amazon soya goes to animal feed. And plenty more for oil and other processed foods. You can't blame the vegans for everything. https://globalforestatlas.yale.edu/amazon/land-use/soy

1. We were talking about food production. I can eat sheep, I can't eat trees.

2. Soya, fine. What about palm oil which I believe is the biggest cause of deforestation at the moment?

3. Why bring vegans into it?

Look, I'm an environmentalist, we are pretty much on the same side, but when I look at the country the Scottish and Welsh uplands are not the issue. The pollution, excess consumption, dependance on oil fueled transportation, waste and increasing population are far, far bigger issues. I'd rather flatten London and plant trees there. It would be far more beneficial 🌿😁

3. Why bring vegans into it?

Who knows? Seems to be the usual distraction from the farmers.
Palm kernel meal is used for animal feed. Seems to get ignored as a 'by-product', but it is still contributing to deforestation. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/may/09/pet-food-asian-rainforest

There's plenty of food for everyone, if it was produced and distributed in a more efficient way. Why does every piece of land have to be exploited for food production? Why not leave some space for nature. Forest cover in Scotland is still less than half of the European average.

Without wanting to rake over other threads, food production is one thing, shooting estates another.

But you made the assertion that sheep were destroying the environment. I hold that they are maintaining an environment that mankind destroyed several hundred (if not thousand) years ago in the the UK when deforestation occurred for firewood, ship building, pit props, charcoal, etc etc. Sheep were one of the first domesticated animals and were able to utilise those deforested areas not suitable for cultivation and have done so ever since, providing meat, and until comparatively recently a huge proportion of the textiles we have used. The wealth of large parts of the UK and commonwealth was built on the wool trade. That same wool is now almost a waste product while the world carpet their homes and clothe themselves with petrochemical based products. Why people have such a focus on sheep I really don't know. As I said. If the majority of society wish to see the countryside re-afforested, then fine, let us have that conversation and work out the best long term way to achieve that that balances all the needs of society. But to simply scream, "get rid of the sheep, they are destroying the environment" is blatantly wrong, and will be completely counterproductive to achieving any sort of consensus or compromise going forward.

How so?

The Lynx Project, at least the one which gets the headlines, has a rather dubious history.
Paul O’Donoghue who is charge also has his Wildcat haven and, most recently, announced he had a project to release eagles this year in Wales. Which undermined a proper project to do so which has been going on for a couple of years planning out and involving local people.
Has been covered several times in Private Eye and similar.
He recently lost a case against Andy Wightman around his business practices.

I think Lynx Uk trust does more harm than good. If they are going to be reintroduced then will be by someone else. My suspicion is there may be a mysterious reintroduction in the same way the beavers were and then some evidence produced several years later showing no one has really noticed them.

And I would agree, the principle of hunting estates is an abomination, though there can be little argument that the landscapes they have produced, such as heather moorlands and open woodland Chases such as Cannock, are quite unique and it would be a sad day if all those areas were allowed to return to a dense homogeneous climax woodland.

@dissonance Is there a difference between the Lynx Project and Lynx UK?

Mind you, if lynx were reintroduced on the sly, how would anyone know given how secretive they’re meant to be?

All the beavers have done is turned the habitat around this lochan into the same as the rest of the area. They have reduced biodiversity not increased it.

plus one to this

Look at a Canada, no ****ing trees at all.........

But you made the assertion that sheep were destroying the environment. I hold that they are maintaining an environment that mankind destroyed several hundred (if not thousand) years ago in the the UK when deforestation occurred for firewood, ship building, pit props, charcoal, etc etc.

Livestock, in general, on a rocky hillside or not, is an inefficient way to produce food, at least in terms of delivering calories to cake holes.

If in 20 years time we’d managed a large scale shift to vertical farming and lab grown meet I genuinely believe all our lives would be better. It won’t happen, all a bit icky eating a petri dish burger.  Even if we did, we’d probably turn the unused over to some other monoculture purpose or just tarmac the lot.

Welshfarmer - I agree with much of what you say but not on the shooting estates. They have produced degraded green deserts in scotland with poor biodivesity
https://goo.gl/maps/ETjfs2B3ryJZFhCMA

Or maybe the rainforest being burnt to grow soya for a vegan to have his “milk”

It's almost certainly being used so that the non-vegan can have their milk/meat. Seems 85% of the worlds soybean crop is processed into soybean meal, of which 97% ends up as livestock feed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean#Uses_2

Anyway, that's a bit OT.

To my mind, farming and conservation are just modes of land management. In each case, someone is fiddling with the ecosystem to promote the species that they want to live on that land. Sometimes it's so that people can eat it, sometimes not. A pal of mine who used to work on the Abernethy Estate in the cairngorms once described himself to me as a 'Capercaillie farmer'.