# Beavers are a nuisance



## rkunsaw (Nov 24, 2013)

They are sure making a mess around here. they are even adding mud and sticks to the dam we built. Every day we have a pile to clean out from below the dam. They have also cut down trees to use in the dam and for food.

I shot two Thursday night and put out two traps Friday. Nothing in the traps yesterday. I'll check them this morning after it gets light. At least I scared them enough that they didn't come near the dam Friday night.

On the plus side I can sell their anal glands to ice cream companies, Cadbury's  candy egg company, or other food companies who want to add 'natural' flavor to their product.:help:


----------



## rkunsaw (Nov 24, 2013)

??? who's Phil Robertson?  Is that our Sifu Phil?


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 24, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> ??? who's Phil Robertson?  Is that our Sifu Phil?



I should say _not_! I don't deal in anal glands! :mask:


----------



## Pappy (Nov 24, 2013)

Now folks, let's approach this subject from the rear. If I am going to indulge in my next ice cream cone, what in hell does it have to do with Beaver's anal glands. Should I order Uranus flavor or what?


----------



## Jillaroo (Nov 24, 2013)

_My stomach is churning as i type_


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 24, 2013)

You shot beavers?
I'm speechless
mg:

How is that even legal?
Is there anything you are not allowed to shoot in America?


----------



## Jillaroo (Nov 24, 2013)

_i would say the beavers would be classified along with a few other animals as being vermin just like our rabbits, as long as they aren't an endangered species like the lions, elephants, and Rhino's which are being slaughtered for sport and their tusks & horns Grrr _


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 24, 2013)

Take a deep breath Polly,   remember  the angst and outrage from the PETA types about what savages we were for blowing the heads off cute little Joeys?  They never showed the pictures of the hundreds of thousands of roos literally starving and dying of thirst in that big 9 year drought. They overbred due to more water being accessible in dams which then dried up in the drought, so I'd be waiting to hear about local conditions and numbers and nuisance levels before passing any judgements.  Maybe, like roos, there are more beavers since settlement than the land would support before we 'upgraded' it? 

You have no idea how pleased I am that seldom ever eat ice-cream.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 24, 2013)

I hear what you are saying but when I read the OP my jaw literally dropped.
I'm still shocked.
:eek1:


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 24, 2013)

Yeah it raised an eyebrow here too as I'd thought they were kinda rare and 'iconic' due mostly to the hushed and worshipful tones of documentary voice-overs.

 But we're here to learn how things really are in other places and I think we're learning plenty and changing our preconceived views of things accordingly.
I'm sure potential tourists on the forum are greatly relieved to have the Drop Bear thing put into perspective, and I'm still getting over what pests racoons are.   Here was I thinking they were just little 'cuties'.


----------



## Ozarkgal (Nov 24, 2013)

Rkunsaw..loud and clear on the beavers. 

What a nuisance!  When we first moved here we had a colony of them across the creek.  They had already killed several of the trees and were working on more.  We waged an all out war on them, with firecrackers, backhoe, and shot one.  They got uncomfortable enough to move on.

Three years later, back again.  We noticed a small tree chewed down hanging over the creek bank. Brother was able to get off a couple of shots at one.  Not sure if that discouraged them, but no signs of any more trees down yet.  They are very difficult to discourage and are very smart and wary of traps.  If you fail to trap them on the first attempt, you'll never get another chance.


----------



## Ozarkgal (Nov 24, 2013)

Warrigal said:


> You shot beavers?
> I'm speechless
> mg:
> 
> ...



Warrigal...it is not legal to shoot beavers for sport.  However, in my state if they are damaging property, such as chewing down large trees, damming up waterways or ruining crops you have the right to shoot them.  As I mentioned in my above post they are very difficult to discourage and can ruin a stand of mature trees in a very short time.  They not only use the tree for their dams and food, but they must keep chewing in order to keep their teeth from overgrowing their mouths.  

 I will refrain from addressing your obvious snipe at American gun laws.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 24, 2013)

No, that wasn't a snipe at the gun laws. I get hunting and trapping.
It's shooting people that disturbs me,

The shock was because in my mind it sounded like shooting platypus or wombats over here.
Both would elicit public outrage. Almost all of our native wildlife is totally protected.
I imagined that yours would be too.

I've been looking up CITES and I see that I am wrong.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 24, 2013)

I think that Pennsylvania has a beaver trapping season - 3 months at the beginning of the year - and it's legal to shoot them with a small-caliber firearm once they're trapped. Not sure what the limits are - I think it depends upon which part of the state you're in. 

Evidently they're not an endangered species here, either.

Warri, there is a VERY strong hunting culture in this country - you'd be surprised what some people hunt.


----------



## RedRibbons (Nov 25, 2013)

Cute little racoons, or cute little squirrels, cute little possums can all carry rabies. I hate all of them. They are destructive and also do much harm to my landscape.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 25, 2013)

RedRibbons said:


> Cute little racoons, or cute little squirrels, cute little possums can all carry rabies. I hate all of them. They are destructive and also do much harm to my landscape.



Beg pardon, but ... YOUR landscape?

Those rabid little critters roamed the Earth long before you and I - don't you think they have as much, if not more, right to be here? Isn't life - ANY life - more sacred than a few fancy petunias and a well-trimmed lawn? 

The way I see it, WE are encroaching upon THEIR territory, so it's only right that they fight back in whatever manner they can.


----------



## Michael. (Nov 25, 2013)

*Do not upset the Beavers?
*
.







STATE OF MICHIGAN 
GRAND RAPIDS DISTRICT OFFICE STATE OFFICE BUILDING 
6TH FLOOR
350 OTTAWA NW GRAND RAPIDS MI 49503-2341


December 17, 1997 


Mr. Ryan DeVries 
2088 Dagget Pierson, MI 49339 



Dear Mr. DeVries: 


DEQ File No. 97-59-0023-1 T11N, R10W, Sec. 20, Montcalm County 


It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced parcel of property. 

You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity: 

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond. 

A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department's files show that no permits have been issued. 

Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, 
of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated. 

The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris dams and flooding at downstream locations. 

We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all unauthorized activities at this location, 
and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the strewn channel. 

All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 1998. 

Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. 

Failure to comply with this request, or any further unauthorized activity on the site, may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action. 

We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. 

Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions. 




Sincerely, 


David L. Price 
District Representative Land and Water Management Division 







Dear Mr. Price: 


Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N, R10W, Sec 20; Montcalm County 

Your certified letter dated 12/17/97 has been handed to me to respond to. 

You sent out a great deal of carbon copies to a lot of people, but you neglected to include their addresses. 

You will, therefore, have to send them a copy of my response. 

First of all, Mr. Ryan DeVries is not the legal landowner and/or contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan  

I am the legal owner and a couple of beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood "debris" dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. 

While I did not pay for, nor authorize, their dam project, I think they would be highly offended you call their skillful use of natural building materials "debris." 

I would like to challenge you to attempt to emulate their dam project any dam time and/or any dam place you choose. 

I believe I can safely state there is no dam way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic. 

As to your dam request the beavers first must fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity, my first dam question to you is: 
are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or do you require all dam beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request? 

If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, please send me completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits. 

Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, 
of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated. 

My first concern is — aren't the dam beavers entitled to dam legal representation? 

The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said dam representation — so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department's dam concern 

that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event causing dam flooding is proof we should leave the dam Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names. 

If you want the dam stream "restored" to a dam free-flow condition — contact the dam beavers — 
but if you are going to arrest them (they obviously did not pay any dam attention to your dam letter-being unable to read English) — be sure you read them their dam Miranda rights first. 

As for me, I am not going to cause more dam flooding or dam debris jams by interfering with these dam builders. 

If you want to hurt these dam beavers — be aware I am sending a copy of your dam letter and this response to PETA. 

If your dam Department seriously finds all dams of this nature inherently hazardous and truly will not permit their existence in this dam State — 
I seriously hope you are not selectively enforcing this dam policy, or once again both I and the Spring Pond Beavers will scream prejudice! 

In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their dam unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green, and water flows downstream. 

They have more dam right than I to live and enjoy Spring Pond. So, as far as I and the beavers are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more dam elevated enforcement action now. 

Why wait until 1/31/98? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then, and there will be no dam way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them then. 

In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real environmental quality (health) problem: bears are actually defecating in our woods. 

I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the dam beavers alone. 

If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!) 

Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office. 




Sincerely,


Stephen L. Tvedten


----------



## That Guy (Nov 25, 2013)




----------



## Ozarkgal (Nov 25, 2013)

Phil:  





> The way I see it, WE are encroaching upon THEIR territory, so it's only right that they fight back in whatever manner they can.



Given that logic, I assume if your apartment were over run with cockroaches, spiders and rats you would leave them alone, live with and view it as you encroaching upon THEIR territory.  More power to you if that's your way.









I live in the woods, and  maybe you can relate my property to being the size of a postage stamp placed on two acres of land.  In the middle of many hundreds of acres, I have ten acres and the animals have free roam of all of it without peril, _except_ for the three acres that I actually maintain as my "territory".  This is where my house, chicken coop, pasture, yard, gardens, outbuildings and pets are located.  
Woodland animals are not welcome here.

 Given all the great outdoors to roam and forage in, small varmints in particular are not invited to encroach on what I deem my "territory". Raccoons kill chickens, raid and tear up gardens, tear walls out, dig into anywhere they want to be including your roof or basement. Except for killing chickens, squirrels do the same. Armadillos, which we have a scourge of, dig 6" ankle breaker holes unmercifully all over the yard and pasture. A foraging dillo or two can dig up a yard or pasture and make it look like a land mine in one short night.

 Beavers as we have already discussed can chew down many thousands of dollars in timber in short order and dam up waterways that support aquatic life, and wells and livestock are dependent on. All except possum can carry rabies. Possum and coons carry an assortment of devastating diseases in their feces and urine which kill livestock. Possum have a low body temp that does not support rabies well, but can carry leprosy. We are faced with an assortment of very venomous snakes that also kill livestock, raid chicken coops for hatchlings and eggs, kill dogs and cats as well as large livestock with venomous bites.

 I am not about killing animals for sport or target practice. We harvest one or two deer for food once a year during hunting season. I have no trophy deer heads hanging in my home. The varmints that are caught wreaking havoc on my "territory" will be dispatched without remorse. It will be done as humanely as possibly, by shooting if necessary, but they have to go. 

Some of you will recall my ongoing battle with racoons this spring. I live trapped and relocated 13 of them. Had I allowed them to take over, by now I would be walking on their backs to get across the yard. They would likely be waving out the windows and hanging from the rafters by now.

 Those of us that are faced with raiding varmints that have to be dealt with are not animal haters, or repressed serial killers. It takes a different kind of person to live in woodlands and deal with the wildlife. We are happy to exist along side of nature. It's part of why we live where we do, and for the most part, co-existing is what we do. But, we cannot allow destructive creatures to take over our existence, safety and financial well being. 

 It's easy and maybe natural for people that have never lived in such a situation to Ewww!!, Ooohh!!, and be shocked. I doubt most of them have ever had livestock die from EPM, livestock or people with broken legs from holes dug, domestic animals preyed upon, homes suffer thousands of dollars of varmint damage, yards and gardens destroyed that a lot of backbreaking work and money was invested into, or a possibly rabid, emaciated coyote stroll down their driveway in broad daylight. I have, and believe me he was not relocated.

 The human species has just as much right to exist in their environment as any other animal, and when push comes to shove in nature, the strong survive. 

In this case, the weak and vulnerable are animals that encroach upon human territory, and have become dependent whether by laziness in foraging for harder food, sickness or injury, just as we would likely be the weak if we encroached upon a mountain lion or bear's territory.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 25, 2013)

I stand by my assertion that they were here before us. We are direct descendants of the people who slaughtered the Native Americans, therefore we are no strangers to decimating whatever "wild life" is present in an area that we wish to take as our home. 

That a wild animal decides to make a brunch of a domesticated animal is, as OG said, a matter of the strong surviving. By throwing in their lot with humans the domesticated animals have chosen their destiny - they have chosen to be brunch, in one manner or another. To believe that a wild animal is "evil" is to anthropomorphize a very simple fact of nature.

I've lived with roaches and rats and spiders, yes. But as you claim with your situation, they were invading my space. In fact, they were doing more than that. They weren't killing my livestock, they weren't eating my marigolds and they weren't making my landscaping look bad - they were falling on me from the light fixtures and the shower-head (roaches) and trying to bite me (rats). The spiders I left alone as they are useful allies in the battle against other critters.  

So the rats and roaches were making it a personal battle - they were attacking ME. When someone - ANY one - attacks _me_ I fight back. But I wasn't putting out treats for them, I wasn't a slob with food laying all around, I wasn't dirty. They came because my neighbors were slobs. Essentially, my neighbors had invited them. And even with that I would have been fine with just an occasional visit, but I didn't ask them to get into bed with me. 

That's personal. I like to have a choice whom I shower and sleep with. They gave me no choice, just as your critters gave _you_ none. 

I'm talking about the _reasons_ we kill wildlife. I understand hunting for food. I understand killing for the protection of yourself and your livestock. I understand calling in the exterminator for infestations.

What I do NOT understand is killing for the alleged attacks upon ornamental gardens and flowers, a form of killing I have seen all too often. Farmers have a reason to kill when their crops are threatened; my neighbor has no such excuse when their custom-rolled-and-fertilized Blue Grass lawn is visited by a few hungry birds. I have no problem shooting the coyote that you catch eating your chicken; I DO have a problem going out on heavily-armed coyote slaughters in the name of "protection".

As I am with humans, I am ready, willing and able to pull the trigger on any animal that transgresses, but first I have to be damned sure that they're guilty of more than just surviving as any other animal would. Animals do not (as far as I know) have an inherent knowledge of the concept of good and evil; that is something that WE force upon THEM, and in killing for no good reason we enforce our Way over that of Nature. 

And don't ever believe that a city boy is ignorant of the facts of life - we have our own cycles of life and death that mirror those of the country folk. They merely take a slightly different form. So just as I don't shoot a coyote for howling at the moon, I don't shoot a gangsta for listening to rap and throwing gang signs.

But when the coyote raids my livestock - or the gangsta comes at me with his "nine" - then I have no compunctions about terminating them with extreme prejudice.


God, I love this board - thank you all for making me think!


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 25, 2013)

I loved Leland Grass' statement - 



> They possess the same fundamental right to life as we, the five-fingered ones, do.



That's what I was talking about.

And yes, I'm angry about the entire affair. 

​


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 25, 2013)

> As I am with humans, I am ready, willing and able to pull the trigger on  any animal that transgresses, but first I have to be damned sure that  they're guilty of more than just surviving as any other animal would. * Animals do not (as far as I know) have an inherent knowledge of the  concept of good and evil; that is something that WE force upon THEM,* and  in killing for no good reason we enforce our Way over that of Nature.



Wot Phil said.  It ain't personal.
... and wot OG said too. 
 "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's"....  the bit of ground I paid for is my territory, the rest of OZ belongs to whoever and whatever lives in it.  I have no compunction in killing vermin, especially feral 'foreign' vermin like rodents.  We have no native rodents that I'm aware of just marsupial look alikes which are seldom seen, so rodents and insects are fair game. 
 A snake of any colour that's just passing through I'll avoid with respect but won't be calling a SWAT team in over it.  However if it's fangy and takes up residence then measures will be taken.

I've fenced the roos out to cut down on the crap accumulation and the odd confrontation at the door,  rather than accept the kind offer from someone to shoot them.  Not necessary, and I kinda like looking at them, they're really cute from a distance and they give the dog something to bark at. 



I'm not a Petunia and lawn kind of gal, I mow with weedkiller and live  on largely barren ground so no problem with herbivores but even I  couldn't pass a death sentence on something for eating a flower!  I'm a live and let live type.  The best way to solve the 'garden pest' problem is not have a garden.  I'd rather watch live things scurrying about in native grasses and weeds than a few poxy petunias any day.  I concluded long ago that gardens are for the neighbours to look at so I look at theirs and they can think what they like about the view of my house.  I don't have to look at it all except when I drive in so it's their problem and if they want to improve their view then  they're welcome to come over and work on it.



I remember being aghast when the edict came down that snakes, crocs etc were henceforth protected species. Wot??!!! But I've gotten used to the idea as have most. I even found myself worried that the Black snake on that windshield vid would get hurt. I wouldn't have minded a Brown one getting mangled though.


 No one goes hunting snakes and crocs for fun now that I know of but we still kill a lot more of them than they of us.  If we want to walk in the bush then we have no right to expect that the bush be rendered human friendly for that purpose.  Nor should harmful wildlife expect to reside on *my* territory as a 'safe' zone.  

I have spiders in the house, the Huntsman (similar to Tarantula) doesn't build webs and doesn't bite if you don't sit on it, and eats DLL  spiders that do web everywhere.  A good arrangement all round.  I even tolerate the couple of Redbacks (Black Widows) that live in the laundry. They're well out of accidental contact range, they have nice little piles of insect bits under their nests to prove they're doing me a favour,  and they don't hunt me so I don't hunt them.  
Other nuisance ones that appear are toast but it's all a matter of balance.


----------



## rkunsaw (Nov 26, 2013)

Pappy said:


> Now folks, let's approach this subject from the rear. If I am going to indulge in my next ice cream cone, what in hell does it have to do with Beaver's anal glands. Should I order Uranus flavor or what?



Pappy we had an informative discussion about this before you came here. I'm sure you can search this forum for beaver anal glands and find it.

Briefly, beaver anal glands are use with or in place of in ice cream, Cadbury eggs and other products. Companies in the USA are not required to list it as such in the list of ingredients. They only list it as 'natural' flavor. 

Enjoy your ice cream. I make my own without the glands.


----------



## rkunsaw (Nov 30, 2013)

*FINALLY*  It's been over a week but I had a beaver in one of my traps this morning. A really big one too. I hauled it off for the coyotes and buzzards to fight over, then reset the trap.


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 8, 2013)

Yea, I got another beaver in a trap this morning. :clap: I hope the rest will get wise and leave but I don't expect that will happen. My tongs were frozen shut so I couldn't get the trap off him yet. I hope the coyotes don't drag him away before I can get the trap.
But if they do I'll probably find the trap sooner or later. :magnify:


----------



## Ozarkgal (Dec 8, 2013)

Tie that trap down, Rkunsaw. You don't want to be scouting for it all over the countryside in this kind of weather and those traps aren't cheap! You're lucky to get two so far, I've heard they are hard to trap.  

Oh, and beaver tails are supposed to be good eatin'. You might want to check out a recipe online.


----------



## Sid (Dec 8, 2013)

I don't need no recipe


----------



## Ozarkgal (Dec 8, 2013)

Sid: 





> I don't need no recipe



Wanna share yours?


----------



## Sid (Dec 8, 2013)

It is kinda a secret.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 8, 2013)

... and then one chilly December morning they all woke up and, checking their morning papers, saw the headline:

BEAVER EXTINCTION LEADS TO MASSIVE FLOODING

... and there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth. If only they had known, they all cried ... if only someone had told us ...


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 9, 2013)

Truth is Phil beavers are the cause of a lot of flooding. They get so bad at times that the county offers a bounty for killing beavers. Unfortunately there is no bounty around here at the moment. The last time they had one they paid $10 per beaver. 

I've never tried eating beaver. Those caught in the trap are cold and stiff by the morning when I check the traps.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> Truth is Phil beavers are the cause of a lot of flooding. They get so bad at times that the county offers a bounty for killing beavers. Unfortunately there is no bounty around here at the moment. The last time they had one they paid $10 per beaver.
> 
> I've never tried eating beaver. Those caught in the trap are cold and stiff by the morning when I check the traps.



I'm sure they DO cause a lot of flooding, but somehow I just can't get over the simple fact that they were here a long, long time before we were, and there were no problems.

Why are we killing beavers? Why is there on a bounty on their heads? Not because they're inherently evil or bad; simply because they inconvenience US. It's the same with many extinct animals that were hunted to extinction: it was either because they possessed something that was desirable (pelt, tusks, etc.) or because they posed a threat to our comfort.

Eliminating an entire species, no matter the reason, is wrong. We don't have that kind of power over life and death, although we _think_ we do. 

All I'm saying is that killing animals wholesale always has a price. It just isn't always an easily-seen one.


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 9, 2013)

Yabut Phil, the lake on my property is man made so it is not part of the beavers natural habitat. In this case man was here before the beavers were. 

Think about it. Every house, every city in the world is on land once populated by animals. Should we let it all go back to nature?  Us humans are part of this world too and we also have our place in nature.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> Yabut Phil, the lake on my property is man made so it is not part of the beavers natural habitat. In this case man was here before the beavers were.



Did you see what you said? "MY property"? Because you paid for it? You know what a traditional Native American would have to say about that, right? 

Man was _not_ there before the beavers; Man simply took the land and changed it, then complained when the beavers came by. 



> Think about it. Every house, every city in the world is on land once populated by animals. Should we let it all go back to nature?  Us humans are part of this world too and we also have our place in nature.



Yes, we do have our place in nature - co-existence.

That doesn't include ecocide.


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 9, 2013)

> Man was _not_ there before the beavers



I'll take your word for that.

 But I do know there were no beavers on this property before there was water. And yes I did pay for MY property. That is how humans get land these days. Other animals have other means of taking over property.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> I'll take your word for that.



Well, put it this way: which came first, the beaver or the Man? I mean, in the evolutionary sense ... 



> But I do know there were no beavers on this property before there was water.



Right. They came because Man created the lake. You can't _blame_ them for that - it's an instinctive thing. 

But killing them because they're attracted to something _you_ created - something you _knew_ would bring them - smacks of setting up a kill-zone.




> And yes I did pay for MY property. That is how humans get land these days. Other animals have other means of taking over property.



I'm afraid you missed my point, probably because I didn't make it clear enough. 

We are merely stewards of the land - how can we "own" it? 

It was there long before we came along - pretty presumptuous of us to assume we can "own" something like that, isn't it?

It will be there long after we are gone - do we still "own" it then? Sure, we can will it to our kids and their kids and their kids ... but it isn't _owned_. It might "remain in the family" for generations, but we still don't get to say we "own" it. 

Yes, legally we can say "This is mine", but that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking Big Picture here. That's why artificial boundaries such as those that enclose countries are so much trouble, cause so much war - because we think "Hey, we want to own the land THOSE guys own!", so we crank up the war machine.

Without the concept of land ownershhip we would greatly reduce the occurrence - and the _need_ - for war. We wouldn't need passports, we wouldn't need visas, there would be no boundaries save those that Nature put there.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

Something that just came to mind that illustrates the illogical and comical lengths that the concept of land ownership can achieve ...

There's a movie named _Door to Door_ which tells the story of Bill Porter, a door-to-door salesman for the Watkins company. During his sales calls he comes upon 2 neighbors, one of whom has a beautiful, big old tree in their yard, and half of its branches are hanging over the neighbor's yard.

When the neighbors get into a silly argument, half of the tree is trimmed. For years afterward the tree is only half a tree. 

Because of a stupid argument over land boundaries.


----------



## Ozarkgal (Dec 9, 2013)

> Why are we killing beavers? Why is there on a bounty on their heads? Not because they're inherently evil or bad; simply because they inconvenience US.



 Phil, as I've explained, beavers damage timber and cause massive flooding in areas that are not their natural habitat. Just because there happens to be water and timber where they decide to inhabit does not mean they belong there. Much as a rat does not belong in someone's home, but has moved in for the convenience of easy living. 

Beavers are native to wetlands habitats, where their presence is very much an important and appreciated part of the eco system.  They are not appreciated in a human developed habitat where they can cause thousands of dollars worth of damage in a short time, putting peoples lives, property and financial investments of crops and timber in jeopardy.    No one is killing them when they move into a human habitat, because they are an "inconvenience", but rather because the human environment is at risk.

In our case we live right on a creek, and the banks depend on tree roots and native plants  and free flowing water, that is not dammed up to hold  the banks together,.  If we allowed beavers to keep multiplying and to chew down the trees and build dams to overflow the banks, soon the banks would be eroded, and our home and property would be flooded.  This is not a mere whim of wanting to kill animals, but a matter of survival in our home.  

 The argument that beavers were here first does not hold any credence with me, since all kinds of animals were everywhere before development pushed them out. If we were to abide by this argument, this country would still be undeveloped. 

As it is now, development has pushed much wildlife to the fringes of and in some cases into human habitat.  They are now losing fear of people and starting to come into the neighborhoods and cities.  Wild turkeys are causing problems in Long Island with traffic, landscaping and aggressiveness.  Coyotes and bob cats are terrorizing my friend's long developed neighborhood in Texas feasting on pets.  Moose are roaming the streets of Montana, mountain lions are attacking people in neighborhoods in Southern Cal, coyotes and wild hogs are coming into neighborhoods in New Orleans, bears are raiding dumpsters in Colorado.  Do we allow them to stay...where is the line to be drawn in the argument that they were there first?   



> BEAVER EXTINCTION LEADS TO MASSIVE FLOODING



No one is advocating beaver extinction.   Beavers were once all but extinct, thanks to the fur trappers in the late 1800's who were furnishing beaver pelts to the fashion trade of wealthy city people.  By the time beaver fur coats and hats fell out of fashion, beavers were all but extinct.  They were totally extinct in Arkansas, but were re-introduced in the min 1900's and are now thriving.
They are prolific breeders and are now firmly established in their natural wetlands habitat throughout most of the United States and Canada. 

Even if beavers were totally annihilated tomorrow, I doubt that mass flooding on a grand scale would occur because if man made flood control measures can't control it, a beaver dam just isn't going to cut it. In my small scale case, a beaver dam will cause it.






> I'm sure they DO cause a lot of flooding, but somehow I just can't get over the simple fact that they were here a long, long time before we were, and there were no problems.



Of course there were no problems with them before the continent became inhabited, don't get this logic.  All animals had free roam then, but progress, if that's what you want to call it took precedence over animals.





> Eliminating an entire species, no matter the reason, is wrong. We don't have that kind of power over life and death, although we _think we do_


_.

_You've mentioned twice about _eliminating_ beavers. Beavers are not endangered animals, and who is advocating eliminating the entire species?  Don't be overly dramatic.

 Yes, like it or not, humans do have power over life or death when it comes to animals, and even their own species. If you are speaking of some esoteric power or philosophy, sorry, but I deal in the here now, not the ethereal hereafter . 

Thankfully, most of us understand the powerful role that animals play on earth and humans have taken measures to preserve endangered species, from the smallest bug to the largest mammal. 

 I can't speak for Rkunsaw, but I take exception to the statements regarding elimination of a species if it is directed toward me because of what I believe. I have the right, and will exercise that right in protecting my home, habitat if you will, from any destructive force of nature, and that includes beast or human.  On the other side of the coin, I will not harm an animal that merely causes me "inconvenience" , such as the 13 raccoons that I spent considerable time and effort relocating this spring. 

 So far in another thread, you have accused me of selling my soul to live rurally, because I shop at Walmart, and now from what I can ascertain, because I would kill a beaver to protect my property, I guess I'm to be included with whomever or whatever group you think is on a mission of total annihilation of the beaver population.  

Man, I'm beginning to suck!  I'll have to join the PC crowd and cry assault on my eroded self esteem.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinions and arguments, that you express so much more eloquently by written word than I, but I say don't judge until you have lived amongst them.


----------



## That Guy (Dec 9, 2013)




----------



## That Guy (Dec 9, 2013)




----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 9, 2013)

> Right. They came because Man created the lake. You can't _blame_ them for that - it's an instinctive thing.



So you're saying if a mouse came into your house ( the environment you created) you wouldn't set a trap. Or have you trapped a mouse before? I;ll bet you have. Are you trying to eliminate mice from the world? How cruel.fff:


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

Ozarkgal said:


> The argument that beavers were here first does not hold any credence with me, since all kinds of animals were everywhere before development pushed them out. If we were to abide by this argument, this country would still be undeveloped.



And I believe that this country could have developed _without_ the wholesale slaughter of bison, passenger pigeons, the monk seal, the Carolina parakeet ... and that's just the U.S.

To hunt a species to extinction is, as Mr. Spock said, illogical.

Those extinctions didn't come about because of the animals invading our domain - they came about because of the greedy nature of Man.



> As it is now, development has pushed much wildlife to the fringes of and in some cases into human habitat.  They are now losing fear of people and starting to come into the neighborhoods and cities.  Wild turkeys are causing problems in Long Island with traffic, landscaping and aggressiveness.  Coyotes and bob cats are terrorizing my friend's long developed neighborhood in Texas feasting on pets.  Moose are roaming the streets of Montana, mountain lions are attacking people in neighborhoods in Southern Cal, coyotes and wild hogs are coming into neighborhoods in New Orleans, bears are raiding dumpsters in Colorado.  Do we allow them to stay...where is the line to be drawn in the argument that they were there first?



 Could the problem be that Man has spread out over far too much territory? 



> No one is advocating beaver extinction.




That's good to know, but then "no one" advocated the extinction of the above-mentioned animals, either. 

"It just happened". Oops. 



> Even if beavers were totally annihilated tomorrow, I doubt that *mass flooding on a grand scale* would occur because if man made flood control measures can't control it, a beaver dam just isn't going to cut it. In my small scale case, a beaver dam will cause it.



Please forgive me my somewhat inflated writings - I find that sometimes such techniques bring about conversations such as this.



> Of course there were no problems with them before the continent became inhabited, don't get this logic.  All animals had free roam then, but progress, if that's what you want to call it took precedence over animals.


There you go - that's one of my dislikes, putting so-called progress in front of living creatures.





> You've mentioned twice about _eliminating_ beavers. Beavers are not endangered animals, and who is advocating eliminating the entire species?  Don't be overly dramatic.



Aw, please let me be dramatic? It's fun!



> Yes, like it or not, humans do have power over life or death when it comes to animals, and even their own species. If you are speaking of some esoteric power or philosophy, sorry, but I deal in the here now, not the ethereal hereafter .



Not speaking of the hereafter, I'm speaking of the practice of humans to kill anything that is inconvenient to them. And no, that doesn't include a charging rhino or an attack of enraged chimpanzees - I'm talking more about things like trapping improperly, where the animal is left to suffer for days because of the wrong type of trap. 

Actually it's even more than that - it's that cloying sense that humans are oh so much better than animals, so much more sociable and intelligent. The sense that we don't _share_ the world with them as much as _tolerate_ them. But then, I suppose that's getting into that forbidden philosophical area ... 



> Thankfully, most of us understand the powerful role that animals play on earth and humans have taken measures to preserve endangered species, from the smallest bug to the largest mammal.



In some cases, yes. In many other cases, no. 



> I can't speak for Rkunsaw, but I take exception to the statements regarding elimination of a species if it is directed toward me because of what I believe. I have the right, and will exercise that right in protecting my home, habitat if you will, from any destructive force of nature, and that includes beast or human.  On the other side of the coin, I will not harm an animal that merely causes me "inconvenience" , such as the 13 raccoons that I spent considerable time and effort relocating this spring.



It isn't a "right" - it's an _instinctive action_. 

And I appreciate and respect your actions with the coons. So, why couldn't the same thing be done with beavers? 



> So far in another thread, you have accused me of selling my soul to live rurally, because I shop at Walmart, and now from what I can ascertain, because I would kill a beaver to protect my property, I guess I'm to be included with whomever or whatever group you think is on a mission of total annihilation of the beaver population.
> 
> Man, I'm beginning to suck!  I'll have to join the PC crowd and cry assault on my eroded self esteem.
> 
> Of course, you are entitled to your opinions and arguments, that you express so much more eloquently by written word than I, but I say don't judge until you have lived amongst them.



I don't believe I have accused you of anything, but if I have you have my profoundest apologies. 

... unless of course you ARE guilty of it. layful:

And yes, I'm a city boy, so my opinions are going to be different than yours - I realize that. I've been guilty in the past of killing what I saw as varmints - rats, roaches, unicorns - but I never thought of their possible extinction at the time. Since beavers once WERE close to extinction I tend to have a bit more of a knee-jerk reaction to anything concerning their elimination. 

I'm sure I've done many things that YOU would object to in my years in the city. Feel free to use whatever names you like on me for indulging in wholesale violence, criminal activity and moral and ethical transgressions. Whatever you call me, know that it won't change my behavior because, like you, it's the environment that I'm living in. 

And finally, much of what I present as my views on topics such as this are primarily philosophical. I'm basically a monk trapped in his little cell, imagining what the world outside looks like. Of course many of my ideas are going to seem like they're impractical, but this is how I learn - by throwing an argument into open forum and seeing if any opposing views make sense.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> So you're saying if a mouse came into your house ( the environment you created) you wouldn't set a trap. Or have you trapped a mouse before? I;ll bet you have. Are you trying to eliminate mice from the world? How cruel.fff:



See my _mea culpa_ in the previous post. 

PS: I've never _killed_ a mouse. I've _trapped_ a few in a cardboard box and took them to the woods. Unlike the rats. Maybe because the mice are "cute" and the rats are "repulsive" ... stupid reason, I know.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

TWHRider said:


> Wow this thread has gotten a lot more exciting than I could have ever imagined



Right? 

Who would have ever thought that the mere mention of "beaver" would create such excitement? 











> 1.  *WHOA!  That means the Big Gun Beavers became extinct before man hit the icy waters with their traps and it's good thing!
> *



What weighs 300 pounds, walks down a dark alley and goes "Here, kitty, kitty, kitty!" ?



> 2.    * Simply put, they wouldn't be on rkunsaw's pond if he hadn't built a pond -- yet a tug-O-war is being played over who was there first and who owns the rights to rkunsaw's pond?
> *



I may be mistaken but I thought he was referring to a _lake_ that _others_ had built ...

Regardless, it's terraforming - the act of playing God by placing water where there was once land and vice-versa. Mighty bold act for humans, no?



> 3.    *Here's where the humans come in -- please note it was a few years before our generation(s) started to wreak havoc on the Beaver population.
> *



No argument there.



> 4.    *Please note the part I put in bold italics --- sounds like city slicker-dom to me----------meaning don't blame it all on the country folk*



I'm not blaming country folk. It's just a fact that most of the animals are going to be found out in the country. 



> 5.   *Good Beaver or Bad Beaver in this paragraph?  A little bit of bothnthego:*



All creatures great and small contain the Yin/Yang nature - that's a given, and it's also why, before a species is hunted to extinction, you have to consider the pluses as well as the minuses of their existence. We've killed off the bugs that attack crops - that's wonderful. But we never thought that the bees would be killed off in the process.

Oops, again.



> 6.    Pro:  Beavers are now managed by the state(s) and trapping is regulated.  Con:  In some areas beavers have become an agricultural pest.




"They may be harvested OR TRANSPLANTED..." - that's my point. I know there's a lot more work involved in transplanting them but I see it as being the more humane way of dealing with them. It isn't as if they're attacking us like enraged beasts - they're just living their lives. Why penalize them for doing that? 



> It is against the law to kill a Copperhead, in Tennessee.  I am sorry, if I see one on the garage apron with his head poised for a strike, he's dead if I get the chance.  I know full well if there's one there's probably a den of them close by.  I don't want them to become extinct but the neighbor has a big fat pond 1,200 feet away and they either stay in their own territory or take a chance on getting their head blown off if they show up in mine



Having had my encounters with copperheads I know that I go out of my way to avoid them, just as they do with me. If it comes down to a confrontation then yes, it's kill or be killed. 

Very different than a beaver.

*



			And so it goes with any type of wildlife humans share their corner of the world with.  It is our responsibility to not be the Nimrods of the 21st Century but we also have to manage the wild life ethically.
		
Click to expand...

*
Well said.


----------



## Jillaroo (Dec 9, 2013)

_Love that Boxers antics_:lofl:


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 9, 2013)

Jillaroo said:


> _Love that Boxers antics_:lofl:



Makes me want to go out and get a trampoline just to see what Snagglepuss and Tigger would do.

... knowing them, Tigger would still be trying to hump Snaggle, even in mid-air.


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 18, 2013)

I know some of you don't like to hear about trapping beavers so I won't mention the two I caught this week.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 18, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> I know some of you don't like to hear about trapping beavers so I won't mention the two I caught this week.



Aw, no, c'mon, RK - give us the dirt! Did they last a long time? Did they wet themselves? Did they thrash and roll and scream?


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 18, 2013)

sorry to spoil your fun but the trap kills them almost instantly.


----------



## Ozarkgal (Dec 18, 2013)

rkunsaw said:


> I know some of you don't like to hear about trapping beavers so I won't mention the two I caught this week.



Larry, When you're through trapping yours how about coming this way...I found another tree down yesterday.  What kind of trap do you use and where can I get one?


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 18, 2013)

I use 10 inch conebear traps. I got mine at nitelite here in Clarksville. Many feed stores or sporting goods stores carry them. If yo get them get the heavy duty tongs. The small tongs are the only ones they have at many stores and they won't work with the 10 inch traps. 

Another option is to buy them online. Google conebear traps.


----------



## TICA (Dec 18, 2013)

Canada = beaver.  

Cut and paste below is off of the Government of Canada website.    I've only seen one live beaver in my life and that was at a wildlife sanctuary.   It is interesting to note that the beaver is classified as a "rodent".   And.....they are on our pennies, although the government is no longer making pennies.    A form of extinction right there!


_The beaver attained official status as an emblem of Canada when an "act to provide for the recognition of the beaver (__castor canadensis) as a symbol of the sovereignty of Canada" received royal assent on March 24, 1975._


----------



## That Guy (Dec 18, 2013)




----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 18, 2013)




----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 18, 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=F_qGISYy5CY


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 18, 2013)

Totally different type of trap, huh? Makes sense.


----------



## Pappy (Dec 18, 2013)

This should settle it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Dec 18, 2013)

Pappy said:


> This should settle it.



Yeah, but that's not really what we're on about here, at least I'm _hoping_ that Larry doesn't eat beaver.

... wait, that didn't come out right ... :cower:

Hunting for food, I don't have a problem with. Killing an animal because it's attacking you or your livestock, no problem there either.

My problem lies more in the philosophical realm - that we kill animals because they threaten the infrastructure that we've put on the land that we supposedly share with them. I know that our cities would never have been built if we hadn't taken the land from the animals, but where do you draw the line? 

Everyone wants their own paradise. Animals get in the way of achieving that. Therefore, being the dumb, lower-class things that they are, they are sacrificed. We can all justify what we do, but there's always going to be someone seeing the situation in a different light, because of their upbringing or because of a lack of knowledge. In my case I'm sure it's a bit of both, and if I were in Larry's shoes I'd probably be doing the same thing, but right here, right now, I'm playing the "Save-The-Animals" card.


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 19, 2013)

> if I were in Larry's shoes



If you were in my shoes I'd be barefoot dammit.


----------

