What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Nature In General
Mammals
Beavers released into wild
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jos Stratford" data-source="post: 1550801" data-attributes="member: 12449"><p>That quote surely reflects a responsible attitude - it would not be in the best interest of conservation if private organisations could deem themselves the judges of what can or can't be reintroduced, there does have to be a decision-making authority. At the end of the day that is the State. </p><p></p><p>I know nothing of the mechanics of the Scottish Government in this case, nor whether they will act via fully informed arguments, etc, but the debate should not be whether it is they <em>per se </em>that ultimately makes the decision, but whether they fulfil their role as independent of interests and are well-informed, etc, ie. criticise them if they don't do it well, but not because they do it.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Additionally, at the end of the day, so what if they are introduced 'just because we can', also so what if the population will be controlled - does that mean it is better to have nothing than a population controlled?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Also, although Beavers were previously eliminated in the UK due to persecution, if the population became established again, I would doubt there is much chance it could be so easily controlled again at a set level, a different attitude in today's world would see greater resistance and numbers of landowners not permitting trapping, etc, so there will always be a reservoir at least (ie. other than at local levels, <em>'any beavers above our 'safe number' of X will be trapped and humanely destroyed'</em> is most unlikely to ever be achieved even if deemed desirable).</p><p></p><p>One last point, <em>"Maybe, if, in 15 years time, and get as blase about seeing a beaver as we now do about seeing a marsh harrier" </em> Er, without considerable effort, Beavers are darn hard to see most of the time - I have three Beaver lodges of my land, I see signs of their activities daily, but it is a rare thing indeed that I actually see one of the animals. I think it will be a good day when you are blase about seeing them <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jos Stratford, post: 1550801, member: 12449"] That quote surely reflects a responsible attitude - it would not be in the best interest of conservation if private organisations could deem themselves the judges of what can or can't be reintroduced, there does have to be a decision-making authority. At the end of the day that is the State. I know nothing of the mechanics of the Scottish Government in this case, nor whether they will act via fully informed arguments, etc, but the debate should not be whether it is they [I]per se [/I]that ultimately makes the decision, but whether they fulfil their role as independent of interests and are well-informed, etc, ie. criticise them if they don't do it well, but not because they do it. Additionally, at the end of the day, so what if they are introduced 'just because we can', also so what if the population will be controlled - does that mean it is better to have nothing than a population controlled? Also, although Beavers were previously eliminated in the UK due to persecution, if the population became established again, I would doubt there is much chance it could be so easily controlled again at a set level, a different attitude in today's world would see greater resistance and numbers of landowners not permitting trapping, etc, so there will always be a reservoir at least (ie. other than at local levels, [I]'any beavers above our 'safe number' of X will be trapped and humanely destroyed'[/I] is most unlikely to ever be achieved even if deemed desirable). One last point, [I]"Maybe, if, in 15 years time, and get as blase about seeing a beaver as we now do about seeing a marsh harrier" [/I] Er, without considerable effort, Beavers are darn hard to see most of the time - I have three Beaver lodges of my land, I see signs of their activities daily, but it is a rare thing indeed that I actually see one of the animals. I think it will be a good day when you are blase about seeing them ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nature In General
Mammals
Beavers released into wild
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top