Wednesday 28 November 2007
THE COST OF ARROGANCE
SNH has reluctantly revealed that it squandered £83,000 of public money (excluding staff wages) in its foolhardy attempt to introduce beaver into North Knapdale, Argyll.
By anyone’s standards this is an obscene amount of money to spend on a self-aggrandising ego-trip. Not content with that, they were to supplement it buy a further half a million pounds if granted a licence. There are many conservation projects that could have benefited from an injection of eighty three thousand pounds. One wonders if there should not be tighter controls placed upon the activities of SNH, perhaps a monitoring committee of MSPs, because patently the Minister for the Environment has no control over them.
Wednesday 21 November 2007
Contact from SWT
The Voices of Reason recently received an email from SWT regarding the article "DAMn BUSTING NEWS Cairnbaan Floods Again". This has been SWT's only contact or comment on or about this Blogspot.
Dear Mr Slan
RE: Content of www.beaverboycott.blogspot.com
I would be grateful if you could remove the following item from the above site as soon as possible:
"DAM'n BUSTING NEWS" Cairnbaan Floods again
As you elude this is completely untrue and therefore it is misleading to publish such a report in which referring to SWT and RZSS could be construed as defamation.
I look forward to receiving confirmation of this alteration.
Clara Govier
Communications Manager
We replied:
Thank you for your curiously worded E mail. May we say how delighted we are that you have read the blog. It is often a surprise to some people to realise that it is possible to have an equally valid opposing point of view. It is a pity that you have chosen not to address any of the issues and concerns expressed on the blog. It does your organisation little credit. We note your concern and would be grateful if you could be more specific, so that we can run it by our advisors. Thank you Voice Of Reason
We haven't had a reply yet.
Dear Mr Slan
RE: Content of www.beaverboycott.blogspot.com
I would be grateful if you could remove the following item from the above site as soon as possible:
"DAM'n BUSTING NEWS" Cairnbaan Floods again
As you elude this is completely untrue and therefore it is misleading to publish such a report in which referring to SWT and RZSS could be construed as defamation.
I look forward to receiving confirmation of this alteration.
Clara Govier
Communications Manager
We replied:
Thank you for your curiously worded E mail. May we say how delighted we are that you have read the blog. It is often a surprise to some people to realise that it is possible to have an equally valid opposing point of view. It is a pity that you have chosen not to address any of the issues and concerns expressed on the blog. It does your organisation little credit. We note your concern and would be grateful if you could be more specific, so that we can run it by our advisors. Thank you Voice Of Reason
We haven't had a reply yet.
Tuesday 6 November 2007
A Plea for Moderation
Comment posted on the Autumn Watch comment site
May I ask that you think very, very carefully before so thoroughly approving of, and endorsing the return of beaver to the wild in Britain, especially without showing both sides of the story with regard to this animal?
There are proposed trial areas in the North Knapdale area of Mid Argyll. Many locals believe that this will adversely affect the existing delicate eco system and unique habitat for which this area is renowned.
As well known 'wildlife celebrities' I feel that you might perhaps broadcast a balanced view and point out that they are not just cute & cuddly, tummy scratching mammals.
We have serious concerns, fears and feel real anguish at the thought of the devastation that could be wreaked on Knapdales beautiful countryside, the untold and irreversible damage these creatures could cause.
The beaver diary mentions that “they have a natural instinct to control water levels and block leaks” one of the proposed release sites is the feeder reservoir lochan for the Crinan Canal, there are serious concerns that this will cause flooding to local properties. Also a reference to the damage they do to surrounding woodlands “busy felling another tree in the night”. Once they have felled the trees within in 50meters of their existing lodge they move on to another area and do the same wanton destruction again. This has a major impact on existing habitats, habitat that has never seen beaver and will never see rare water lilies, dragon flies, and many, many other species of flora and fauna, rare & common again.
Contact us via this blogspot: http://beaverboycott.blogspot.com or by emailing beaverboycott@hotmail.co.uk. There is a lot of well researched information about Beavers on this site.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my concerns.
May I ask that you think very, very carefully before so thoroughly approving of, and endorsing the return of beaver to the wild in Britain, especially without showing both sides of the story with regard to this animal?
There are proposed trial areas in the North Knapdale area of Mid Argyll. Many locals believe that this will adversely affect the existing delicate eco system and unique habitat for which this area is renowned.
As well known 'wildlife celebrities' I feel that you might perhaps broadcast a balanced view and point out that they are not just cute & cuddly, tummy scratching mammals.
We have serious concerns, fears and feel real anguish at the thought of the devastation that could be wreaked on Knapdales beautiful countryside, the untold and irreversible damage these creatures could cause.
The beaver diary mentions that “they have a natural instinct to control water levels and block leaks” one of the proposed release sites is the feeder reservoir lochan for the Crinan Canal, there are serious concerns that this will cause flooding to local properties. Also a reference to the damage they do to surrounding woodlands “busy felling another tree in the night”. Once they have felled the trees within in 50meters of their existing lodge they move on to another area and do the same wanton destruction again. This has a major impact on existing habitats, habitat that has never seen beaver and will never see rare water lilies, dragon flies, and many, many other species of flora and fauna, rare & common again.
Contact us via this blogspot: http://beaverboycott.blogspot.com or by emailing beaverboycott@hotmail.co.uk. There is a lot of well researched information about Beavers on this site.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my concerns.
Letter to Bill Oddie & Kate Humble of Autumn Watch
Dear Bill & Kate, Nov. 6th 2007
May we ask that you think carefully before endorsing so wholeheartedly the return of beaver to the wild in Britain? Here in Argyll we are in one of the proposed trial areas and we had hoped that you, as people who care about the countryside, would help us oppose the scheme.
For everything moving into any area, something else has to move out. Our lochans here in North Knapdale have a balanced eco-system, perfected over at least 400 years without beaver. The introduction of new mammals requiring a considerable quantity of vegetation every day would mean that the 50m wide edging to the waterside would cease to support the small animals, insects, and therefore bird life it does at present. It only takes a beaver a matter of minutes to fell a sapling that has taken ten years to grow – during which time the tree has helped support the lives of countless other organisms. And when that sapling is gone nothing will replace it.
At the moment one of the lochans has a rare water lily, called the Least Water-lily (Nuphar Pumila). It features in the life cycle of the dragonflies for which the lochan is famous. But beaver are particularly fond of water lily, so that would be eaten pretty quickly – exit the dragonflies from the lochan.
If there were to be just one group of beaver it might be manageable, but the proposal here is to introduce up to 20, and the delightful kits of these families, as seen in your programme last night, grow up and at the age of two or three, move away and have kits of their own. In time, with appropriate sites being limited to glens with water, they would get into far less suitable places and because of the damage they have to cause by the very nature of their way of life, many would end up being killed. Is this really such a good idea?
People coming to an area expecting to see the beaver would often be disappointed because, as you said, the animals are primarily nocturnal. But that wouldn’t stop visitors attempting to get close, and in order to stop potentially dangerous situations arising, the areas where the beavers were would have to be fenced; CCTV cameras and viewing huts are already being discussed. How does this help wildlife?
As a species beaver is under no threat, in Europe there are literally hundreds of thousands of them. But the Scottish Wild Cat is down to such small numbers as to be barely viable; the Black Grouse has almost disappeared from this area and in the last two years tern colonies on our small islands in the Tayvallich bay have been completely exterminated by introduced (albeit accidentally) mink. Any of these problems would benefit enormously from the proposed half a million pounds which is proposed to be spent on the introduction of a destructive species.
Please be brave enough to mention these facts on your programme, not just the cuddly aspect of these animals. Please look at our blogsite: http://beaverboycott.blogspot.com/ for thoughts and experiences of people who would prefer beaver not to be introduced here. Thank you.
May we ask that you think carefully before endorsing so wholeheartedly the return of beaver to the wild in Britain? Here in Argyll we are in one of the proposed trial areas and we had hoped that you, as people who care about the countryside, would help us oppose the scheme.
For everything moving into any area, something else has to move out. Our lochans here in North Knapdale have a balanced eco-system, perfected over at least 400 years without beaver. The introduction of new mammals requiring a considerable quantity of vegetation every day would mean that the 50m wide edging to the waterside would cease to support the small animals, insects, and therefore bird life it does at present. It only takes a beaver a matter of minutes to fell a sapling that has taken ten years to grow – during which time the tree has helped support the lives of countless other organisms. And when that sapling is gone nothing will replace it.
At the moment one of the lochans has a rare water lily, called the Least Water-lily (Nuphar Pumila). It features in the life cycle of the dragonflies for which the lochan is famous. But beaver are particularly fond of water lily, so that would be eaten pretty quickly – exit the dragonflies from the lochan.
If there were to be just one group of beaver it might be manageable, but the proposal here is to introduce up to 20, and the delightful kits of these families, as seen in your programme last night, grow up and at the age of two or three, move away and have kits of their own. In time, with appropriate sites being limited to glens with water, they would get into far less suitable places and because of the damage they have to cause by the very nature of their way of life, many would end up being killed. Is this really such a good idea?
People coming to an area expecting to see the beaver would often be disappointed because, as you said, the animals are primarily nocturnal. But that wouldn’t stop visitors attempting to get close, and in order to stop potentially dangerous situations arising, the areas where the beavers were would have to be fenced; CCTV cameras and viewing huts are already being discussed. How does this help wildlife?
As a species beaver is under no threat, in Europe there are literally hundreds of thousands of them. But the Scottish Wild Cat is down to such small numbers as to be barely viable; the Black Grouse has almost disappeared from this area and in the last two years tern colonies on our small islands in the Tayvallich bay have been completely exterminated by introduced (albeit accidentally) mink. Any of these problems would benefit enormously from the proposed half a million pounds which is proposed to be spent on the introduction of a destructive species.
Please be brave enough to mention these facts on your programme, not just the cuddly aspect of these animals. Please look at our blogsite: http://beaverboycott.blogspot.com/ for thoughts and experiences of people who would prefer beaver not to be introduced here. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
