Beavers!

[cottonpicken]

Try and listen to Kevin Hurshes commentary without
cracking a smile-even with fresh snow on the ground!

[TOM4CWB]

Cotton,

I 'wish' we in Alberta could!

If all the land under water on the Prairies right now... were to be 'conserved' as wetlands... how much grain could we grow?

Don't laugh.... Alberta wants to 'cleanse' the oil/gas/industrial complex... using farm land as the primary target for their 'Cap and Trade' Environmental Goods and Services plan.

Background:


Environmental Goods and Services… What does the future hold for Alberta farmers?


"Les Routledge says:
April 7, 2011 at 12:13
I too would like to see environmental enhancement programs and incentives take more local knowledge and understanding of the environment into account. The writer points out to the spread of alkaline and saline conditions, which should be a more of a factor in how watersheds are managed. Government or donor based programs like DU will not produce friends if their blanket efforts to expand wet lands destroys the soil health of neighboring lands.
Where I farm in Manitoba, I find that Ducks Unlimited is a generally positive influence, but there is always room for improvements. I have worked with them to expand forage acres on marginal soils, which has been a positive experience. This year they will build a wet land on my land on some low lands that most likely should never have been put in annual crop production. To me, those can be positives.
The issue about wildlife over population and damage to neighbors is one that I would like to see a more thoughtful approach developed by by NGO’s and government agencies. There comes a point when there are too many deer, coyotes, beavers, ducks, geese, gophers, bars, etc.
In some situations, there are also problems with habitat project serving as a reservoir for noxious weeds and invasive species of plants. While it is fine for Duck Unlimited to encourage the initial planting of forage, will they be around in the future to ensure the stand remains health and productive instead of a weed infested blight?
The challenge for habitat management agencies, whether they are government operated or run as NGO, is to come up with effective means to mitigate damage caused by excessive concentrations of wildlife population. Those mitigation actions may take the form of active culls or alternatively investment in passive measures that protect private assets.
With deer for example, our area is very over populated. The financial cost of damage that they have on crops and trees, and in particular, valuable fruit trees, is considerable. The other concern with excessive number of deer is that they can represent a human health risk in the several forms including deer ticks and lyme disease. Either the excessive number of deer need to be controlled or private landowners need to be compensated for the significant cost of constructing deer fencing. In terms of human health, does there also come a point where health authorities need to step in to limit the spread of diseases such as Lyme disease, TB, and chronic wasting disease? If government and NGO’s would listen to people who have to live with those risks and costs, they would realize that too many Bambi’s can be quite problematic.
Excessive populations of migratory or seasonal wildlife can lead to problems with concentrated numbers birds and other animals of prey. Large populations of coyotes and owls for example can be supported in the spring, summer and fall. However, come winter when prey has either migrated or is hibernating, domestic livestock becomes a food of necessity. Creating predator fencing that will stand up to the stresses of operating in winter is very expensive. If NGO and government projects lead to excessive populations of predators, will they step in and help pay for the cost of damage, the cost of mitigation measures or population control measures?
Ducks and geese are known to have the potential to cause significant damage to crops under some conditions. They can also be a disease vector risk for domestic livestock and even human health (e.g. west Nile Disease) When investment in wildlife migration sites results in massive flocks of birds arriving, will NGO’s and governments step up to the plate and make neighboring landowners whole for their losses that are the result of man-made alterations to the natural environment? If there is a excessive populations lead to a disease outbreak that spreads to domestic animals, will the NGO’s and governments replace the full losses of producers?
For some agricultural producers, the negative impacts of investment in habitat enhancement projects can be more unwelcome than energy projects like oil & gas development. Why are regulatory measures in place for that industry so neighboring impacts are considered but there is no obligation on governments or NGO’s to make neighbours whole when habitat enhancement projects have unforeseen negative impacts?
Working with nature is very complicated, but it is a skill that farmers and other people of the land have a lifetime of experience dealing with. Their traditional knowledge, local understanding, perspectives, and concerns about negative risks should play a much larger role in defining the direction of interventions to enhance wildlife habitat and otherwise alter the established natural order that exists today."

[SASKFARMER3]

I need to trap and shoot about 6083 beavers to give a nice living. Hm I think in our area its possible to get that many.

[LWeber]

$30.00 beavers...don't be telling Charlie Sheen.

[bucket]

Now if they could just write an article about the cwb, people might be more informed.

The billions lost in the western canadian economy because of this archaic,incompetent albatross.

[checking]

A young man in the Meridian district was arrested and charged with killing beaver. He was brought before magistrate McIlmoyl and fined $58, including costs. It is reported that two dead carcasses of beaver were found in his possession, the pelt being removed from one. Would this offence be repeated it is quite probable that it will result more seriously for the offender.

Not to worry. This happened 100 years ago.

[cottonpicken]

Lol,seems few share are twisted sense of
humour,Larry.

[TOM4CWB]

Burbert,

A crop wasn't ever lost in western Canada on April 15th before!

[mbratrud]

SF3 Common on Down, I have a herd of them right out my Back door. I will be declaring war on the little bastards this summer, before I have no trees in my yard.

[fjlip]

Agree Burbert, million times worse.
Cold and snow is max depression.

Is the snow map accurate, most of Alberta covered by snow, Sk & Mb is 90% brown?
We have 50% snow cover and map shows us brown!

[SASKFARMER3]

Map of Saskatchewan is only brown in west east
is white.

[bucket]

I am with you on this burbert.

With a drought you can still accomplish something. Rain and muck made me lazy. I won't be doing a rain dance for a long time.

My most productive land is under water.

Seeding hilltops is not productive.

Is true we never lost a crop on april 15, same sentiment last year as I was waiting for a couple more drying days to seed square quarters. Only to never accomplish much last year.

[JDGreen]

Funny i am in southwest sask and its plenty
white here. No chance of seeding here till at
least may 5 or so. Two weeks behind normal
now and forecast is crap for the next week.

[BreadWinner]

Tom don't say it cant happen. Ive learnt that what cant happen usually does. There is a first time for everything.

[TOM4CWB]

Breadwinner,

"A crop wasn't ever lost in western Canada on April 15th before!"

If weather is like this... May 15... then your comment will be justified.