My turn: Trapper sheds light on beavers
As an experienced trapper in taking beavers under the ice, I can shed a bit of light on this situation. It is my opinion most beavers are snared under the ice due to the cost of snares making them more economical than traps (No. 330 Conibear trap is an expensive trap), and traps are heavier to carry than snares.
Sound off on the important issues at
As to the humaneness of the two methods, the trapped beaver (at least with No. 330 Conibear trap) is killed instantly so there is little question of the humaneness. As to Joe Miele's letter of Nov. 20, where he states that, according to a trapper, beavers can be taken alive out of No. 330 Conibear traps, I can only say that I have never seen such a situation. However, since the beaver is oftentimes swimming with brush in its mouth, it is possible that brush could interfere with the trap and cause it not to close completely. This would take a certain size piece of limb that would have to not only interfere with the trap but also not allow the beaver to escape, which would probably be along the lines of the odds of winning the lottery. It is also possible that the Conibear trap could close on the beaver's leg or tail that would not be an instantaneous kill, but I have never observed this, either. Should either of these situations be the case, the beaver would not suffer any more than the snared beaver.
The snared beaver would try to escape the snare until nitrogen builds up sufficiently in its blood to cause it to slip into unconsciousness. Yes, the beaver does not drown, but due to its ability to hold its breath long enough to create "the bends," it just goes to sleep. The next question is how long would the beaver try to escape the snare? Because the beaver would have been holding its breath for some time before encountering the snare, the time in the snare would certainly be less than the total time a beaver can hold its breath. And, just so nobody will compare this struggle to the "waterboarding" that is being discussed by our legal eagles in trying to define "torture," the beaver would just do what comes natural and attempt to be rid of the snare until "the bends" takes over.
Because of Juneau's winter temperatures, it's possible that the access hole in the ice would not freeze over and allow the snared beaver to climb out on the ice - this could cause distress to certain hikers in the area. While neither method, in my opinion, is inhumane to the beaver, it could be argued that the trapped beaver would be treated "more" humanely than the snared beaver.
This beaver flooding problem has been created by the outlawing of trapping there. There would be no chance of pets being involved in under-the-ice trapping of beavers, so that argument is not involved. And due to the area being so close to development, the natural predators of beavers are scarce and it appears that "Romeo" is not able to harvest the "surplus" beavers. Thus these surplus beavers will continue to be a problem to the Forest Service until they are removed. Any attempt to frustrate these beavers by the various methods of messing with the damming process are just feel-good scapegoats, in my opinion. There are a few spots in the Dredge Lake area where beavers have adequate water depth and these spots are taken first, with other low water areas requiring the surplus beavers to raise the water level to survive the winter. Some beavers will also dam moving water to flood certain trees to better access that food supply.
Keep in mind that beavers are our largest rodent and need to be controlled in some situations, and nobody is talking about killing all the beavers. My own feelings are either allow normal trapping of beavers under the ice by licensed trappers, or allow a special permit to take these surplus beavers under the ice, and the problem goes away. The only question needing answers are how many beavers are surplus?
• Bill Yankee is a Juneau resident who has trapped beavers out of a cabin near Minto since 1982.