And so I continue. Monday’s final subcommittee meeting also heard arguments against the classification of our beavers as a keystone species. Never mind the scads of information defining them as such; I suppose it would be a far different thing to those with other agendas should Alhambra Creek be deemed a wildlife corridor versus just a happy coincidence for one beaver colony.I am no more a biologist than an economist but I can observe the transformation of what once was a garbage strewn mud hole to a creek that now hosts and sustains wildlife. Just this morning a cormorant was filmed fishing a carp from the creek. Fuzzy logic says that cormorant wouldn’t have been down that far in the creek but for the beavers converting it to a life sustaining pond.

It was also argued that the appearance of kingfishers and egrets or for that matter every duck and goose that has paddled their way up past Starbucks are also coincidental. Obviously kingfishers aren’t named thus for esoteric reasons and I doubt a duckling could have found enough water to paddle in two years ago.

But for beavers and their subsequent pond, muskrats, waterfowl, otters, turtles and the ever elusive tourist would be suspiciously absent from downtown Martinez. If I’m not mistaken that pretty much defines a keystone species.

The beavers can take care of the watershed, the birds, the amphibians, the fish, and the otters…

They just need you to take care of them.

In late 1999 Riverside County became concerned that a beaver colony was taking trees at their Lake Skinner Reservoir, which was part of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The Department of Fish and Game was consulted and issued a depredation permit. They reported that this was necessary because destruction of habitat would negatively impact two songbirds on the Endangered Species List that were known to breed in the area. (The Bell’s Vireo & Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.)

A group of concerned locals (Friends of Lake Skinner) objected and sued the Department of Fish and Game, Riverside County Conservation Agency and the Metropolitan Water District, demanding that an Environmental Impact Report be obtained before the beavers were removed. They argued that under the regulations of the California Environmental Qualities Act an EIR was necessary. They lost this original suit and the matter was subsequently taken to appeal.

In December of 2000 the Fourth Appellate District overturned the original decision and ruled for the plaintiffs, stating that the decision to remove the beavers from the area was “discretionary” rather than “ministerial” and that because of this, there was a indeed a need for an Environmental Impact Report to meet the standards of CEQA. The matter was found for the plaintiffs and their entire costs were ordered to be paid by the defendants.

This lengthy proceeding lasted more than two years, involving three agencies and expensive expert testimony on both sides. This, ultimately, cost the defendants a great deal of money and public goodwill. A journal article was later developed regarding this action and was recently published in the Journal of Environmental Management 2007[i]. A copy of the remittitur regarding the Appellate Decision can be read on the Riverside Open Access website. It is worth noting that the attorney who represented Friends of Lake Skinner has already written our mayor and been in regular contact with Worth a Dam.

First rule of politics: Choose your battles.

Heidi P. Perryman, Ph.D.

[i] Langcore, T. , Rich, C. & Müller-Schwarze, D. (2006) Management by Assertion: Beavers and Songbirds t Lake Skinner (Riverside County, California) Environmental Management Vol 39 (4).

I am breaking away from my norm of personal essays and while I expect those whose eyes normally glaze over when they balance their checkbooks (like mine do) to react to the title in similar fashion all I ask is a little forbearance. I promise this won’t be a printed equivalent to a dentist visit.

Monday night, March 25^th saw the sunsetting of the Alhambra Creek Beavers Subcommittee whose collective efforts resulted in the compilation of a 57 page report now available in its entirety on-line at www.martinezbeavers.com. On Tuesday March 26^th I received a phone call from a KPIX reporter who was in town to get up to date information on the beavers. That news segment is also available on-line.

My purpose for this post is to draw particular attention to one specific concern raised both in the report and again during the newscast. Numbers are out specifying what it has cost the City of Martinez to maintain our beaver colony in its current habitat. While it could be speculated that these figures appear somewhat inflated, I’m asking that we assume for the moment that they are not.

What the figure of $70,000+/- represents is termed a “sunk cost” or a cost that has been incurred which cannot be recovered to any significant degree. The argument made both in session and again in an interview provided to KPIX is that the cost to the City of Martinez doesn’t warrant a decision to maintain the beavers in their current habitat, yet microeconomics would point to variable costs being the true determinate factor for decision making.

Yes I feel eyes glazing so let me simplify - back in November the citizens of Martinez stood up and demanded the City Council study options that would allow the beavers to remain in their current habitat. Prudence dictated immediate steps be taken to ensure downtown merchants were protected from the possibility of flooding in the interim. The monies spent to date to accomplish both the will of the people and the protection of life and property are sunk costs.

Variable costs are sprinkled throughout the remainder of the report and reflect items such as bank stabilization, flood plain widening, creek walks, etc. These are real and probable costs and should be considered, yet what is and continues to be overlooked is the fact that a non-profit now exists to provide a conduit for necessary funding. The argument that the City of Martinez, ala its citizens, will continue to absorb these costs is misleading and to draw from yet another economic term is geared to create a sense of loss aversion.

What having a non-profit means is the ability to apply for and receive private and public funds, not unlike the New York example where a lone male beaver made the Bronx river his home. That one beaver netted the city $15,000,000 dollars in federal funding. I don’t profess to be much of an economist but to these lay persons eyes that would be one hell of an ROI (return on investment for my numbered addled friends.)

Gary Bogue is at it again. Spreading the word that martinez Beavers are Worth A Dam. Citing the press release issued by our own Linda Meza, Gary quotes, “In response to overwhelming political and special interest pressures to relocate the beavers, and out of a sincere desire to create workable solutions that allow for coexistence, “Worth A Dam,” an association under the umbrella of Land for Urban Wildlife, a 501(c)(3) organization, has been formed.”

It’s true. We are pleased to announce that www.martinezbeavers.com (this website) is now the official home of “Worth A Dam”, and we are eternally grateful to Gary for his relentless support for wildlife. The press release goes on to discuss email communications where City Council Member Lara Delaney responded “We will need all the public support we can get to pressure those members of the Council who are leaning (strongly) toward removal/relocation, referring to Mayor Rob Schroder, Council Member Janet Kenedy, and Council Member Mike Menesini.  

He closed the article with…“Anyone who wants the beavers to stay where they are in Alhambra Creek should obviously attend that very important April 2 (Now April 16th) Martinez City Council meeting. They need all the support they can get”.

Thank you, Gary.  Your attention to our beavers has made an enormous difference. 

The beaver Subcommittee meeting of March 24 was the last meeting of the Subcommittee.

A few notable facts that were shared, particularly by Igor Skaredoff who did a presentation of the most recent hydrology report which identifies several courses of action that can provide flood protection equal to or greater than pre-beaver levels.

There were a number of speakers both from the Subcommittee and the public. One stands out as worthy of mention.

Donna Mahoney, “Worth A Dam” treasurer spoke during public comments period, pointing out several positive aspects of the latest draft of the report prepared being prepared by the Subcommittee for the City Council. She then acknowledged and expressed her appreciation the hard work of the Subcommittee that went into it.

The discussion then turned to the value of our beloved beavers rise to fame in the context of a public relations service as benefiting the community, and that they have not been paid.

The presentation focused on the fact that the beavers have increased visitation to the city because they have increased the city’s visibility. The sustained interest in the beavers and the dynamic civic response means that there have been prime time news casts on virtually every major channel featuring images of the city and the opinions of its residents.

One tool for evaluating this in terms of dollars is to consider the cost of city advertising on any of these channels during peak viewing hours. For example, KTVU was conctacted and reported ab ad rate of $2500.00 for the first 30 seconds of air time. Consider this against the press the beavers have generated for the city since November. Looking only at TV time and setting aside radio and newspaper coverage, major news stories have aired November 6th, December 5th, December 18th, January 4th, and January 28th. Each of these were at least 30 seconds in length, usually 3-5 minutes, and typically repeated morning noon and night. News clips from KPIX are still available online and show cumulative air time of nearly 22 minutes. According to the KTVU advertising rates these clips alone represent an approximate value of 25,000 worth of advertising, repeated 3 times a day for 75,000 and exnded to 5 major channels. The conservative estimated value runs more than a quarter of a million dollars in advertising alone. And in every instance, the beavers, not the city, picked up the tab

It was also mentioned that the City of Concord has a salaried Public Relations person who earns $100,000/yr. The point was made that if costs and benefits are being considered the beavers should get credit for their service.

I was shocked when a member of the Subcommittee interrupted to say that, accidents at Shell Oil, for example, also makes the news from time to time, that Martinez is not without other sources of publicity, claiming the fact that Martinez is in the news isn’t necessarily worth anything and opioned that the fame of our beavers is of questionable value.

WOW. What an awesome testimonial to the value of our beavers.

Later, while wondering whether the objector ever realized the ridiculousness of the argument, a buzz word fell fro the sky that I couldn’t resist giving a google search. The term is animals as ambassadors, which is exactly the role these beavers are playing for the City of Martinez. At the top of the Google search result is a website called animalambasadors.info. [www.animalambassadors.info/] The home page here says

“Animal Ambassadors is an environmental educational outreach organization. Our mission is to expand educational awareness and to foster a commitment from children and adults to preserve wildlife and the environment both locally and globally.

Our ambassadors are the backbone of our wildlife programs enabling audiences to get up close and personal with amazing animals from around the world. The animals that reside here are non- releasable wildlife, unwanted pets and captive bred educational animals. We take care of a small group of ambassadors in order to ensure they receive the very best in care and personal attention.

Animal Ambassadors is a Loudoun County, VA based, locally owned company that since 1996 has delighted and educated thousands of people.”

A few hits down on the list you’ll find a link to a Perdue University Newsletter under the heading of “Animal Sciences Ambassadors Represent the Department”, and says

“Animal Sciences Ambassadors play a vital role in planning, organizing, and participating in many activities to help promote the Department of Animal Sciences, School of Agriculture and Purdue…” [www.ansc.purdue.edu/alumni/newsletter2007/Activities.htm]

Next on the list is U.C. Davis for the Veterinary program which claims…

“The Animal Ambassadors Program is designed to use the world of animals, both domesticated and wild, as a ‘bridge’ to help youth develop an interest in science and acquire critical thinking and life skills. Furthermore, it builds a foundation of care and responsibility toward animals, and, by extension, toward themselves and other humans.

[www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/vetext/animalambassadors/default.html and [http://www.dateline.ucdavis.edu/011400/DL_animals.html]

All told there are 325,000 hits. I went to page 45 of the search results, and it is still on topic.

The beavers of Alhambra Creek have the best of the defining qualities of an Ambassador, and I wonder who will take their place if the beavers are banished.

Our own Cheryl Reynolds was interviewed today by Channel 5 news which was drawn by stories of a pregnant beaver. The challenges and benefits of the beavers were discussed, and one prominent advocate for their removal also featured. The mood of the piece is definitely pro-beaver. It’s a reminder that taking care of these animals is a dynamic example of taking care of the people who appreciate them.

Video Stream

As promised, the final Beaver Subcommittee Report is here for download. This is the Report that will be the subject of the April 16th City Council. Tell a friend where you found it…

This weekend I was at the dam taking sunset pictures when a group of people came out from dinner at Bertola’s, explaining to each other, “Yes this is where the beavers were. They moved them.” I, of course, clarified that the beavers were still there, the council still hadn’t voted on whether or not to keep them, and in fact the mother was pregnant. A woman shook her head, “I’m sure I heard on the news that they were moved to an Indian Reservation”. I explained that this was one proposal which had not been decided yet, that I was on the subcommittee advising the council, and that the beavers were still seen every day doing beaver-y things and working on the dam. They were very surprised but seemed happy to hear it.

Add this misperception to the very fastidious and anonymous wikipedia editor who was persistently altering the Martinez page to say that the beavers were going to be relocated, and changed content each time I posted to the contrary. This user repeatedly deleted my references for the fact that the decision has not been made, that a subcommittee was appointed and given 90 days to examine the issue, and that the report will be released soon. After nearly 30 re-edits in 5 days, Anonymous apparently gave up and allowed the real story to persist — for now (I haven’t checked yet this morning…) 

The other widely circulated (though slightly more benign myth) is that the beaver decision was settled at the November 7th meeting. The city council respected the voice of the people and allowed the beavers to stay. That civic chapter is finished with a happy ending. Nothing to see here, move along. I have even heard this from reporters who truly were under the impression that the issue was resolved. Why send a crew out there when the story is over? 

I hardly have the spare time to be a conspiracy theorist, but its worth noting that, without exception, every single misunderstanding about these beavers appears to benefit the members of the council who want them gone. Think about it, if people believe they have already been relocated, there can hardly be much outcry when the city casts their 3-2 vote for this to happen. In fact, if the press can be discouraged from any interest in the already-completed story, there will be less awkward public opinion to deal with in April, and fewer news cameras.

The only way to challenge a myth is to chip away at it with facts. The beavers are still in residence. They are seen every day. The decision is still in residence too. The council is charged with using the best information available to make a decision that will benefit the entire town. The beaver subcommittee holds its last meeting tonight at 5:30 at city hall. In the mean time, the struggle (which has turned out to be far more epic than we expected) goes on. Tell your friends and co-workers that, to paraphrase Mark Twain, “Rumors of their death have been greatly exaggerated”.

Our beavers’ fate lies in your hands. 

Taken this morning by Cheryl Reynolds.