In anthropogenic landscapes, wildlife reintroductions are likely to result in interactions between people and reintroduced species. People living in the vicinity may have little familiarity with the reintroduced species or associated management, so will need to learn to live with the species in a new state of “Renewed Coexistence.” in England, Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) are being reintroduced and U.K. Government agencies are currently considering their national approach to reintroduction and management. Early indications are this will include requirement for “Beaver Management Groups” (BMGs) to engage with local stakeholders. This policy paper reports on qualitative research that captured lessons from the governance of two existing BMGs in Devon (south‐west England), drawing on both a prior study and new interview data. Through the analysis, we identified that BMGs are not a fixed structure, but an adaptive process. This consists of three stages (Formation, Functioning, and Future?), influenced by resource availability and national policy direction. We argue that, where they are used, Species‐specific Management Groups could provide a “front line” for the integration of reintroduced species into modern landscapes, but their role or remit could be scaled back over time and integrated into existing structures or partnerships to reduce pressure on limited resources, as knowledge of reintroduced species (such as beaver) grows and its presence becomes “normalized.” There must be sufficient flexibility in forthcoming policy to minimize constraint on the adaptive nature of BMGs and similar groups for other reintroduced species, if they are to facilitate a sustainable coexistence.

Individual animals are often given names by humans. For example, names are attributed to domestic animals to acknowledge their closeness to people, some research studies use names to identify differences between individuals in a study group, or zoos often use names to tell stories that attract public or media attention. Publicly naming individual animals can provide opportunities in conservation, but there are also risks. In this perspective we exemplify such opportunities and risks in the context of wildlife reintroductions. We draw on examples and observations from our experience researching Eurasian beaver Castor fiber reintroduction in England, to encourage careful thinking before publicly attributing a name to an individual in reintroduction projects. Naming individuals in reintroduction can: be a low-cost engagement tool; help people relate to unfamiliar reintroduced species; encourage local ownership of reintroduction projects; enable an effective tool for communicating information about the species and ways to coexist; or support creative or cultural expression. Yet naming individuals in reintroduction could: risk misrepresentation of natural species characteristics; make it challenging to normalise the sense that the reintroduced species is a wild animal; unintentionally imply that humans have ownership or power over the animal; cause distraction from establishing viable populations due to focus on the individual; or result in human investment in individual animals, which may have influence on reintroduction outcomes if that animal later comes to harm or dies (naturally or otherwise). Synthesis and Applications. We argue there is more to the act of naming individuals than may first appear. If considering doing so, we call for careful thought about whether it is appropriate and how to go about it. While we intentionally refrain from concluding whether ‘to name or not to name’, we call for careful, informative, message framing that takes advantage of the opportunities and is prepared for future circumstances, when naming of individuals does take place. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

AbstractNatural flood management (NFM) methods work with natural processes to reduce flood risk, while often providing additional benefits such as water quality improvement or habitat provision. Increasingly, the activity of an animal—beavers—is recognised to potentially provide flow attenuation, along with multiple benefits for the environment and society, but there can also be associated challenges. We use Q‐Methodology to elicit and understand human perspectives of beavers and their potential role in flood management among communities living downstream of beavers at three sites in England (Cornwall, Yorkshire and the Forest of Dean). This is the first time a study has focused on downstream communities as the primary stakeholders. We identify diverse perspectives that exhibit a range of value judgements. We suggest a catchment‐based approach to beaver management and public engagement may facilitate deeper recognition of contextual perspectives in decision‐making and enable knowledge dissemination with communities. Further, we examine the relationship between beavers and other NFM methods through these perspectives. In doing so we identify features that relate to the unique element of relying on the natural behaviour of beavers for flood management, rather than human flood managers being the primary decision‐makers.

Primate species demonstrate high levels of intelligence, innovation, and social learning. These characteristics give rise to a high likelihood of new behaviours occurring and being socially transmitted to other individuals within a group. Capuchin monkeys are group-living and are commonly considered to be among the most intelligent non-ape primates. They exhibit a large repertoire of complex behaviours and have been shown to be capable of innovating to problem solve.  However, observations of new behaviours in wild populations are rare in comparison to captive populations. Here we describe Panamanian white-faced capuchins (Cebus imitator) carrying out a behaviour which has not been previously documented in capuchin species and may be related to predator avoidance. This behaviour was video-recorded and to our knowledge is the first record of a capuchin species using tail-dipping behaviour to access an open water source in the wild.  

AbstractBeavers have the ability to modify ecosystems profoundly to meet their ecological needs, with significant associated hydrological, geomorphological, ecological, and societal impacts. To bring together understanding of the role that beavers may play in the management of water resources, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems, this article reviews the state‐of‐the‐art scientific understanding of the beaver as the quintessential ecosystem engineer. This review has a European focus but examines key research considering both Castor fiber—the Eurasian beaver and Castor canadensis—its North American counterpart. In recent decades species reintroductions across Europe, concurrent with natural expansion of refugia populations has led to the return of C. fiber to much of its European range with recent reviews estimating that the C. fiber population in Europe numbers over 1.5 million individuals. As such, there is an increasing need for understanding of the impacts of beaver in intensively populated and managed, contemporary European landscapes. This review summarizes how beaver impact: (a) ecosystem structure and geomorphology, (b) hydrology and water resources, (c) water quality, (d) freshwater ecology, and (e) humans and society. It concludes by examining future considerations that may need to be resolved as beavers further expand in the northern hemisphere with an emphasis upon the ecosystem services that they can provide and the associated management that will be necessary to maximize the benefits and minimize conflicts.This article is categorized under:
Water and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems