Learning to live with reintroduced species: beaver management groups are an adaptive process

Abstract

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.

The Perspectives of Key Stakeholders on the Reintroduction of Apex Predators to the United Kingdom

“…Secondly, it is important to look at potential stories from other animals that can have a similar impact. Reintroductions of beavers in Scotland can provide an interesting context on how to renew a peaceful coexistence between predators and local communities [41,43]. Not to mention the efforts made in other European countries to establish resilient beaver populations that are also coexisting with local communities, e.g., [44,45].…”

Should individual animals be given names in wildlife reintroductions?

“…In the case of reintroductions, new relationships between humans and reintroduced species are being established and the way in which reintroductions occur can influence future humanreintroduced species relationships (Auster et al, 2022(Auster et al, , 2023Coz & Young, 2020). As such, names given to individual animals in a reintroduction (particularly in the early stages) may influence how the species will be viewed in future, in turn determining future human | 1115 behaviours towards the reintroduced species (Borkfelt, 2011).…”

The Cornwall Beaver Project: navigating the social-ecological complexity of rewilding as a nature-based solution

“…Reintroduction of a long absent species to a landscape inevitably creates conflict with human land users and requires a period of social learning and adaptation (Cundill et al, 2011) to achieve a state of "Renewed Coexistence" (Auster et al, 2023). Conflicts and remedies for damage including dam removal, flow device measures to lower water levels, tree protection, and compensation for loss of land and crops are summarized by Brazier et al (2021) from several sources.…”

“…Studies of the experience of interactions among stakeholders of the River Otter Beaver Trial and the Tamar Beaver Management Group led Auster, Barr and Brazier (2022) to conclude that collaborative groups for managing the coexistence between humans and beavers are emerging. Auster et al (2023) emphasize the dynamic adaptive nature of beaver management groups and the need for flexible policy to support the process of humans learning how to coexist with beavers.…”