RILEY — BEAVER CULTURE 
201 
The trapping was done on Cochetopa Creek. This stream, about 
15 miles in length within the Forest boundary, has an almost con- 
tinuous series of dams from the boundary to above timber Hne. Be- 
low the Forest there are several ranches where the beavers were causing 
damage. The damage consisted in flooding hay meadows and ob- 
structing irrigation ditches, and was investigated by the local forest 
officers before a recommendation for the trapping was submitted. 
The stream, therefore, afforded a combination of both conditions under 
which trapping was justified; that is, a fully stocked stream and also 
a locahty where the ranchers were suffering actual damage. 
Upon the recommendation of the Forest Service, a trapper was sent 
by the state with instructions to work under the direction of the forest 
supervisor. When he arrived the latter part of April, the work was 
outlined to him as follows: (1) To try to exterminate the beaver on 
the ranches below the Forest where the owners desired this to be done, 
and for a distance of half a mile within the Forest to prevent inter- 
ference with a big irrigation ditch; (2) to reduce the number for a 
distance of about five miles within the Forest, to give the remainder 
room to increase without working down upon the ranches and causing 
an immediate recurrence of damage; (3) to leave those on the upper 
courses of the stream unmolested with the idea that, if the trapping 
proved too heavy or caused the beaver to migrate to another locahty, 
they would work down the stream as they increased, thus restocking 
the portion trapped. 
There was no actual evidence that heavy trapping might cause the 
animals to migrate, but the work being new and in a somewhat ex- 
perimental stage, it was thought best to leave them undisturbed on a 
portion of the stream. 
Ice prevented operations when the trapper arrived, so he put in his 
camp and looked over the ground in preparation for the work. He 
started trapping about the first of May and trapped until the first of 
June. During this time he caught 132 beavers with No. 4 Newhouse 
traps, using twenty. 
In regard to costs it is regretted that actual figures can not be given 
as the local forest officers did not know definitely whether the trapper 
was paid a salary or was allowed a part of the hides. However, 
regardless of how the state handled the matter the net revenue must 
have been considerable, in view of the size of the undertaking. The 
local forest office was informed that some of the hides brought as high 
as S33, and that the total gross returns were $3,000. Assuming that 
