SBAG Scottish Beaver Advisory Group Meeting - 26 February 2026
Hybrid meeting, NatureScot Aviemore office and online
(10:30-12:30 and 13:30-14:30)
Chair: Jill Robbie
Communications workshop 10.30-12.40
Welcome and Introductions
Group members introduced themselves.
The Chair introduced the workshop on communications, stating that communications has been a topic raised at SBAG a number of times, particularly in relation to new areas beavers are moving into and the need to engage with communities in such areas.
Update from Joanne Ford Communications on the work being undertaken to develop SBAG resources for community outreach in support of Scotland’s Beaver Strategy.
The aim of the contract is to develop a communications outreach pack to be used in areas where beavers are expanding, primarily through natural expansion but it could be used in areas where there are proposals for beaver translocations, though it was noted it is not designed to be a formal consultation pack.
The pack is being designed to provide a suite of consistent and balanced messages. In addition, supporting materials are also to be developed which all members of SBAG and externals could use for beaver communication activities.
The work has been split into two phases:
- Phase one: Research and reviewing existing materials, conversations with subgroup members and draft a messaging framework.
- Phase two: Finalise messages, gather/draft case studies, create new materials and develop an outreach communications proposal.
Phase one of the work has highlighted that there is a lot of information and materials already online, noting that these are primarily advocacy led/detailed. It was noted that there is a gap for easy to find and follow information for a general audience and /or those with limited beaver knowledge.
JF gave an outline of what the proposed messaging framework will contain:
- What are beavers
- Beavers in Scotland (history & status)
- About beavers (key facts & myth busting)
- Beaver behaviours and impacts
- Living with beavers (what to expect, what you might see, what to do, management & mitigation)
- Where to go for further information and advice
JF identified the next steps in her work:
- Further conservations with group members
- Full draft messaging framework and feedback (via comms sub-group)
- Identifying case studies and assets to include
- Create new materials as required
- Proposal for how outreach activity might be taken forward (delivery is not part of JF remit)
Discussion
Comment that proposed messaging is very similar to that already used in the Cairngorms beaver consultation events and in England, i.e. a lot of the material already exists - e.g. see BeaverManagement.org website. It was noted that this work is not looking to reinvent the wheel, a key part of the contract is to pull together the material which already exists so that it is in one place.
Discussion of optimising the viewing of material; it was advised to stay away from creating a new website and instead the group needs to decide on the most appropriate place to host the resources – e.g. SBAG webpage, Beaver landing page on the NatureScot website or the Beaver Management website.
The importance of proactive engagement and how the outreach could be delivered was noted. This led to a discussion about the important role Local Authorities could play in delivering beaver communications and the need to identify further existing bodies/organisations/groups which could help to engage communities. The importance of identifying different communities of interest/ impact and tapping into the groups which already exist was highlighted e.g. the fisheries community and angling associations.
Suggestion of seeking feedback from the communities SBAG is trying to engage with in terms of reviewing the draft materials which are being developed. E.g. the Climate Forth Group was identified as a possible group. It was noted that this approach has been taken for some of the materials that have been developed by others already and has been important in learning from/ adding credibility to the engagement process.
Discussion about signposting the public to the relevant body in Scotland who can help with the query they have. It was suggested that on a website there could be a drop-down menu under a heading like ‘needing support’ which then directs people to different areas i.e. Cairngorms National Park, Trees for Life etc, Local Authorities. In a print pack this could be made available on the back page with a generic email address, with some example scenarios.
In respect to outreach engagement, it was noted that different channels for engagement would be needed; holding or tagging onto existing events in neutral spaces. Included in the pack could also be instructions about best practice in using the pack, and Beaver Trust can help provide guidance on that.
Monitoring piece (beaver monitoring) to be added into the draft messaging framework, as it was felt this was an important piece which is currently missing.
What can we learn from social science about communicating about beavers
Understanding attitudes and perspectives towards keystone species and landscape change - Flurina Wartman – University of Aberdeen
Presented on the social dimensions of human-wildlife coexistence exploring what people think and feel about species and why, how they feel about sharing a landscape with a species and how co-existence is managed. Examples were shared of different species recently worked on in Europe, and the different methods used. Complexity can be distilled using response indicators and analysed. An understanding of perceptions can then be used to inform communications to different groups, target and monitor actions. The importance of a baseline was highlighted in order to measure the success of actions carried out, e.g. to promote co-existence. Thereby social research can pinpoint where actions are helping.
Social issues and community engagement - Vicky Johnson – University if Highlands and Islands
Presented on the socio-cultural research on beavers in the Beauly catchment. The research looked at socio-cultural perceptions and their effects and gathered field-based perceptions using a case study approach centred on the Beauly catchment. Link to full NatureScot Research Report 1318 - Nature’s contribution to people and community engagement: socio-cultural and economic perceptions of beaver presence in the environment.
The study deliberately proactively targeted a broad spectrum of the community not just the usual suspects e.g. via discussions in local store. Suggested that many people had a low level of knowledge about beaver and that concerns related to uncertainty. Values related to individual’s relationship to the land and potential impact on livelihoods. UHI keen to progress further work on Best Practice in beaver translocation.
Discussion
A question was asked about how to get more people to engage in outreach work. It was suggested that a variety of approaches are needed. The key is integrating information into places and processes that are already happening – essentially piggybacking onto already established groups and forums; noting that each community is different in terms of what engagement will work. The setting up of new events on neutral territory will be required in some places.
A discussion took place around the desire to have a social study undertaken in Tayside. The point was made that there has been research on what is happening at Tayside.
AP a: NatureScot to share details of social research already undertaken in Tayside.
NatureScot Commissioned Report 805: Tayside beaver socio-economic impact study
University of Leeds publication - Eager about beavers? Understanding opposition to species reintroduction, and its implications for conservation.
Ongoing work – University of Stirling – Alice Turner on perceptions of mitigation in Tayside and Forth.
Noted the learning from early consultations is already being used.
A further point was made that we need to be proactive in saying where beavers will be. People tend not to engage in something until it is on their doorstep and is about to happen, an example of the beaver translocation in the Cairngorms National Park was given and level of engagement from farmers, which was initially very slow despite outreach work with the farming community. Interest did not peak until the translocation was confirmed as happening.
Discussion of approach and funding
There is currently no plan for how the resource pack will be rolled out and delivered. Noted there are the skills and capacity within SBAG partners to do some of this, but there is also the potential to put together a funding bid to develop this outreach approach further. Members were asked for their thoughts on this including interest in taking forward a funding bid. Support for working with Local Authorities and proposed a “train the trainer” approach.
New AP 1: For all to provide thoughts or feed ideas into the Comms sub-group on options for delivering outreach.
SBAG 'Regular' meeting 1.30-2.30
Minutes of previous meeting - 11 November 2025
No changes proposed to the draft minutes from November.
Action points and matters arising
Actions from 11/11/2025
AP1. Chair to make the above amendments to the workshop report and arrange for it to be published on the webpage. Discharged.
AP2. The Chair to request if a copy of the NRF application can be shared with the group via Objective connect (noting personal information in the application is to be redacted before uploading). Update: Note some sensitives in sharing the application, anyone interested in seeing it should get in touch with the Chair directly.
AP 3. Implement RAG rating for Strategy actions going forwards. Chair to discuss with NatureScot the best way to share the document so others can contribute; to look at the NatureScot policy in terms of what other platforms might be available to help make document sharing easier (currently use Objective Connect).
Update: Agenda item for this meeting.
AP4. LLTNPA are attending the next meeting of LA Biodiversity Officers in December and agreed to raise the potential of running an event with the group; to report back at February meeting.
Update: Due to the meeting being rescheduled there was no opportunity to raise this. However, the channel remains open and the group agreed it would be good group to share the communications pack work with this forum and to liaise with Joanne Ford about this channel for dissemination of information.
AP5. Communications subgroup to meet before Christmas to take forward the work on developing a communications pack, key focus on developing messages, reviewing existing material and delivery. Discharged.
Actions from 22/08/2024
AP6. NatureScot to provide an update regarding fish use at current water gates. Update: Video footage captured in February 2026 has shown a beaver crossing the water gate, so now need to look at what adjustments might need to be made to the gate – fish population data will need to be considered ahead of any adjustments being made. Report required to inform decision making. Ongoing.
Actions from 27/2/25
AP2. Comms subgroup to consider developing a pack (similar to those sent around by CNPA) that could be used in areas where beavers are expanding naturally and have not been subject to public engagement.
Ongoing as per workshop discussions prior to meeting.
Actions from 8/5/25
AP1. NatureScot to look to collate datasets to identify key sensitivities such as Salmon, lichen and where the high-risk areas are located, whilst also exploring areas where the risks are lower.
Update: Information on salmon and sea trout presence is available on the Marine Scotland website which NatureScot can overlay with beaver dam capacity to help to identify sensitive areas and areas which might require management interventions. The data, however, highlights that salmon and sea trout are widespread and hence is perhaps less helpful for screening catchments that are suitable/unsuitable for beaver translocation.
Lichen update given in the meeting (see agenda item 7).
Chair term
The Chair set out that the ToR specifies that the Chairs term is for two years. The group was asked if they are content for the Chair to continue. The Chair indicated she would be happy to stay on or go if the group decide to find a new Chair.
It was noted that there is concern from some in the land management community about having a NatureScot Board member as Chair as they do not consider NatureScot to be independent. Instead, it was suggested there is a preference for someone who is not connected to beavers and/or NatureScot.
This prompted a discussion on what others considered to be important in the role; noting SBAGs role is to advise on delivery of Scotland’s Beaver Strategy and that the important thing is to have someone who is fair and ensures there is a balance of interests represented.
As part of the discussion, it was agreed that now is also an opportune time to relook at the ToR for the group and more widely the membership of the group.
AP1: The group is asked to email NatureScot setting out their preferred option for a Chair. ScotGov and NatureScot can then consider the communications and decide next steps.
AP2: The group is to relook at the ToR and membership at the next meeting.
Proposals for adapting Scotland’s Beaver Strategy and reporting – paper to follow – NatureScot
The Chair outlined that there has been an ongoing issue relating to reporting against the strategy due to the large number of actions (88) associated with it. Discussions have previously taken place about whether it is possible to focus in on priority actions and if there is a process for revising actions.
A paper was circulated to the group which set out the challenges of reporting against the actions, notably the way they are written (not SMART) and that there is a lot of overlap between the actions.
The NatureScot beaver team have had an initial go at refining the actions, looking at commonality between the actions, grouping these where appropriate and removing duplications. A slimmed down set of actions which would make reporting against them more manageable was presented to the group.
The paper outlined the importance of the co-production of the strategy and noted that any changes to it must involve others in the process. A recommendation from the paper was the establishment of a small working group made up of SBAG members to go through the initial process of streamlining the actions to see if there is agreement with what has been suggested and/or if there are other suggestions.
The point was made that it is important to have a read across with the new and old actions, to show which ones have been merged, removed, added and adapted to ensure transparency in the process and to be able to clearly show to people where the changes have been made.
Overall, there was support for the actions in the strategy to be reviewed and for this to involve multiple stakeholders from SBAG.
AP3: NatureScot to arrange a meeting of a working-group to look at streamlining and prioritising Scotland Beaver Strategy Implementation Plan actions. Interested group members should contact NatureScot. There was initial interest from RSPB, SLE, NFUS, CNPA, TFL, RZSS and Beaver Trust.
Sub-group updates - Chairs to report
Communications
Update given by the Chair in the morning.
Management and Mitigation
Delivered by Beaver Trust representative on behalf of the subgroup Chair.
- Last meeting held in November focused on identifying key knowledge gaps and clarifying reliable sources of information.
- There was agreement from the group for a joint meeting to be held with the Research & Innovation and Fisheries subgroup identified as an important next step to ensure alignment and understanding.
- British and International beaver management website highlighted as a useful and neutral information source, alongside contributions from several European organisations, including the Beaver Trust https://www.beaverknowledgehub.com/
- Network Rail are intending to outline its current approach to beaver management and the development of its own engineering manual.
- Environment Agency also preparing guidance relevant to its infrastructure and statutory responsibilities. SEPA have noted areas of overlap and internal discussions are progressing, with SEPA now invited to the Environment Agency lead infrastructure sub-group in England. The group is to collate robust and reliable sources of mitigation guidance with a view to improving cross communication and signposting between existing website resources. Discussions focused on burrowing impacts and associated erosion, identified as being the most significant and challenging issues particularly in relation to developing improved early intervention monitoring tools and effective mitigation responses. Effective resourcing and financial support for affected landowners remains a key consideration and challenge.
- A funding application has been submitted to NRF in collaboration with two Tayside land managers dealing with burrowing impacts on flood banks to look at a trial realignment project. Outcome of the application expected at the end of February 2026.
- Good progress being made with Forest Research to advance trails on creating beaver resilient riparian woodlands, four Scottish sites now confirmed with planting scheduled for March as part of a long-term study. It will look at whether willow buffers or alternative tree species selection and planting density can function as mitigation tools helping to facilitate woodland creation.
- Further engagement with the Health & Safety Executive to determine whether WOBRA an anti-game paint used in tree protection can be approved for wider application.
- Next meeting is a joint meeting with the Research & Innovation subgroup in April – further details in Research & Innovation update.
AP 4 Chair to email the Chair of the Mitigation and Management subgroup to get further details on the approach being taken by Network Rail.
Research & Innovation
Delivered by Beaver Trust representative on behalf of the subgroup Chair.
- Group is to hold a joint meeting with the Mitigation and Management sub-group in April to discuss activities and actions of interest for both groups. The two sub-groups invited SBAG to propose hot topics for discussion at this joint meeting with a view to identifying priority actions to take forward. Actions which crossover between the two groups were outlined as Goal 2, Goal 4, Goal 8, Goal 9.
Some suggestions for discussion at the meeting, had been proposed by the Chairs.
- Reflecting on exiting modelling approaches e.g. Exeter beaver dam model, flood risk models and Newcastle landscape population model: how can available data on beaver impacts and mitigation can be used to assess mitigation success or predict future threats;
- what do we understand about beaver territories and individual movement following trapping,
- can we assess the cost benefit of different beaver mitigation strategies,
- what are the appropriate time frames for post mitigation monitoring and how can monitoring inform future research.
- which mitigation activities, perhaps not yet readily implemented would benefit from further research or trialling.
Interest from SBAG in exploring the topic on what mitigation activities, not yet implemented would benefit from further research or trialling. Also noted previous discussions on flood banks and trapping and removing beavers from some locations may increase burrowing activity.
It was also noted by SBAG that while there are lots of different areas that members would like to see more research on, in the current funding climate there needs to be a prioritisation of topics that are most needed for Strategy delivery. Two suggested strands of focus for the R&I sub-group were suggested: i) development of policy summaries of current knowledge in specific research areas and ii) identification of key knowledge gaps which can then be used to facilitate this research happening i.e. by engaging with research organisations and exploring the funding needed.
AP5 Anyone with proposals for topics for the joint Research & Innovation and Mitigation and Management sub-groups meeting in April should get in touch with the Chair of the Research & Innovation sub-group.
AP6 Chair of SBAG to apply for an internship at Glasgow University for an intern to prepare policy summaries.
Fisheries Management
No update available from the Chair but a brief overview of the last meeting provided by representative from the Beaver Trust.
- Last subgroup meeting focussed on a summary of evidence on the impacts of Eurasian beaver on Atlantic salmon being prepared for the Wild Salmon Strategy Science and Evidence Board.
There were also ongoing discussions of the beaver dam assessment methodology. There was agreement within the group that it is close to having an agreed flow chart. The group then needs to relook at the wording which sits alongside this to see if it needs to be adapted or modified. Consensus that one approach is needed for England, Scotland and Wales.
Translocation updates
Beaver Trust
- 54 beavers have so far been trapped this season, overall, the number of trapping sites requested this year are lower than the previous year. The majority of animals have been relocated to projects in Scotland, with a smaller number supporting projects in England.
- Continuing to work closely with English projects through the studbook process to inform pairing recommendations to ensure animals selected for release are from geographically distinct parentage and unrelated, supporting genetic robustness.
- Contributed ~200 samples to a forthcoming genetic analysis undertaken collaboratively with RZSS, Natural England and the Wildlife Trusts. Findings expected to be published later this year.
- Recently submitted two papers for publication on Giardia and Leptospirosis in beavers, reporting very low prevalence.
Trees for Life
Reported two releases had taken place in Glen Affric, including one last week.
Ness project has almost completed its engagement phase, translocation application yet to be submitted. Working closely with Beaver Trust on this and have kept NatureScot/SG updated on timing.
NatureScot
Update provided on the recent expressions of interest exercise undertaken towards the end of 2025. A short paper was presented. Interest was received from a total of 39 people: covering 24 river catchments. NatureScot staff had undertaken an initial desk-based RAG assessment to aid discussions. The table and map included in the paper sets out this assessment and shows where the interest is relative to current beaver presence.
The group was asked for any comments and for its collective thoughts on where limited resource was best placed in supporting future projects. NatureScot suggested there are groups/individuals with an interest already progressing proposals, i.e. bottom-up. But reflecting resource constraints, (NatureScot staff support for SEAs/ assessing licence applications and support translocation costs), NatureScot are seeking a steer from the group on priorities.
Noted some support for the Awe catchment in linking the Knapdale and Tayside populations. Discussion of potential for swamping Norwegian genetics in Knapdale vs viability of this population without further supplementation. Suggested there is a need for up to date study of this population.
It was asked on what basis catchments had been categorised as High/Medium/Low risk of conflict relating to agriculture and whether there had been consideration of the importance of less productive classes to the agriculture of the area, e.g. of winter forage. The classifications had been based on the predicted area of overlap between beavers and agricultural land (LCA 1-3.2) in the 2022 (SEA Addendum) analysis but the H/M/L classification are not absolute. The intention was to provide an indication of the potential for conflicts for the group to consider the relative pros and cons of different catchments.
NatureScot is currently taking forward a national HRA, though due to the scale of this work it is not yet completed.
AP7 Members with concerns about the RAG assessments were asked to feedback to NatureScot their thoughts on the level of risks in the catchments listed.
AP8 The group are invited to submit comments on the translocation paper presented by NatureScot, particularly where they see the priorities as being. Members are asked to do this before the next meeting, where this will be discussed again.
NatureScot updates
- Mitigation Best Practice
No time to discuss this agenda item in the meeting. Proposed for next meeting.
Lichens – NatureScot
- Meeting with the British Lichen Society, Plantlife and local experts took place earlier in the week.
- Prior to the meeting a letter had been written to NatureScot requesting that a Beaver Lichen Project Officer post be created. NatureScot is not able to support this but had constructive discussions around where progress could be made, recognising that beavers may pose a risk to some of the more vulnerable species. Discussion around balancing net biodiversity benefits of beaver with the potential for specific losses.
- Discussion around tree protection and the protection of specific host trees or the need for wider scale protection of important areas (looking at continuity of habitat, not just about individual trees).
- Previous discussions about accessing BLS data for mapping of sensitivity. NatureScot has offered some funding to try to facilitate this work; includes mapping of important areas, with a view to informing monitoring and mitigation.
- Discussion on what monitoring and mitigation is required as part of any translocation process, desire to see this more embedded than is currently the case, which the mapping of the sensitive sites will help to support.
- British Lichen Society and others were keen to see a best practice guide on lichens and beavers to be developed as well as seeing lichens/bryophytes embedded into other guides.
AOB
Advised the Tay/Forth beaver survey is expected to be published in summer 2026, all group members will be notified when it is available.
Question whether there was value in exploring modelling approaches to help map the potential for beaver related conflicts in a more proactive way – for example in central belt looking at potential for issues with infrastructure and housing. It was noted there are various existing modelling tools existing and in development, e.g. University of Manchester floodplain model which would be very helpful in anticipating the extent of beaver induced inundation (both with regard to potential benefits and conflicts).
DONM: 5 May (online).
Summary of outstanding actions
Actions from 26/2/26
AP1: The group is asked to email NatureScot setting out their preferred option for a Chair. ScotGov and NatureScot can then consider the communications and decide next steps.
AP2: The group is to relook at the ToR and membership at the next meeting.
AP3: NatureScot to arrange a meeting of a working-group to look at streamlining and prioritising Scotland Beaver Strategy Implementation Plan actions. Interested group members should contact NatureScot. There was initial interest from RSPB, SLE, NFUS, CNPA, TFL, RZSS and Beaver Trust.
AP 4 Chair to email the Chair of the Mitigation and Management subgroup to get further details on the approach being taken by Network Rail.
AP5 Anyone with proposals for topics for the joint Research & Innovation and Mitigation and Management sub-groups meeting in April should get in touch with the Chair of the Research & Innovation sub-group.
AP6 Chair of SBAG to apply for an internship at Glasgow University for an intern to prepare policy summaries.
AP7 Members with concerns about the assessments were asked to feedback to NatureScot their thoughts on the level of risks in the catchments listed.
AP8 The group are invited to submit comments on the translocation paper presented by NatureScot, particularly where they see the priorities as being. Members are asked to do this before the next meeting, where this will be discussed again.
Actions from 11/11/2025
AP4. LLTNPA are attending the next meeting of LA Biodiversity Officers in December and agreed to raise the potential of running an event with the group; to report back at February meeting.
Update: Due to the meeting being rescheduled there was no opportunity to raise this. However, the channel remains open and the group agreed it would be good group to share the communications pack work with this forum and to liaise with Joanne Ford about this channel for dissemination of information.
Actions from 22/08/2024
AP6. NatureScot to provide an update regarding fish use at current water gates. Ongoing.
Actions from 8/5/25
AP1. NatureScot to look to collate datasets to identify key sensitivities such as Salmon, lichen and where the high-risk areas are located, whilst also exploring areas where the risks are lower. Ongoing.
Attendees
Attendees:
Jenny Bryce NatureScot
Donald Fraser NatureScot
Scot Mathieson Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Kenny Kortland Scottish Forestry (SBAG meeting only)
Rob Needham Beaver Trust (SBAG meeting only)
Elliot McCandless The Beaver Trust (Comms workshop only)
Alan McDonnell Trees for Life - representing Scottish Rewilding Alliance
Lisa Kerslake Forestry and Land Scotland
Jonathan Willet Cairngorms National Park Authority
Martin Janes River Restoration Centre (SBAG meeting only)
Nic MacLeod Scottish Land & Estates
Sarah Robinson Scottish Wildlife Trust
Kate Maitland National Farmers Union Scotland
James Silvey RSPB - representing Scottish Environment Link
Samuel Turner Scottish Government
Heather Ritchie-Parker Royal Zoological Society of Scotland
Graeme Heenan Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority
Joanne Ford Freelance consultant
Apologies: Roisin Campbell-Palmer – Independent/Beaver Trust, Aileen Mill University of Newcastle, Alan Wells Fisheries Management Scotland.
