There has been a certain pattern to the kit development in the local beaver population, and I thought I should write down these observations.
Quite soon after birth (perhaps even less than a month), the kits began not only emerging from the den (the first kit to emerge could have been merely half a month old) but also taking family trips as far as > 200 m from the den into areas which were not necessarily concealed and subjected to the lowest disturbance levels on the range.
The kits seemed to be supervised by the yearlings and they also appeared to travel between the den and foraging patches frequently utilized by the parents.
I believe such trips are not common every year and, this year, kits might have reached physical prowess sooner than customary necessitating to invent purposeful pastimes for the kits outside of the den (practising swimming, practising diving, getting to know the family home).
These activities were mostly characterized by physical exercise, introduction to novel environment as well as following the lead by the subadults/adults.
However, the subadults/adults were supervising the kits but not really interacting with them closely.
The kits were rather self-willed.
I believe that, during this stage, it was perhaps yet difficult for the kits to engage in more complex social behaviours such as exploring together, repeating subtle actions after the older sibling/parent etc.
They could, of course, follow and respond to alarm signals but the kits largely designed their own entertainment, and the supervisors were probably there to watch over the younglings so that they did not hurt themselves and were safe from disturbances/predators.
This occurred during a period of variable weather which was then followed by 2 – 3 extremely cold nights.
Cold weather affects kits more than yearlings, and it affects kits + yearlings more than it affects adult beavers.
I cannot say that kits were entirely inactive during these cold nights as I observed some of them.
Overall, however, the families retreated to the dens (they were no longer seen in less sheltered areas).
If natal dens are selected also for thermal purposes (concerning wind direction, depth of water, tree cover), an additional reason behind this withdrawal would have been that of keeping the kits in the warmest sites possible.
The yearlings disappeared, as well, which suggests they were staying close to the kits.
As the kits were already highly developed, I find it hard to imagine they were easily appeased by these sudden constraints to their movement, their will to find new feats and their curiosity.
From what I have observed about a week later, it seems to me that, during this stage, the kits might have engaged in more complex social interactions.
It was probably a natural stage in the kits’ development which in other years (when the kits are less physically active) could have coincided with the end of the true denning period (the period when the activities inside of the den are the most important and when the kits are not yet as conscious of their surroundings).
It was fortunate that the kits gained in cognitive faculties precisely during the time of relative confinement (due to the cold weather) as mental exercising can expend energy and capture attention (satisfy curiosity) as greatly as physical activities.
At this stage, I observed, for example, a kit communicating with an adult before leaving the den (Beaver observation (Jun 13, 2024) – a kit conferring with a parent) whereby I believe that the kit was consulting with the adult in order to make a decision over playing outside under the conditions of cold air but not so cold water.
I am not about to claim that vocalizations had not been used by the kits previously. They were.
On this occasion, however, the communication was very context specific.
It was not a general interaction (e.g., whining for milk/attention or expressing discontent that is applicable in many contexts and with any of the family members, except, of course, milk + mother combination).
It was an interaction between two particular individuals who acknowledged each other’s social status and level of expertise.
It was an interaction under specific circumstances which might or might not repeat themselves but the result of the given communication would not be applicable to other situations.
To conclude, it was a true conversation.
When the cold weather was exchanged by warmer nights, the families did not return to their full ranges.
Most of the kits + yearlings are still localizing near the natal dens for the greatest part of their time.
I think that the newly discovered cognitive faculties have altered the pace and level at which the kits explore their family and their home.
Additionally, it seems that the kits have gained in patience and they might have started taking solid food.
One of the kits I observed on June 17 (2024) was on land alongside the adult.
I suppose this would not have been possible during the coldest nights because both the adult and the kit were relatively immobile, and such lack of movement would have been uncomfortable for the kit when the air temperatures were low.
Their immobility suggested that the kit was probably either observing the adult feeding or also taking some snacks, making first foraging attempts.
They were foraging in an area where only some riparian grasses grow but the adult could have brought branches from further inland/from the opposite shore.
It is, in fact, a bit early for the kits to be taking solid food (this should happen by 5 – 6 weeks of age and these kits might only be 4 – 5 weeks of age).
Some sources suggest that family brings food to the den but I believe that the kits apparently also forage alongside the family members on the shore.
The degree of patience needed to sit quietly in one spot and to watch someone forage/have a nibble themselves would have been impossible in the kits at the developmental stage I observed a mere week ago.
I suppose the kits have become conscious of their family members – they are no longer almost mythical figures but specific individuals who can capture the kits’ attention outside of nursing/alarm/following/grooming context.
This would allow for the young restless mind to engage in discovery even while not moving around but sitting by a family member’s side.
I suspect once the kits have trained these faculties enough (activating the respective pathways), they will resume their physical feats, as well, combining those with perhaps more play as a form of socially interactive educational entertainment.
The kits have also become more proficient at diving and they are less conspicuous.
I do not think that this is the result of practice only (nor that the kits have encountered some danger that has made them shy).
I think that the cognitive development has also enabled the kits to follow their own movements more closely and to perhaps mimic the adults more proficiently (to notice differences between their behaviour and the behaviour of their family members).
As a result, the kits might have improved their skills as the instinct has been supplemented with active, conscious deliberation.
The subadults and the adults, during this stage, have been very quiet, and the kits might be learning stealth from them.
The kits might not have become more concerned over danger but they might simply be trying to become more adult-like.
Perhaps the rest of the family members also act less conspicuously precisely with the purpose of having the kits naturally (and without traumatic associations) learn how to ‘stay out of sight’.
The kits have also reduced the amount of tail-slapping but we have accidentally spooked them to rarely for me to be truly able to claim that they used to slap tails often or that now they longer do.
I cannot wait what the kits will develop next regarding the magnificent scope of beaver potential.
Notes by Ieva 