Killing Owls to Save Owls your thoughts? (1 Viewer)

what are peoples thoughts about this?.....

ARCATA, Calif. (AP) _ Federal scientists are planning to shoot a small number of barred owls they say are crowding out the threatened spotted owl in northern California _ an experiment that could lead to killing thousands of the larger owls on the West Coast.

Scientists said the ``removal'' experiment would be the best way to quickly determine whether barred owls are pushing spotted owls toward extinction. If successful, officials would then consider expanding the program.

``This experiment is a small step,'' said Brian Woodbridge, a biologist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service office in Yreka, Calif.

The final plan was being discussed at a meeting of spotted owl experts Wednesday at Humboldt State University in Arcata, he said. The experiment could start as early as next week.

Scientists said the northern spotted owls, which became a symbol of environmentalists' efforts to preserve the old-growth forests on the West Coast, are competing with the more common barred owls for nesting places and food. The barred owls, which have migrated to west from the Great Plains, also kill the spotted owls.

There are no hard numbers on how many spotted owls or barred owls are in the West, but some estimates put spotted owls at about 8,000 pairs. Barred owls appear to greatly outnumber spotted owls in Washington, and are about even in Oregon, according to some estimates.

The experiment site, in the southern Cascade Range, is bordered on three sides by mountains and contains only eight to 11 barred owls and 32 spotted owls, Woodbridge said. Barred owls have already displaced two spotted owl pairs and are crowding a third in the area.

The California Academy of Sciences, which has agreed to take part in the experiment, already has permits from the Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game to shoot up to 20 barred owls for museum studies, meaning the experiment does not require a lengthy environmental impact statement.

Some experts, however, say even if the experiment is successful, it will be hard to stop the migration of the barred owls.

``Assuming you find removal is working _ spotted owls move back into their territories _ are you prepared to do that for the next 10,000 years? Because as soon as you stop you're right back where you started,'' said Eric Forsman, a spotted owl biologist for the U.S. Forest Service.

The invasion also could have far-reaching ramifications for timberland owners, who log under habitat protection plans to maintain spotted owls. Some of those plans would allow more logging if spotted owls disappear; others could allow less.

``This is creating a lot of anxiety for us,'' said Lowell Diller, a biologist for Green Diamond Resources Co., which owns 450,000 acres of timber east of Redwood National Park in Northern California.

Susan Ash, conservation director for the Audubon Society of Portland, whose lawsuit resulted in spotted owl protections, said her group supports research, but has concerns about killing barred owls.

``I don't feel we should just jump into something without getting a sense of the feelings of all the interest groups,'' she said.

As has been discussed in other threads here about the killing of one species to protect another, absent hard data and the studies to show that habitat loss, not another species, is more responsible, I personally think the notion is idiotic. I think Eric Forsman is spot on: What are these management agencies going to do, keep it up for the next 10,000 years?

Katy Penland said:

absent hard data and the studies to show that habitat loss, not another species, is more responsible, I personally think the notion is idiotic. I think Eric Forsman is spot on: What are these management agencies going to do, keep it up for the next 10,000 years?

Click to expand...

i agree.

but about the 10,000 yrs thing.

I would be surprised to see the earth make it 1000 yrs, look what weve done in the last 200yrs. just me tho.

Capture and re deploy. Killing is not our decision.
If this can't be done then surly let nature take its coarse.

I guess I disagree with the majority idea on this thread. As a short term project, this could be very valuable in understanding the dynamics of why the spotted owl is disappearing. Is it a good solution for the long run, no. It may give people more time to figure out the next step in protecting spotted owls though. Sorry to say Simon S, but people make killing their decision every day and have done so for thousands of years now. Many simple, routine decisions we make ever day kill something down the line or use something that has had to die for our advances. I'd rather see people trying to understand/protect the endangered species at the cost of a few individuals of a species that is in no danger right now.

What a ludicrous idea. Unless one of the species has been introduced by man, let nature take its course.

I cannot believe valuable conservation resources are being wasted on something like this.

I think it will turn out to be a pointell excercise. Even if the barred owls are culled, this could simply cause new barred owls to move into the vacent areas which to keep the study going will then also have to be culled creating a sink for probably immature barred owls.

To determine if food and breeding sites are a problem, a study could be conducted to compare the ecologies of the two. Are they actually eating the same prey? Do the two actually prefer to nest in the same places? This could be done without having to kill any birds and would determine if there could be competition going on between the two species. Even so, a cull could simply have a greater benefit the barred owl by reducing the competition with others of the same species. Culling because of "suspected competition" between two different species is unneccessary when the better option would be to look at the ecology of both species.

Did the two species co-exist together in the past?

The main cause for the decline in thge spotted owl is, as always, human related. Habitat destruction is the major cause of mortality and, if I remember rightly, the spotted owl has a preference for old growth forest that unfortunately is becoming scarce. Attempting to place blame on as different species is to ignore the fact that human activity is the main cause of a species decline and switch the blame to something else.

Now, I'm sure someone here will be able to give a comparision of the spotted and barred owls in regards to their ecology...

Yet again we see another pointless exercise in the name of "protection of an endangered species".

As has been rightly pointed out, if you cull the current Barred Owl population then other Barred Owls will simply move in to replace them.

This is a classic case of natural selection, one species is becoming dominant at the expense of another (remember Darwin!) and no matter how we try to intervene, nature will find it's own balance.

The mention of logging would tend to indicate that it could be habitat destruction rather than Barred Owl invasion that is a contributory factor in this species decline.

Let nature take it's course, whilst it may not feel pleasant it is what happened before mankind appeared on the scene and what will surely happen after once more we are long gone.

Everyone seems to forget that we are part of nature. The "let nature take its course" view is extremely anthropocentric. Unfortunately, our role in nature has been a very negative one. A cull would be beneficial as a study for only a short period of time because, as has been pointed out, other barred owls will move in. While I do not know for a fact, I'd imagine that they are doing the study on federally protected land, so habitat loss is probably not the reason the spotted owls are declining there. I'm pretty sure they said in the article that the barred owls are actually killing the spotted owls and using their nest sights, so direct competition has already been observed. it would make sense that they have similar habits since they are of the same genus.

I would like to see more information on why the barred owl population is booming though. What if the only reason barred owls are doing so well is due to human influence on the environment there? Would people be more inclined to accept this study?

affe22 said:

Everyone seems to forget that we are part of nature. The "let nature take its course" view is extremely anthropocentric. Unfortunately, our role in nature has been a very negative one. A cull would be beneficial as a study for only a short period of time because, as has been pointed out, other barred owls will move in. While I do not know for a fact, I'd imagine that they are doing the study on federally protected land, so habitat loss is probably not the reason the spotted owls are declining there. I'm pretty sure they said in the article that the barred owls are actually killing the spotted owls and using their nest sights, so direct competition has already been observed. it would make sense that they have similar habits since they are of the same genus.

I would like to see more information on why the barred owl population is booming though. What if the only reason barred owls are doing so well is due to human influence on the environment there? Would people be more inclined to accept this study?

Click to expand...

The article said the barred were killing the spotted but quoted no figures or gave any indication of the frequency of such incidents. It might have been recorded 100 times, or it might have been recorded on just one isolated ocassion. As for nesting sites providing evidence of competition, it doesn't to me because I would like to see evidence that the site is the preferred option of the spotted owl or if the two nest in the same sites because there are not enough good alternatives available. If competition for nesting sites is a problem, a better option would be try to influence the available nesting sites for the spotted owls by perhaps putting up nest boxes for them that the larger owls can't get into.

Just because two species are in the same genus doesn't neccessarily mean that the two have similar habits, if they are of the same genus that suggests to me that they may have been co-existence in the past - and the size difference could be an evolution response to reduce the competition between the two allowing both to share the same habitat exploiting a slightly different niche.

Although habitat loss might not be an issue in the site itself, the owls are not living in isolation from what is happening across the rest of their range. What happens to owls outside of the site will determine what the population in the site will be. If those surrounding the site are suffering habitat loss, then there are fewer new birds available to move in to the better site maintaining the genetic health of the birds. What is happening outside the area will still influence what is happening to the spotteds where they are.

it should ensure medium term stability of the popuation. A good thing in my book. Who knows what the future will bring.

if you read it, you'll notice it's an experiment to determine IF the Barred are having a detrimental effect on the THREATENED Spotted and to take measures after that

habitat loss is a huge problem but populations need to be protected/stabilised so that if habitat is created in future there are animals there to move into it.

The Audubon Society are not against it per se either.

Tim

I commented on this in another thread some time ago regarding the ramifications of a proposed gutting of the Endangered Species Act, with California and the Spotted Owl, and the culling of the Barred Owl as part and parcel of a future "test case" that will potentially serve those long frustrated interest groups in northern California chafing at the ban on logging old growth forest. As some of previous posts have alluded to - to come in after the fact with the puerile and facile pronouncement of "what's the big deal, let nature take its' course, natural selection and so on...", is patently absurd. It must be apparently reiterated that the reason for the encroachment of the Barred Owl into the old growth habitat is CAUSED BY US!! So, if all we are going to do every time that there is a similar situation arising is just invoke "natural selection", then why don't we just get it all over right away - cut down all the trees, and to heck with all of us nut cases that are not in agreement.