USFWS Barred Owl Removal Plan (1 Viewer)

[qwerty5]

My question is, what ecological role do Spotted Owls play that Barred Owls do not? Is Spotted Owl extinction going to mess up the ecology? If not I don't see what the big deal is, especially if the genetics won't be lost. I don't like the idea of a species going extinct, but if it won't cause any real problems, then it seems we should use our resources elsewhere.

 

[Scott98]

re: US FWS...I wouldn't want to impugn the dedicated people working there or the good deeds they have done, but currently, they are public enemy #1 here in Newburyport Mass. with the birding and bird conservation community.....if you're curious you can read all about it here:

https://www.newburyportnews.com/news/local_news/words-on-birds-refuge-proposes-destruction-of-habitats-it-created/article_d74b504a-6902-11ee-86c3-6782afe8ff4c.html

https://www.newburyportnews.com/news/local_news/words-on-birds-help-save-freshwater-impoundments/article_d9caa640-6e7a-11ee-8491-f3172720c47d.html

https://www.newburyportnews.com/news/local_news/words-on-birds-deadline-looms-for-refuge-plan-comment/article_964e6e46-7420-11ee-8f1c-b3f94118d30a.html

 

[01101001]

Regarding the Barred Owls, I've read some comments under news articles, and I'm yet to see non-birders who approve of the plan (with the exception of one commenter under one of the articles, maybe).

 

[NorthernHarrier]

My question is, what ecological role do Spotted Owls play that Barred Owls do not? Is Spotted Owl extinction going to mess up the ecology? If not I don't see what the big deal is, especially if the genetics won't be lost. I don't like the idea of a species going extinct, but if it won't cause any real problems, then it seems we should use our resources elsewhere.

That's a reasonable question, and I would guess that question could, in a scientist's or policy analyst's mind, be asked in a slightly different way: what ecological role was played by the spotted owl in the northern Pacific that caused it to appear and live in that habitat without any incursion by barred owls until the last several decades? That question requires that we ask another question: is there a value and is there a reasonable cost of trying to maintain the species diversity that existed back before the invasion of the barred owl there, or is that diversity not cost-effective and/or unnecessary today and in the foreseeable future?

And, of course, there are also questions that can and should be asked about animal rights, which some folks believe ought in some cases to be considered without regard to what is most convenient and cost-effective for human beings. These are very difficult questions to answer, for obvious reasons. And given that decisions have to be made without having many important questions like this answered with a high degree of certainty and satisfaction in the general public, and given the paltry resources available to the relevant actors to implement any proposed solutions, it is inevitable that compromises have to be made that will upset many of us, and some outcomes of whatever policies are chosen will be unanticipated. We've made too much of a mess of things for the solutions to be easy and cheap, for us and for the animals, unfortunately.

 

[pbjosh]

I wouldn’t consider signing either petition and personally view this whole thread as a good example of why I prefer governments and scientists to make policy decisions and not posters to Internet forums.

 

[Mendobirder]

NorthernHarrier has pretty much summed up much of my thinking, especially back in #17.

I think we can put aside all the confusion about how the Barred Owl got into the western forests, and how much humans had to do with it, and just ask: What to do now? We can't undo the habitat alteration that has already occurred, and anyway it's clear that Barred Owls can use all of the same habitat that Spotted Owls do, plus some, and do so more efficiently. (I've seen data indicating a given territory can support up to 4x as many Barred as Spotted.)

The question of ecosystem function is absolutely the heart of the matter. Spotted Owls and Barred Owls do NOT perform the same functions. The Spotted Owl is a specialist that primarily takes only a few species as prey: woodrats and flying squirrels mostly, with a few other small mammals taken sometimes. The Barred by contrast eats virtually anything it can catch. Literally. Mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish, crustaceans - they are all food to the Barred Owl. This means many species that formerly were not prey for the forest owls, are now being taken by them, and this has huge potential consequences for the ecosystem. Basically it is being disrupted and the results are not predictable. There is considerable concern for populations of Northern Screech-owls for example, as they never had to worry about being tracked down and killed when they vocalize, but that's a thing now.

So that's what is at stake - the ecosystem function of the forests. The proximate effect that has received the most attention is the potential loss of Northern Spotted Owls; this might have something to do with the fact that they are the most intensively studied bird in the west, maybe in all of North America, and billions of dollars have already been invested in protecting it. Whole economies were disrupted in the 80s and 90s and the Forest Practices Act was basically rewritten, with that bird as a central focus. But we really have very little idea what else will be affected and how badly, because none of the other species are studied with anything like that intensity.

Those of you who have been proposing ideas without bothering to look up the basic facts about the owls themselves and the western forest habitats - you aren't really helping here. Relocation isn't even a possibility. Again: the Barred Owl is better fit for the environment than the Spotted, and will outcompete it everywhere. There is no fantasy island where Spotted Owls could live untroubled by the outside world.

Also some of you maybe haven't read what USFWS has proposed. They are talking of a continuous cull for 30 years. That's US regulatory parlance for "forever." It is certainly possible, given how things work, that they might just stop after 30 years - or sooner, if political or scientific support eroded - and ultimately accomplish nothing. It's also quite possible that it becomes an institutional custom and is carried out indefinitely. We can't really know, so we can't really draw conclusions about that. It really comes down to, what should we do now?

 

[Mendobirder]

My question is, what ecological role do Spotted Owls play that Barred Owls do not? Is Spotted Owl extinction going to mess up the ecology? If not I don't see what the big deal is, especially if the genetics won't be lost. I don't like the idea of a species going extinct, but if it won't cause any real problems, then it seems we should use our resources elsewhere.

See my long-winded answer above. tl,dr: Yes, replacement by Barred Owls is already "messing up" (changing) the ecology. The two species have VERY different ecosystem functions. It's not so much loss of the Spotted as the indiscriminate appetite of the Barred that is causing problems.

 

[pbjosh]

NorthernHarrier has pretty much summed up much of my thinking, especially back in #17.

I think we can put aside all the confusion about how the Barred Owl got into the western forests, and how much humans had to do with it, and just ask: What to do now? We can't undo the habitat alteration that has already occurred, and anyway it's clear that Barred Owls can use all of the same habitat that Spotted Owls do, plus some, and do so more efficiently. (I've seen data indicating a given territory can support up to 4x as many Barred as Spotted.)

The question of ecosystem function is absolutely the heart of the matter. Spotted Owls and Barred Owls do NOT perform the same functions. The Spotted Owl is a specialist that primarily takes only a few species as prey: woodrats and flying squirrels mostly, with a few other small mammals taken sometimes. The Barred by contrast eats virtually anything it can catch. Literally. Mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish, crustaceans - they are all food to the Barred Owl. This means many species that formerly were not prey for the forest owls, are now being taken by them, and this has huge potential consequences for the ecosystem. Basically it is being disrupted and the results are not predictable. There is considerable concern for populations of Northern Screech-owls for example, as they never had to worry about being tracked down and killed when they vocalize, but that's a thing now.

So that's what is at stake - the ecosystem function of the forests. The proximate effect that has received the most attention is the potential loss of Northern Spotted Owls; this might have something to do with the fact that they are the most intensively studied bird in the west, maybe in all of North America, and billions of dollars have already been invested in protecting it. Whole economies were disrupted in the 80s and 90s and the Forest Practices Act was basically rewritten, with that bird as a central focus. But we really have very little idea what else will be affected and how badly, because none of the other species are studied with anything like that intensity.

Those of you who have been proposing ideas without bothering to look up the basic facts about the owls themselves and the western forest habitats - you aren't really helping here. Relocation isn't even a possibility. Again: the Barred Owl is better fit for the environment than the Spotted, and will outcompete it everywhere. There is no fantasy island where Spotted Owls could live untroubled by the outside world.

Also some of you maybe haven't read what USFWS has proposed. They are talking of a continuous cull for 30 years. That's US regulatory parlance for "forever." It is certainly possible, given how things work, that they might just stop after 30 years - or sooner, if political or scientific support eroded - and ultimately accomplish nothing. It's also quite possible that it becomes an institutional custom and is carried out indefinitely. We can't really know, so we can't really draw conclusions about that. It really comes down to, what should we do now?

Really well stated.

While not a closely analogous situation, I just today saw some new info on the ongoing control measures against Mediterranean Fruit Flies in Southern California. There is constant insect trap monitoring for female flies and potential outbreaks. At the same time, many millions of sterile male flies are released DAILY. And have been for years and years now. And it’s working. Yes it is intensive management. Yes it is something that must be sustained or all the work thus far will be undone. But crops are being protected, and thus far the Med fruit fly has not gotten established in CA. Of course a program like this isn’t cheap but it’s also not billions / year, and yet it protects billions / year in agriculture.

As I said, it’s not highly analogous. But it’s an intense management of a shitty situation that is of anthropogenic origin, and it’s working and there are no plans to halt it as it is working.

 

[01101001]

At the same time, many millions of sterile male flies are released DAILY. And have been for years and years now. And it’s working. Yes it is intensive management. Yes it is something that must be sustained or all the work thus far will be undone. But crops are being protected, and thus far the Med fruit fly has not gotten established in CA. Of course a program like this isn’t cheap but it’s also not billions / year, and yet it protects billions / year in agriculture.

As I said, it’s not highly analogous.

Yes, I agree: releasing sterile males into the wild is very different from culling non-sterile individuals in the wild. Also, apparently more effective in this particular case.

 

[pbjosh]

Also, apparently more effective in this particular case.

This is completely unknown, you are speculating.

It seems to me that it will be difficult to cull Barred Owls. But that doesn’t mean it is doomed to failure and with sufficient resources and as an ongoing management plan it is certainly possible that it can be successful.

One could almost wager that the hardest part of it will be the battle of public opinion.

As I heard it told (I welcome correction if these details are not accurate), invasive mouse removal from the Farallons was stopped/delayed due to animal rights activists and the ensuing public opinion.

 

[katastrofa]

ALL owls are endangered now, because of climate change and human pressure. Barred owls are less endangered than northern spotted owls, probably because they're better adapted to the conditions humans created in the environment. We're not willing to modify our behaviour to relieve the pressure, but we're willing to kill 500,000 barred owls to reverse the selection result we have caused. So basically we're penalising the winners in the game of "survive humans". This makes no sense to me.

 

[qwerty5]

We're not willing to modify our behaviour to relieve the pressure

How, specifically, ought our behavior be modified?

 

[katastrofa]

Stop destroying and restore the habitats which supported the spotted owls.

 

[katastrofa]

In early 2021, the Trump administration removed more than 3 million acres of Pacific Northwest land from the protected habitat of the northern spotted owl, 15 times the amount it had previously proposed opening to the timber industry. Aurelia Skipwith, director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, stated that "these common-sense revisions ensure we are continuing to recover the northern spotted owl while being a good neighbor to rural communities within the critical habitat" even though northern spotted owl populations continue to decline.

Northern spotted owl - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[dantheman]

ALL owls are endangered now, because of climate change and human pressure. Barred owls are less endangered than northern spotted owls, probably because they're better adapted to the conditions humans created in the environment. We're not willing to modify our behaviour to relieve the pressure, but we're willing to kill 500,000 barred owls to reverse the selection result we have caused. So basically we're penalising the winners in the game of "survive humans". This makes no sense to me.

I have to admit this is kind of my thinking too.

There was also the point made earlier that we should 'trust the conservationists on this as they know best'. Employees of the state forestry service (?) may well have their own ideas and agendas that the whole gamut of conservationists worldwide don't - possibly they can't see the woods for the trees (ironically). Vast resources (we are not just talking the bullets manufactured but the whole ecological footprint of the hunters) over time for something that may well be irreversible/pointless anyway in the grand scheme of things.

 

[qwerty5]

Stop destroying and restore the habitats which supported the spotted owls.

I agree with this in principle, but in practice we can't ignore that we actually do need lumber. Conservation isn't as simple as "quit logging and plant trees". Besides I don't know why that would do anything about the Barred Owls, which use the same habitat more efficiently.