Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk 
Thread started 28 Feb 2012 (Tuesday) 20:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Killing barred owls to save spotted owls....

 
Shar824
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,948 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Lower Alabama
     
Feb 28, 2012 20:46 |  #1

Obama administration plan would kill rival bird to save spotted owl


WASHINGTON — To save the imperiled spotted owl, the Obama administration is moving forward with a controversial plan to shoot barred owls, a rival bird that has shoved its smaller cousin aside.


The plan is the latest federal attempt to protect the northern spotted owl, the passive, one-pound bird that sparked an epic battle over logging in the Pacific Northwest two decades ago.



Full article at link...
http://www.washingtonp​ost.com …/28/gIQAvxAUgR_​story.html (external link)


Sharon

"If you want to see birds, you must have birds in your heart." -- John Burroughs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MakeMeShutter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,343 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Upstate New York
     
Feb 29, 2012 11:07 |  #2

Where is the Lorax when we really need him?

I'm all for saving the spotted owl, but not if it means shooting the barred owls.


New York Dragonflies (external link)
NYDragonflies.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shar824
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,948 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Lower Alabama
     
Feb 29, 2012 12:11 |  #3

MakeMeShutter wrote in post #13990434 (external link)
Where is the Lorax when we really need him?

I'm all for saving the spotted owl, but not if it means shooting the barred owls.


I know, it just doesn't seem right to shoot one species to save another. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me at all.


Sharon

"If you want to see birds, you must have birds in your heart." -- John Burroughs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,327 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Feb 29, 2012 21:54 |  #4

This is a highly controversial topic that has been brought up before.

This problem is completely human created. With the expansion of humans across the plains, forested habitat has been able to be grown creating a "bridge" for the eastern Barred Owl to spread to the western territory. Prior to human development, the plains were just too large to support a mass expansion to a new habitat. On top of that, the removal of old growth timber has further damaged the Spotted Owl's reproduction.

The Spotted Owl is a Endangered Species that needs to be saved. There is no other solution to help boost numbers due to the ability of the Barred Owl to colonize both old growth forests (where Spotted Owls live almost exclusively) and Re-prod (replanted forest..aka reproduction forest) where it is too dense and does not supply the Spotted Owl with enough nesting habitat. The much larger Barred Owl (up to a pound heavier than the Spotted) is much more aggressive, killing and hunting Northern Spotted Owls.

The Barred Owl is not threatened and has a very stable population back East where it can thrive in urban developments. However, the Spotted Owl has rapidly shrinking habitat plus the pressure from the Barred Owls. There is no other alternative solution to save the Spotted Owl since it has declined by 40% in the last 20 years.

I highly suggest people heavily research the pros and cons of this topic before posting their views. I do not mean on news websites, but on federal ones that show the research and studies done on both species.Living here in the Pacific North West where the problem is has been a real eye opener for me. In over 14 years of living here, spending 100s of hours in the woods, I have only heard one wild Spotted Owl. However, every hunting season, I here dozens of Barreds.


--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shar824
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,948 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Lower Alabama
     
Feb 29, 2012 22:52 |  #5

BirdBoy wrote in post #13994621 (external link)
This is a highly controversial topic that has been brought up before.

This problem is completely human created. With the expansion of humans across the plains, forested habitat has been able to be grown creating a "bridge" for the eastern Barred Owl to spread to the western territory. Prior to human development, the plains were just too large to support a mass migration to a new habitat. On top of that, the removal of old growth timber has further damaged the Spotted Owl's reproduction.

The Spotted Owl is a Endangered Species that needs to be saved. There is no other solution to help boost numbers due to the ability of the Barred Owl to colonize both old growth forests (where Spotted Owls live almost exclusively) and Re-prod (replanted forest..aka reproduction forest) where it is too dense and does not supply the Spotted Owl with enough nesting habitat. The much larger Barred Owl (up to a pound heavier than the Spotted) is much more aggressive, killing and hunting Northern Spotted Owls.

The Barred Owl is not threatened and has a very stable population back East where it can thrive in urban developments. However, the Spotted Owl has rapidly shrinking habitat plus the pressure from the Barred Owls. There is no other alternative solution to save the Spotted Owl since it has declined by 40% in the last 20 years.

I highly suggest you heavily research the pros and cons of this topic before posting your views. I do not mean on news websites, but on federal ones that show the research and studies done on both species.Living here in the Pacific North West where the problem is has been a real eye opener for me. In over 14 years of living here, spending 100s of hours in the woods, I have only heard one wild Spotted Owl. However, every hunting season, I here dozens of Barreds.


I wasn't posting my opinion...I found the article, thought it was interesting, thought others might like to read it........so I passed it along.


Sharon

"If you want to see birds, you must have birds in your heart." -- John Burroughs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,327 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Feb 29, 2012 22:57 |  #6

Shar824 wrote in post #13994927 (external link)
I wasn't posting my opinion...I found the article, thought it was interesting, thought others might like to read it........so I passed it along.

I was specifically targeting you or anyone else. I was just stating that people should educate themselves before diving into this discussion. It has been a highly heated and debated topic on a number of forums and other formats.:)

I edited the above paragraph referencing "you" to mean people in general. When I wrote it I meant "you" as in the reader/people in general, not "you" as in the OP. Sorry for the confusion.
I do believe that the problem of Barred Owls should be addressed and a forum is a great way of spreading the word. However, forums have a tendancy to morph information to the point of being completely false (camera/lens release dates anyone?:))


--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kevin ­ Hall
Member
Avatar
116 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Feb 2009
     
Mar 01, 2012 06:21 |  #7

Here's another way of looking at this:

We're all familiar with the problem of the pythons in the Everglades, yes? As they do not belong there, but were introduced by humans, there are no natural checks and balances on them. Hence, they are eating their way through all of the mammalian fauna down there. That's just the immediate impact, it will touch everything else growing and alive that depends on the mammals being there eventually.

Unfortunately, the Barred Owl is another introduced species to the western part of the continent. It wasn't introduced directly by humans (although we made it possible) and chances are that the predators there will provide some checks and balances, but until an equilibrium is reached they are putting enough pressure on the Spotted Owl to be of serious concern.

We're really good at laying waste to the planet, even when we try to correct some of our actions. Who knows how this will shake out?


“By reading this message you are denying its existence and implying consent.”

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,327 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Mar 01, 2012 11:05 |  #8

The problem is that the "Balance point" for the Barred Owl is too late for the Spotted. If not slowed down by humans, Barred Owls will continue expanding into Spotted Owl habitat, continually out competing/killing them. The Barred Owl cannot be compared to a python because it is not an introduced species, but a native species expanding its range (similar to the White-tailed Kites expanding northward). It could be argued that this was caused by humans. However, the Barred Owl was also expanding Northward before it began to expand West (around 1912). Scientists have guessed that the Barred Owl would have used Southern Canada as a corridor to the West Coast if the plains had not been developed. Currently, the only predator that the Barred Owl faces is the Great Horned Owl, which does not seem to be in enough numbers currently to seriously make a dent in the Barred Owl population.

The key point for people to realize is that the government does not mean to completely wipe out the Western population of Barred Owls (they are a native species to North America after all). There plan is to selectively remove Barred Owls that have taken over key old growth timber that the Spotted Owl requires. Leaving the second growth timber for the Barred Owls. Old growth timber is the key requirement for Spotted Owl nesting cavities.


--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2011
     
Mar 01, 2012 11:17 |  #9

BirdBoy wrote in post #13994621 (external link)
This is a highly controversial topic that has been brought up before.

This problem is completely human created. With the expansion of humans across the plains, forested habitat has been able to be grown creating a "bridge" for the eastern Barred Owl to spread to the western territory. Prior to human development, the plains were just too large to support a mass expansion to a new habitat. On top of that, the removal of old growth timber has further damaged the Spotted Owl's reproduction.

The Spotted Owl is a Endangered Species that needs to be saved. There is no other solution to help boost numbers due to the ability of the Barred Owl to colonize both old growth forests (where Spotted Owls live almost exclusively) and Re-prod (replanted forest..aka reproduction forest) where it is too dense and does not supply the Spotted Owl with enough nesting habitat. The much larger Barred Owl (up to a pound heavier than the Spotted) is much more aggressive, killing and hunting Northern Spotted Owls.

The Barred Owl is not threatened and has a very stable population back East where it can thrive in urban developments. However, the Spotted Owl has rapidly shrinking habitat plus the pressure from the Barred Owls. There is no other alternative solution to save the Spotted Owl since it has declined by 40% in the last 20 years.

I highly suggest people heavily research the pros and cons of this topic before posting their views. I do not mean on news websites, but on federal ones that show the research and studies done on both species.Living here in the Pacific North West where the problem is has been a real eye opener for me. In over 14 years of living here, spending 100s of hours in the woods, I have only heard one wild Spotted Owl. However, every hunting season, I here dozens of Barreds.

Why does an endangered species need to be "saved"? Many species became endangered and died out, or came back from the brink of extinction far before humans could meddle in the process. Humans are simply another species exerting force upon this world. We assume we are somehow capable of completely destroying life on earth - but we are not. We may one day cause our own extinction - but other forms of life will continue to thrive. The earth may look far different than it does now though.

We have this really odd idea that because we have meddled in the affairs of other species and caused them to react to our presence that we should try to counter-meddle in other ways to "balance" things out. We have no clue what effect this will have. No person may ever know the effect because by the time the effects can be see, humans may no longer inhabit the earth.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,327 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Mar 01, 2012 12:10 |  #10

Numenorean wrote in post #13997725 (external link)
Why does an endangered species need to be "saved"? Many species became endangered and died out, or came back from the brink of extinction far before humans could meddle in the process. Humans are simply another species exerting force upon this world.

I completely agree.

Numenorean wrote in post #13997725 (external link)
We assume we are somehow capable of completely destroying life on earth - but we are not.


But we are, the result of a nuclear war would result in the end of the planets ecosystem. The actual blasts may not kill everything, but the nuclear fallout would effect most life. Nuclear bombs today are 100x more powerful than they were at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Numenorean wrote in post #13997725 (external link)
We have this really odd idea that because we have meddled in the affairs of other species and caused them to react to our presence that we should try to counter-meddle in other ways to "balance" things out. We have no clue what effect this will have. No person may ever know the effect because by the time the effects can be see, humans may no longer inhabit the earth.

This is purely on your conscious. If you hit a person are you going to help them or are you just going to drive away? The reason that we should help save animals that have been hurt by our naivety is that it directly effects us.

Here is an example. The deforestation of our planet, done in an unsustainable way (not planting trees), directly causes less carbon to be processed into oxygen. This carbon then goes into our oceans where it increases the acidity. A highly acidic ocean then causes large plankton die offs (they are the #1 carbon reducer, before trees). Large plankton die offs cause depletion in oxygen in the water because of the remaining dissolved oxygen is being used by the bacteria that decay the dead phytoplankton and very little phytoplankton are alive to produce more oxygen. No oxygen in the water creates incredibly large "dead zones" (im talking thousands of miles) in our oceans where no living organism that uses oxygen can survive. Massive fish die-offs then cause more oxygen to used up by the bacteria that break down their bodies. These fish die offs then reduce the amount of catch that humans gather from the ocean. 1 billion people on our planet are reliant on fish for their food and livelihood.

Everything is connected. How is the Spotted Owl connected? It is a key stone species. Remove the key predator, and the lower level animals flurish until food becomes scarce and there is no longer enough resources for them to live. The best example of key stone species in action is the wolves in yellowstone. You might think that one species of owl doesn't matter. However, with thinking like that, the extinct species start to add up. That is when you notice what is too late to fix.

Why must we fix what we have caused? Because it effects us.


--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2011
     
Mar 01, 2012 12:31 |  #11

Nuclear war? Sure...it might wipe out most life as we know it today. But not all life. New life will spring up over time. A few million years after that, who knows what will be thriving. Not humans.

To think that we even remotely understand how the world works and that we can fix it is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. We only know about a very, very small amount of time compared to how old the earth is. We can only speculate more wildly about things the further back we go.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,327 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Mar 01, 2012 12:45 |  #12

I personally would like the earth to stay as it is now or better for when I have kids and they have kids etc.
I would not like "whats a Rhino grandpa?", to me, that would be sad. I am now going to leave this thread because I believe that it is getting into politics and no longer about birds.


--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boufa
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Lake County, OH
     
Mar 10, 2012 07:59 as a reply to  @ Evan's post |  #13

History has shown that the eco system is extremely complex and intertwined in ways that we do not even understand. Every time we selectively tinker with it we are walking a very dangerous line. The "balance" is that you cannot just change 1 thing to offset something else. It tends to cause more problems than it helps. So long as their is a attractive environment for the barred owl he will more in to it. Shooting them today may solve the problem, but you would have to keep hunting them down for ever. I am an environmentalist, but the most dangerous thing for the environment is to cross science and politcs. Government solutions are often time wrong solutions.


Canon EOS 7D & 40D | Σ 10-20mm Wigma | Σ 150-600mm | Σ 18-250mm Macro | Canon 18-135 STM | Canon 55-250 STM
Gallery/Website/Blog - TowPathPhoto (external link)
Social Media - - - on Flickr (external link) . . . on Twitter (external link)
Creator of @OhioBirdAlert (external link) on Twitter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,024 views & 0 likes for this thread
Killing barred owls to save spotted owls....
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bushpilot
936 guests, 251 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.