At 07:47 AM 1/25/99 -0800, Bruce & Michele wrote:

>In talking to the people here I find that most of them believe the Owl can
>thrive in 2nd or 3rd growth forests. But everything I read from the pro-owl
>side says they cannot. But I also seem to be seeing a lack of research done
>on the issue.

>Does anyone know of any real research that they indeed need Old Growth
>Forests to survive?

There's TONS of "real research". Keep in mind that "survive" has several
meanings depending on context. To the best of our knowledge, the long term
survival of northern spotted owl populations in our types of forests require
old-growth. Individuals may survive, pair, nest and occasionally produce
young in younger forests but that is not the issue. They do not reproduce
at a level necessary to sustain the population in our young forests. Make
sure your questioners understand that survival of the OR/WA population, not
individuals, are what this is about.

> And any information about the claims of Simpson Timber
>that they banded 600+ Owls in 2nd growth forests and stated they had the
>highest reproductive rates in 35-50 year old redwood stands

Yes, northern spotted owls do OK in certain redwoood 2nd growth forests.

The reasons this is true have also been researched and are well-known. These
are different forests than our forests, which is why they're "down there",
not "up here".

Ask the folks in Aberdeen to take you out to the local 2nd growth
REDWOOD forest when you're confronted with this.


- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net