Tweeters,

Federal agencies have long been removing and killing other species to save habitats as well as endangered species. I believe in the case of the Barred Owl it only seems "highly interventionist" and "controversial" because of the charismatic nature of the species being killed. Brown-headed Cowbirds have been trapped and killed by the thousands each year in Texas, Oklahoma, and Michigan to save endangered Black-capped Vireos and Golden-cheeked and Kirtland's Warblers. Sea lions (protected by Marine Mammal Protection Act) are routinely trapped and sometimes shot for predating on endangered salmon stacked up below dams. Golden Eagles were trapped and removed from the Channel Islands to reduce hunting pressures on the endangered Island Foxes living there. These are just a few I can think of off the top of my head and I'm sure 100's of more examples could be dredged up.

The fact is that Barred Owl expansion into the Pacific Northwest has largely been assisted by anthropogenic effects and there is a wealth of scientific literature to back that statement up. So if we want Spotted Owls to be around for our kids and grandkids we are going to need to take drastic and expensive measures to ensure their persistence in the next 200 or so years the old-growth habitat recovers. This well illustrates the fact that leaving ecosystems intact is far more efficient and less expensive then trying to piece back together.

However, if your argument is built on the premise that humans are indeed a "natural" part of the landscape and the repercussions of our activities (e.g. Barred Owl invasion) are natural, then I would agree that killing Barred Owls is an interventionist approach. However, if that argument holds then we should not manage for endangered species or any species at all. If the "machinery" of habitat and species management is shut down I'm afraid there would a sweeping wave of extinctions across the country. There are dozens of ecosystems and thousands of species that depend on our management to persist. In my mind killing 4,650 Barred Owls is no different than spraying a south Puget Sound prairie invaded by tall oatgrass with a grass-specific herbicide so that endangered prairie birds and butterflies may flourish there. Both are unpleasant but necessary under the federal policy (Endangered Species Act) that reflects our value to prevent the loss of species at the hand of man.

Cheers,



Tyler L Hicks
Master's Student
Washington State University - Vancouver

E-mail: tyler_hicks at wsu.edu
Website: www.thingswithwings.org

"Back off man, I'm a scientist!" - Bill Murray, Ghostbusters




> From: dcanning at igc.org
> To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:59:44 -0800
> Subject: [Tweeters] "Killing Barred Owls to Help Spotted Owls"
>
> Tweets -
>
> Today's Seattle Times carries a very brief article on a draft
> environmental impact statement in preparation by the US Fish & Wildlife
> Service in Oregon addressing the proposed shooting of Barred Owls to
> benefit Spotted Owls. Ultimately, this program could be expanded to
> Washington and northern California, which could result in the killing
> of 1,200 to 1,500 Barred Owls.
>
> The Barred Owl - Spotted Owl debate has been going on for decades; this
> is simply the latest grasping at straws.
>
> The two most recent issues of Northwestern Naturalist carry a two-part
> paper titled: "Killing Barred Owls to Help Spotted Owls I: A Global
> Perspective" (91(2): 107 - 133), and "Killing Barred Owls to Help
> Spotted Owls II: Implications for Many Other Range-expanding Species
> (91(3): 251 - 270).
>
> The abstract for Part I reads (in part): "Barred Owls expanded their
> range to include western North America and have been competing with
> federally threatened Northern Spotted Owls for a few decades. To help
> protect Spotted Owls, the US Fish and Wildlife Service is considering
> conducting a 3- to 10-y study in which as many as 2150 to 4650 Barred
> Owls would be killed and, possibly, conducted long-term management of
> Barred Owls. ...If the precedent-setting removal study as described
> here is implemented,it would, during its 1st year, result in the death
> of 36 times more raptors than in all other conservation-based projects
> combined in the United States and its territories, and 84 times more
> raptors than the largest ongoing effort worldwide. This study could
> cost $1 million annually; simplifying the cost to dollars per Barred
> Owl killed approximates $700 per Barred Owl for the first year and
> $2800 per Barred Owl for each subsequent year."
>
> The abstract for Part II reads (in part): "...I present information
> concerning how frequently range expansions of North American birds and
> other factors may precipitate similar management issues in the near
> future. ... If thousands of Barred Owls are killed because they
> expanded their range and are competing with a species of concern, it
> seems likely USFWS soon would need to consider whether to lethally
> intervene between many other species of native birds due to the high
> frequency and large extent of range expansions..."
>
> The author, Kent B. Livezey, is a US Fish and Wildlife Service
> employee.
>
> These papers describe an interesting potential departure in wildlife
> management philosophy, one that is highly interventionist, and very
> controversial within in federal wildlife management community. Livezey
> presents a very professional discussion of the matter, one which also
> does us the service of placing the proposal into a more public forum
> than federal government documents.
>
> Northwestern Naturalist is published by the Society for Northwestern
> Vertebrate Biology (http://www.thesnvb.org/; it is the successor
> publication to The Murrelet, published by the Pacific Northwest Bird
> and Mammal Society, predecessor to the SNVB. Copies of the Northwestern
> Naturalist should be available at the library of any academic
> institution which has an ornithology program.
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> *************************
> Douglas Canning
> Olympia, Washington
> dcanning at scattercreek.com
> dcanning at igc.org
> *************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters