... to save the even more endangered Spotted Owl.
[IMG]http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_404h/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/08/23/Weekend/Images/owl.JPG[/IMG]
[release]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.
The government set aside millions of acres of forest to protect the owl, but the bird’s population continues to decline — a 40 percent slide in 25 years.
A plan announced Tuesday would designate habitat considered critical for the bird’s survival, while allowing logging to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire and to create jobs. Habitat loss and competition from barred owls are the biggest threats to the spotted owl.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called the draft plan “a science-based approach to forestry that restores the health of our lands and wildlife and supports jobs and revenue for local communities.”
By removing selected barred owls and better managing forests, officials can give communities, foresters and land managers in three states important tools to promote healthier and more productive forests, Salazar said.
The new plan, which replaces a 2008 Bush administration plan that was tossed out in federal court, affects millions of acres of national, state and private forest land in Washington, Oregon and Northern California.
The plan to kill barred owls would not be the first time the federal government has authorized killing of one species to help another. California sea lions that feast on threatened salmon in the Columbia River have been killed in recent years after efforts to chase them away or scare them failed.
The U.S. Agriculture Department kills thousands of wild animals each year — mostly predators such as coyotes — to protect livestock. Other animals, including bears, wolves and raccoons also are killed through the program.
The latest plan for spotted owls was accompanied by a presidential memorandum directing Interior to take a number of steps before the plan is finalized, including providing clear direction for how logging can be conducted within areas designated as critical habitat and conducting an economic analysis at the same time critical habitat areas are proposed.
Officials acknowledge that the plan to kill barred owls creates an ethical dilemma, but say an experiment on private land in northern California has shown promising results. Spotted owls have returned to historic territories after barred owls were removed.
Salazar and other officials stressed the new plan’s job-creation component, noting that for the first time logging would be allowed in areas designated as critical habitat for the owl. Previous plans had prohibited logging in areas designated as critical habitat.
“Appropriate timber harvests consistent with ecological forestry principles (should) be encouraged,” the Interior Department said in a statement.
The American Forest Resource Council, a timber industry group, was skeptical that so-called ecological logging would produce a significant amount of timber or jobs. At the same time, the plan has the potential to double the amount of acres designated as critical habitat, said Tom Partin, the group’s president.[/release]
[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ap-newsbreak-obama-administration-plan-would-kill-rival-bird-to-save-spotted-owl/2012/02/28/gIQAvxAUgR_story.html?tid=pm_pop"]Source.[/URL]
Good, fucking owls.
They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4[/media]
No seriously, there is more important shit to worry about than [b]Owls.[/b]
[QUOTE=TerabyteS_;34927239]They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive[/QUOTE]
ahahaha
[QUOTE=TerabyteS_;34927239]They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive[/QUOTE]implying we didn't already wipe out "nature" entirely
[QUOTE=TerabyteS_;34927239]They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive[/QUOTE]
yes, that's why 60 years ago the deer population was completely killed off when the government declared it acceptable for hunters to control their population.
I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of every single species to ever exist has died out or split into another species.
Once you realize this, one becomes jaded to the idea of trying to "save an endangered species."
I don't mean to say people's efforts are not laudable, just that in the end, it's more trouble than it's worth.
[QUOTE=Levithan;34927320]I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of every single species to ever exist has died out or split into another species.
Once you realize this, one becomes jaded to the idea of trying to "save an endangered species."
I don't mean to say people's efforts are not laudable, just that in the end, it's more trouble than it's worth.[/QUOTE]
It's called diversity and it's needed.
[QUOTE=Levithan;34927320]I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of every single species to ever exist has died out or split into another species.
Once you realize this, one becomes jaded to the idea of trying to "save an endangered species."
I don't mean to say people's efforts are not laudable, just that in the end, it's more trouble than it's worth.[/QUOTE]
Except it's usually our fault that species become endangered in the first place anymore
I'm all for saving animals that are endangered because of poaching or deforestation but if it is just another more sucessful species taking over then that's just nature doing what it does.
[QUOTE=Levithan;34927320]I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of every single species to ever exist has died out or split into another species.
Once you realize this, one becomes jaded to the idea of trying to "save an endangered species."
I don't mean to say people's efforts are not laudable, just that in the end, it's more trouble than it's worth.[/QUOTE]
I don't really see why we should sit around and just let a species go extinct, if there's something we could be doing to help.
Unless that species is some kind of giant, super poisonous spider that was capable of flight and just hated humans with a passion.
Although some species of animals have died out due to the rise of humans, others are adapting or have already adapted to the new conditions humans have created.
If a species starts to die out because of natural causes, then you aren't supposed to help it.
If a species starts to die out because of humans, then you are supposed to help it.
That is the end of discussion.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;34927404]I'm all for saving animals that are endangered because of poaching or deforestation but if it is just another more sucessful species taking over then that's just nature doing what it does.[/QUOTE]
It's debated whether or not the barred owl's recent expansion west into spotted owl territory is due to human interference.
[url]http://www.nature.nps.gov/YearInReview/yir2000/pages/02_nps_science/02_03_gremel.html[/url]
"hey man some endangered species is being pushed out by a species more adapt at living than it."
"let's kill the adapt one, what could possibly go wrong?"
In Britain the grey squirrel is classed as vermin and you can legally kill them because the red squirrel is becoming more endangered because of them
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8el_P4yvfc[/media]
[editline]29th February 2012[/editline]
Obama is clearly the secret king of the beavers.
[video=youtube;ApFB-GylZNQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApFB-GylZNQ[/video]
Out of all the Futurama clips, I never thought I'd be able to use this one day :v:
[QUOTE=TerabyteS_;34927239]They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive[/QUOTE]
Barred owls shoulsnt be in the area anyway
[QUOTE=Grabigel;34927511]If a species starts to die out because of natural causes, then you aren't supposed to help it.
If a species starts to die out because of humans, then you are supposed to help it.
That is the end of discussion.[/QUOTE]
Says who? To be honest we can do whatever we want. There isnt some 'ultimate rule' that says we never allowed to interfere with nature, after all we are also part of it.
The country is going down a triple somersalted cartwheeled shithole and they are worrying about owls holy shit, why not put toddlers in charge of the government instead since its the goddamn same thing?
Unless i missed it the article doesn't mention why the barred owls are there, but i think it's safe to assume they were introduced or driven there by humans, and thus it is the humans that should atleast see if anything can be done to minimize damage done.
We're doing it wrong. Let nature take its course.
I don't get why people are trying to save species that are endangered BECAUSE of reasons aside from human interaction. It's survival of the fittest, just let the unfit die out.
Owls seem like cool pets.
[QUOTE=Tigster;34927395]Except it's usually our fault that species become endangered in the first place anymore[/QUOTE]
yes you're absolutely right humans are responsible for >90% of all the species that have ever lived now being extinct
[B]WE KILLED THEM[/B]
25 species go extinct per day; [I]24.9 due to humans![/I] [B]WE'RE KILLING LIFE ON EARTH[/B]
[QUOTE=TerabyteS_;34927239]They're stupid if they think they're better than nature at deciding which species should survive[/QUOTE]
Nature can suck my human dick.
Owls are not cute they are creatures of pure cunning and evil
and they spit out fucking bones of the of the other animals they massacred.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
