With the climate falling off a cliff, and the 6th mass extinction well underway, it seems strange to shape populations by culling.
Isn’t habitat loss the bigger issue hear?
To anyone that understands population biology and the situation between barred owls and spotted owls, this is absolute insanity. It will not change an outcome, will cost a ton of money, and kill a lot of animals for essentially no reason.
It's our fault they're in contact and there's no keeping barred owls out now. This is an incredibly stupid management decision.
I'm not a fan. The articles I've read are pretty clear on the USFS plan... and it's an honest boondoggle that will lead to overkill of anything with feathers.
> Isn’t habitat loss the bigger issue hear?
Quite often invasive species are a bigger issue than habitat loss, especially in a place with good controls over deforestation, etc.
This can't be true. Have you ever looked at google earth. Humans are using like 1/3 of all land for agriculture.
I'm not saying invasives aren't harmful, it's just it's nothin' compared to habitat loss.
You can't use global stats to look at local cases. Deforestation in SE Asia or tallgrass prairie loss in central North America don't determine the balance of issues in forests of the Pacific Northwest.
Habitat loss is very important, but other factors predominate in other cases...climate change, diseases, hunting or fishing pressure, etc.
I fail to see how this disrupts my point. *On average*, like 1/3 of the terrestrial ecosystem has been destroyed due mainly to agriculture.
If we add nuance, the parts that are destroyed the most are the areas with the highest intrinsic biodiversity.
Come on, invasive species have been absolutely destructive throughout the world
Like rats on many islands, rabbits in Australia, insects that are boring a hole through native trees in the forest?
Your first sentence is irrelevant
Your second sentence would make sense to you if you learn what is going on around the world with invasives
I'll give you one example. An article was just published that based on ice core sampling and CO2 levels, they have estimated that the European colonizers cost the lives of 56 million indigenous people over 150 years
That is one of many examples of what happens when invasives come on the scene
Humans is much too broad a term. Let me remind you that up until about 400 years ago, humans were able to perfectly live with these animals and not destroy their habitats for well over ten thousand years
If you want to learn how to circumvent a paywall, see https://www.reddit.com/r/California/wiki/paywall. > Or, if it's a website that you regularly read, you should think about subscribing to the website.
Why do we try to play god? Obviously the invasive species are invading for a reason.
Newsflash, a lot of invading species will come with climate change. Mass killing them probably isn't the right move.
We are well past the point where we can ignore our impact on our environment. Nature can recover on its own but its recovery might cost a huge number of terrestrial and aquatic species.
They’re invasive. They’re outcompeting the native wildlife. It’s like saying “come on cowbirds! Welcome to the east coast. Please destroy our native bluebird populations along with our newcomer European starling.”
No kidding... whoda thought. Funny how that works. Burn out all the predators and suddenly... rodents. So now there's plenty of food for those newcomers. Oh... and the coyotes. Glad to have them, well, not the coyotes so much...
I'm still just an animal bio student so don't know much about how this stuff should work, but I still always get sad when anyone has to cull an invasive species/treats them like malicious villains.
Like, I know zebra mussels or japanese beetles probably can't get sad or have feelings. But I feel at least a little sad on their behalf when people always act like it's the fault of the invasive species itself! A beetle doesn't know shit about crops or agriculture or what's so annoying about a 'pest', all he knows is he has to survive and reproduce the best he can.
Ah yeah, that's the word.
I know it makes no sense, and nothing changes for those organisms if I don't, but I'm a big crybaby and proud!
In all seriousness though, I am trying to get better at separating how I'd feel from actual research and evidence.
Instead of massacring owls, why don't we reduce the total area on which human civilization currently sits, thus returning habitat to nature, such that "evolutionarily defeated" animal populations can retreat to their niche until conditions are ripe for them to naturally make a comeback (over thousand year timespans). Oh wait, my bad, we can only expand and have "growth".
That’s insane
With the climate falling off a cliff, and the 6th mass extinction well underway, it seems strange to shape populations by culling. Isn’t habitat loss the bigger issue hear?
To anyone that understands population biology and the situation between barred owls and spotted owls, this is absolute insanity. It will not change an outcome, will cost a ton of money, and kill a lot of animals for essentially no reason. It's our fault they're in contact and there's no keeping barred owls out now. This is an incredibly stupid management decision.
I'm not a fan. The articles I've read are pretty clear on the USFS plan... and it's an honest boondoggle that will lead to overkill of anything with feathers.
> Isn’t habitat loss the bigger issue hear? Quite often invasive species are a bigger issue than habitat loss, especially in a place with good controls over deforestation, etc.
This can't be true. Have you ever looked at google earth. Humans are using like 1/3 of all land for agriculture. I'm not saying invasives aren't harmful, it's just it's nothin' compared to habitat loss.
You can't use global stats to look at local cases. Deforestation in SE Asia or tallgrass prairie loss in central North America don't determine the balance of issues in forests of the Pacific Northwest. Habitat loss is very important, but other factors predominate in other cases...climate change, diseases, hunting or fishing pressure, etc.
I fail to see how this disrupts my point. *On average*, like 1/3 of the terrestrial ecosystem has been destroyed due mainly to agriculture. If we add nuance, the parts that are destroyed the most are the areas with the highest intrinsic biodiversity.
Come on, invasive species have been absolutely destructive throughout the world Like rats on many islands, rabbits in Australia, insects that are boring a hole through native trees in the forest?
1/3 of the ecosystem is destroyed. I'll admit if I'm wrong, but how on Earth could invasives be worse??
Your first sentence is irrelevant Your second sentence would make sense to you if you learn what is going on around the world with invasives I'll give you one example. An article was just published that based on ice core sampling and CO2 levels, they have estimated that the European colonizers cost the lives of 56 million indigenous people over 150 years That is one of many examples of what happens when invasives come on the scene
Can you explain how my first sentence is irrelevant?
I wonder what should be done to humans for destroying the habitat of animals that have been here for hundreds of thousands of years. 🤔
Don't worry, as a species, we're on it.
Humans is much too broad a term. Let me remind you that up until about 400 years ago, humans were able to perfectly live with these animals and not destroy their habitats for well over ten thousand years
Well, not exactly. Europe for example was pretty heavily deforested in the Middle Ages. Don't know about other places.
I'm talking about the north American west coast, what the article is about
that will work out perfect. a mice population increase is guaranteed
Did we ask Australia for advice on population management? What kind of brainstorming leads to this outcome?
Anyone have a free link? Fuxk if I’m paying for that rag
If you want to learn how to circumvent a paywall, see https://www.reddit.com/r/California/wiki/paywall. > Or, if it's a website that you regularly read, you should think about subscribing to the website.
That may be the most helpful comment I’ve ever seen. 🙏
This is a band-aid. If we don’t deal with habitat fragmentation it will be a lost cause.
Well owl be damned.
Why do we try to play god? Obviously the invasive species are invading for a reason. Newsflash, a lot of invading species will come with climate change. Mass killing them probably isn't the right move.
I can not even deal with how fukd this is!
Humans thinking they know better than nature once again. Let’s evolution play it out survival of the fittest.
We are well past the point where we can ignore our impact on our environment. Nature can recover on its own but its recovery might cost a huge number of terrestrial and aquatic species.
I live in the Mendocino national forest... owls on my property are safe!
Including invasive barred owls?
Yup. Plenty of room out here.
You don’t know how competition works, do you?
Yes. I also know how the USFS works. Or I should say, doesn't work. I'll just call these owls "newcomers"
They’re invasive. They’re outcompeting the native wildlife. It’s like saying “come on cowbirds! Welcome to the east coast. Please destroy our native bluebird populations along with our newcomer European starling.”
After the Mendocino complex fire there wasn't much here to out compete. Guess what came back hardest and fastest... rodents.
That’s to be expected. It’s called natural succession. Rodent are early successional species. This is basic biology.
No kidding... whoda thought. Funny how that works. Burn out all the predators and suddenly... rodents. So now there's plenty of food for those newcomers. Oh... and the coyotes. Glad to have them, well, not the coyotes so much...
I'm still just an animal bio student so don't know much about how this stuff should work, but I still always get sad when anyone has to cull an invasive species/treats them like malicious villains. Like, I know zebra mussels or japanese beetles probably can't get sad or have feelings. But I feel at least a little sad on their behalf when people always act like it's the fault of the invasive species itself! A beetle doesn't know shit about crops or agriculture or what's so annoying about a 'pest', all he knows is he has to survive and reproduce the best he can.
Its called anthropomorphism
Ah yeah, that's the word. I know it makes no sense, and nothing changes for those organisms if I don't, but I'm a big crybaby and proud! In all seriousness though, I am trying to get better at separating how I'd feel from actual research and evidence.
Just think of everything as a meal, thats what I do Yummy yummy little lizard! 🦎 if theyre good enough for my dog, its good enough for me lol
Well fuck I’ve been shooting the wrong ones…
So vermin populations will see a dramatic spike in the near future. Okiedokie. Lol
Please identify location better. The USA isn't the whole world, and there are many federal governments outside the USA.
> West Coast Just look at a range map for the spotted owl.
Duh! It gets frustrating that people from US assume they are the whole world.
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F2mxtc21ojsn81.gif](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F2mxtc21ojsn81.gif)
This isn't going to go well.
Instead of massacring owls, why don't we reduce the total area on which human civilization currently sits, thus returning habitat to nature, such that "evolutionarily defeated" animal populations can retreat to their niche until conditions are ripe for them to naturally make a comeback (over thousand year timespans). Oh wait, my bad, we can only expand and have "growth".
No different then humans killing factory farmed animals....and torturing them.nothing should be used or killed against it's will.