Spotted Owl Update

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I cut a couple paragraph out that got my attention.
First one is this,

"The American Forest Resource Council, a timber-industry group, was skeptical that so-called ecological logging would produce significant timber or jobs. At the same time, the plan has the potential to double the number of acres designated as critical habitat, said Tom Partin, the group's president."

So they are going to double the amount of critical owl habitat. That sounds like a job killer to me.

Here's another,

"Just how many barred owls would be killed and where under the new plan remains undecided, although officials said hundreds of birds are likely to be killed with shotguns. The plan also calls for nonlethal removal of the barred owls, by capturing and relocating them or placing in them in permanent captivity."

Two things out of this. First, they are going to relocate them. I mean get real. Where too? East of the Mississippi?
Second, I hope people realize they will now have to shoot Barred Owls forever. These are going to be a permanent expense. They won't wipe them out and they'll have to keep shooting some every year to keep the Spotted Owls treading water.
Maybe this is what they mean when they talk about job creation.

My view is it is becoming obvious that the dissaperance of the Spotted Owl was and is a natural thing. We should get out of the way and let nature take its course.
 
I quote myself, regarding the same article, posted elsewhere:

Not that I defend those jack-bones, but I do feel compelled to point out that it was NEVER about the damned bird; it was always about the habitat. The issue here is to not log in places where the tree-huggers say not to log. The bird is just the unwitting figurehead for these efforts. This feels like a re-run because it is; the "habitat" that would be "protected" is already protected, and the barred owls are just a new face to the controversy. EXAMPLE: the ownership I work on has NEVER had spotted owls found within its boundaries, yet USFWS insisted that we preserve "habitat" as a "corridor" for migration between Olympic and Cascade populations which may or may not exist. Thus, we accepted restrictions to protect birds which were acknowledged to be imaginary!
 
It sounds like the current administrations efforts at social engineering extend to our feathered friends as well.

I doubt if I will live to see the Barred Owl on the endangered list but it will be the ultimate irony when it happens.
 
It'll end up where everything else does, the Ninth Circuit Court.

Now as for the
"nonlethal removal of the barred owls, by capturing and relocating them or placing in them in permanent captivity"

Seems like Seattle (all of it) would make an ideal sanctuary for a place of permanent captivity, since a while back in another thread Seatte was returned to all forest land.
This should be done with large nets and heliocopters. The Coast Guard should be involved in the search and rescue effort. Bet a tally counter job would be lucrative.
 
Eh, once the Barred Owl starts interbreeding with Spotted Owls, the whole argument and protective measures in favor of the Spotted Owl (and their habitat) should be rendered invalid. But that'd be too easy. No one in government does things the easy way.
 
well, Pigeons and Starlings should get preferential treatment too. Feeding stations should be set up in the median of I-5 so they don't run out of food during annual migration. 1/2 half of our Fisheries take should be set aside for Sea Gulls, too.
 
Back
Top