In November, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) announced plans to cull nearly 500,000 barred owls across the lush forests of the Pacific Northwest and California.
But by killing these owls, the agency hopes to: keep Although owls are different types of birds. Officials plan to eliminate parts of the rich northern spotted owl population over a 30-year period to create space and resources for the endangered northern spotted owl, but some of the time it will be removed from federal land. There are only about 4,000 birds left. The region's barred owls have faced many threats over the past few decades, including deforestation due to logging and competition from barred owls, which have been more successful at hunting than weaker birds and have adapted to different territories. cousin.
Scientists still don't know where or how the barred owl came from, but research shows that it began expanding its range westward at the same time as European settlement, and that anthropogenic changes have caused it to spread across the Great Plains and boreal forests. It is known that the northern habitat has changed. As a result, many say the great owl is an invasive species and must be removed to protect native species, NPR reports.
However, the USFWS culling plan has sparked a wave of backlash since it was announced. Just last week, dozens of wildlife groups released a letter condemning the effort, saying it “betrays a deliberate failure to foresee the far-reaching negative effects that such a plan is sure to come up against.” ' he claimed.
The plan also resurfaced long-standing debates about what makes a species “invasive” and how exotic plants and animals should be treated within ecosystems. Today, we'll take a deep dive into the details of the invasive debate and how it may impact future wildlife management.
What's your name? Author Charles Elton first used the term “invasion” to describe foreign plants and wildlife in his 1958 book The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants, The New York Times reported. Reporting.
Scientists have identified countless invasive species across the United States, from the cane toad in Florida to the claw-sized zebra mussels in the Great Lakes. Most often, these species are introduced by humans, who may accidentally introduce them during transportation or intentionally release them. While many invasive species are relatively harmless to ecosystems, others can have devastating consequences. For example, feral pigs destroy crops and spread disease to at least 35 U.S. states, according to the Department of Agriculture.
A 2021 study found that invasive species have cost North America more than $26 billion annually since 2010. Additionally, a growing body of research shows that climate impacts such as drought and fire may create ideal conditions for invasive species to thrive and exploit environments. New routes for alien species to invade different ecosystems.
The United Nations considers invasive species to be one of the five main drivers of global biodiversity loss. But Sebuan Bliss, a doctoral candidate at Radboud University in the Netherlands who studies animal and biodiversity governance, says it's important to remember that these animals are themselves biodiversity. Stated.
“The language we use determines what courses of action are considered acceptable and appropriate,” Bliss told me via email. “When we call something invasive, we may show less concern for their welfare.”
Bliss pointed to certain inhumane methods of killing invasive species, such as traps that were once used in the Netherlands to kill muskrats by trapping them in water until they drowned. Other researchers also question the term “invasive.”
“That's not to say it's not descriptively true,” said William Lin, a researcher at Clark University in Massachusetts who studies animals. “Non-native species can invade an area and cause damage; It symbolizes the meaning of invasion.” And he taught me about the ethics of sustainability over the phone. “However, we often classify species as 'invasive' simply because they are non-native or introduced, or we are blind to the term 'invasive' when it is not clear what is actually going on. It's a problem to make strong statements.”
Owl conundrum: The northern spotted owl is listed as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, and the U.S. military in Japan is legally obligated to protect it. This led the government to enact regulations restricting the areas in which timber companies could log trees, sparking opposition from the industry and local residents due to the economic impact.
The Service has now determined that this cull is necessary to fulfill this obligation.
“Cutting out barred owls is not something the military takes lightly,” Jody Delavan, public information officer for the USFWS in Oregon, told the Guardian. “However, the Service has a legal and ethical responsibility to do everything we can to restore the northern spotted owl population. Unless the invasive barred owl is managed, it will remain on the federal list.” The northern spotted owl will become extinct throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
The U.S. government has previously experimented with culling barred owls, but on a much smaller scale than the new USFWS project. More than a decade ago, a research team led by the U.S. Geological Survey killed more than 2,400 spotted owls, an effort that could help temporarily stabilize the spotted owl population over the next five years, according to a 2021 study. It turned out that
At the time, Lin was a member of the government's Bird Owl Stakeholders Group, which conducted an ethics review before implementing the project.
Despite the group's “deep discomfort with killing spotted owls”, Lin said he believed thousands of spotted owls needed to be culled to save the spotted owl species. . But overall, he said, the experiment was a “failure” because while it slowed the spotted owl's decline, it didn't provide a long-term solution.
“It's a completely different situation now,” Lin said, adding that he doesn't think the new culling will save the spotted owl.
Wildlife managers have used similar strategies to tackle other invasive species and enlisted the public's help in controlling populations. In my home state of Pennsylvania, a widespread “Stomp and Smash” campaign to eliminate the invasive spotted orchid fly in 2022 includes T-shirt merchandise. Now, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is inviting individuals to hunt non-native Burmese pythons throughout the state after completing a training course.
Lin said invasive species management should be decided on a “case-by-case” basis, and the main factors to consider are “effectiveness and ethics.”
“There is no reason for moral panic because a harmless non-native species is creating a niche in a new ecosystem,” he said. “If we try to kill “alien species'' with no real benefit, we not only have the ethics of harming those individuals and social groups themselves, but we also have no real purpose to benefit them. There is also the problem of doing so.”
More top climate news
On April 10, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the nation's first limits on “permanent chemicals” in drinking water, known as PFAS. The ruling requires utilities to reduce per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances to “the lowest levels that can be reliably measured,” writes Michael Phillis of the Associated Press.
Biden administration says these limits will help protect 100 million people from PFAS exposure, thought to be associated with immune system problems, developmental delays, and breast cancer. But this won't happen overnight. The public water system has three years to test her for six types of PFAS and five years to bring the levels down to new standards. Some estimates suggest it could cost up to $4 billion to implement technology to remove PFAS from faucets, writes National Geographic's Sara Novak.
“We have learned the lesson over the past few decades that once these compounds enter the environment, they are very difficult to remove,” said Scott Belcher, director of the PFAS Environmental Health Effects Center at North Carolina State University in Raleigh. ” he said. he told National Geographic.
In other PFAS news, states are starting to require clothing companies to phase out the chemicals completely. However, Bloomberg reports that this will not solve the problem of harmful substances remaining in old clothes. Buying used clothes may be a more sustainable option than buying new clothes, but experts are concerned about the long-term shelf life of chemicals in traditional products. .
“Once it's on clothing, it's very difficult to identify or treat,” Iliki, a scientist and project manager at the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, told Bloomberg. Mr. Yiliqi added that individuals should ensure that he does not purchase new or used products that are known to contain PFAS.
kylie price
reporter
Kylie Price is a reporter for Inside Climate News with a particular interest in wildlife, ocean health, food systems and climate change. She writes her ICN newsletter, Today's Climate, which features the most pressing environmental news each week.
She earned a master's degree in science journalism from New York University and a bachelor's degree in biology from Wake Forest University. Her work has appeared in National Geographic, Time, Scientific American, and more. She is a former Pulitzer Press Fellow who spent a month in Thailand covering the intersection of Buddhism and the country's environmental movement.
