• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

feds are going to kill owls to save owls

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.

"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.

Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News
 

ChrisL

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
47,571
Reaction score
16,958
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.

"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.

Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News

Sometimes we might interfere TOO much IMO.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I wanna hear from the board expert on owls before commenting:mrgreen:
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,981
Reaction score
33,900
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.

"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.

Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News

Now that they've figured that out, can they get out of the way and let the loggers go back to work? Maybe that would help unemployment, bring down the cost of lumber, and maybe open the way to clear off some of the overgrown forests before there is yet another devastating wildfire.

No, come to think of it, that would be logical and rational, and therefore beyond the scope of Washington politics.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
34,037
Reaction score
16,915
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I remember when the spotted owl issue started. Some news channel was interviewing loggers and tree huggers on the issue.

This old logger made a statement that has stuck with me for many years.
He said, " I got one question for them there environmentalists," "where did the spotted owl live before there was old growth?"

Some people seem to forget that in some forest regimes, one must think in hundreds of years for a life cycle. and old growth does not live forever. all trees eventually die. Some sooner than others.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
21,061
Reaction score
8,221
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
More Con games-
The logging industry was not 'devastated' by restricting the wholesale harvesting of lumber for an owl. It was restricted to save the salmon industry and maintain a sustainable industry. Fact is the logging industry was fouling water supplies far more than hurting any owls. But rather than admit that, the CONs ignore that and focus on an owl.

The logging industry lost 90% of it's jobs between 1947 and 1964. These days loggers are losing jobs as increased mechanization has gained ground in the industry- just like every other industry.

So just how much land was barred from harvest because of the spotted owl? Most harvest management policies were passed before any Owls were thought to be in any danger. To be honest about the regulations it simply bans clear cut logging of 70 acres per documented nest on private land and the harvesting of old growth timber on federal lands. Biologists figure 1,500 acres is the actual habitat for a breeding pair but yanno how it goes when it's bird vs Weyerhaeuser.

Another CON game is the 'one thing' con. It takes FAR more than a nesting site to ensure a species survives. Invader species that are in no danger of extinction can devastate native species. Protecting natives from invaders is part and parcel of any CONservation plan, just some CONs don't like to admit it.

What the PNW has resisted is what most other timber regions have already adopted- you have to base the industry on sustainable harvest management- like Weyerhaeuser does here in SE Oklahoma. The days of free range grazing is over on the Great Plains, time for clear cut logging on Public lands has come.

Blame a bird or blame a fish... don't matter.... :peace
 

DiAnna

Hooter Babe
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
52,601
Reaction score
29,746
Location
Northern California
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
uncaptioned-k593I-50c8f0af23f47.jpeg
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Now that they've figured that out, can they get out of the way and let the loggers go back to work? Maybe that would help unemployment, bring down the cost of lumber, and maybe open the way to clear off some of the overgrown forests before there is yet another devastating wildfire.

No, come to think of it, that would be logical and rational, and therefore beyond the scope of Washington politics.

This is one of those times I realize most of the people on this forum are not in the west they just yawn about this stuff
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
More Con games-
The logging industry was not 'devastated' by restricting the wholesale harvesting of lumber for an owl. It was restricted to save the salmon industry and maintain a sustainable industry. Fact is the logging industry was fouling water supplies far more than hurting any owls. But rather than admit that, the CONs ignore that and focus on an owl.

The logging industry lost 90% of it's jobs between 1947 and 1964. These days loggers are losing jobs as increased mechanization has gained ground in the industry- just like every other industry.

So just how much land was barred from harvest because of the spotted owl? Most harvest management policies were passed before any Owls were thought to be in any danger. To be honest about the regulations it simply bans clear cut logging of 70 acres per documented nest on private land and the harvesting of old growth timber on federal lands. Biologists figure 1,500 acres is the actual habitat for a breeding pair but yanno how it goes when it's bird vs Weyerhaeuser.

Another CON game is the 'one thing' con. It takes FAR more than a nesting site to ensure a species survives. Invader species that are in no danger of extinction can devastate native species. Protecting natives from invaders is part and parcel of any CONservation plan, just some CONs don't like to admit it.

What the PNW has resisted is what most other timber regions have already adopted- you have to base the industry on sustainable harvest management- like Weyerhaeuser does here in SE Oklahoma. The days of free range grazing is over on the Great Plains, time for clear cut logging on Public lands has come.

Blame a bird or blame a fish... don't matter.... :peace

Too stupid and misinformed to respond to.:roll:
 

Gathomas88

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
28,659
Reaction score
18,803
Location
Charleston, South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.

"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.

Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News

It's just another example of government doing what government does best; micromanaging things that rather clearly do not need to be micromanaged, and creating more problems than it solves in the process.

Nothing to see here. Move along.
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's just another example of government doing what government does best; micromanaging things that rather clearly do not need to be micromanaged, and creating more problems than it solves in the process.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

I'm curios what the cost will be per owl to kill 3,600 of them. I'm guessing around a million per owl when you figure in all the so called studies.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,981
Reaction score
33,900
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I hear the meat is tough and stringy.:lol:

But, if they're willing to split that cool million per bird with me 50/50, then I'll put them in a pressure cooker, and maybe feed them to Congress. I'll tell them it's a power lunch.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
27,903
Reaction score
18,378
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This is one of those times I realize most of the people on this forum are not in the west they just yawn about this stuff
Believe me, we experience the same thing on the eastern side - just not in the volume you guys in the west do.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
27,903
Reaction score
18,378
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm curios what the cost will be per owl to kill 3,600 of them. I'm guessing around a million per owl when you figure in all the so called studies.
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.
 

polgara

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
20,215
Reaction score
17,786
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.

We had the same thing happen here. The deer population had increased to he point that there was not enough vegetation available to keep them all fed, and many were starving. And this was in a 1000 acre park. The "poor little deer" crowd that objected to the humane killing quickly changed their minds when it was learned that the meat would be available for free to anyone who signed up. Then it was, "put me on the list!" Human nature at its finest? :thumbdown:

Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
 

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
12,895
Reaction score
2,909
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.

actually species diversification tends to be higher on public and private lands where use is high, than national parks, due to the fact the deer tend to over graze the later when their populations are not controlled. And there has been a clear shift in environmental protection that takes account for economic benefit in the protection models.

The "leave mother earth alone" mantra of the brain dead hippies is pretty much on the historical trash pile at this point
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
27,903
Reaction score
18,378
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We had the same thing happen here. The deer population had increased to he point that there was not enough vegetation available to keep them all fed, and many were starving. And this was in a 1000 acre park. The "poor little deer" crowd that objected to the humane killing quickly changed their minds when it was learned that the meat would be available for free to anyone who signed up. Then it was, "put me on the list!" Human nature at its finest? :thumbdown:

Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
Isn't that funny? The same is true of logging here. There are rabid environmentalists that want the forests to remain untouched, until their house is threatened by fire. The lack of understanding of forest management is astounding in these types, but they desperately want to maintain that untouched look for their own self-gratification. The tracts I logged in the national forrest 20 years ago are impossible to distinguish from the surrounding forrest now. This fact is completely lost on the tree huggers.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
27,903
Reaction score
18,378
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
actually species diversification tends to be higher on public and private lands where use is high, than national parks, due to the fact the deer tend to over graze the later when their populations are not controlled. And there has been a clear shift in environmental protection that takes account for economic benefit in the protection models.

The "leave mother earth alone" mantra of the brain dead hippies is pretty much on the historical trash pile at this point
Agreed. We should manage what we have here and remember that without that responsible management, we will lose it, and a piece of ourselves in the process.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
21,061
Reaction score
8,221
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Too stupid and misinformed to respond to.:roll:

More like your CON game falls apart when facts are applied and you just have to walk away with a snitty little comment. Fact is the question is Clear Cutting the last of the old growth timber on TAXPAYER land. Not YOUR private property and not Weyerhaeuser's land but everyone's land. You living next door to the timber and drooling at the chance to cut down the old growth trees is as meaningful as a city guy wanting to cut down park trees for firewood. :roll:

Fact is the private sector has had a crappy track record managing natural resources. From denuded hillsides around western silver mines to desertification of the short grass prairies of New Mexico.

Fact is the salmon streams were being lost as silt from run-off was choking the gravel beds the fish need to lay eggs.

Here in Oklahoma we have 'Gubmint' regulations restricting the land we can plow. After the Dust Bowl marginal land was removed from cultivation and the moldboard plow is a historical relic only used to rebuild the terraces we use to control run-off, through younger farmers are using tilt blade graders for the job. We have had devastating droughts of late, the worst in my lifetime, and yet we have had no dust bowl- mostly because of 'Gubmint' restrictions on plowing. Due to the continuing drought we have the lowest herd numbers since the 50's- another drought period BTW.

But we don't have a dust bowl.

Fact is a few CON men want to cut down the last of the old growth timber for their own profit on TAXPAYER land- the ultimate example of a greedy, self centered TAKER if ever there was one! :shock:

If these CONs had their way the Sequoia National Forest would be a parking lot. :doh
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
26,371
Reaction score
12,616
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
actually species diversification tends to be higher on public and private lands where use is high, than national parks, due to the fact the deer tend to over graze the later when their populations are not controlled. And there has been a clear shift in environmental protection that takes account for economic benefit in the protection models.

The "leave mother earth alone" mantra of the brain dead hippies is pretty much on the historical trash pile at this point

Only because wolves and cougars are no longer around in most cases. Allow them to come back the population of deer will be controlled.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Isn't that funny? The same is true of logging here. There are rabid environmentalists that want the forests to remain untouched, until their house is threatened by fire. The lack of understanding of forest management is astounding in these types, but they desperately want to maintain that untouched look for their own self-gratification. The tracts I logged in the national forrest 20 years ago are impossible to distinguish from the surrounding forrest now. This fact is completely lost on the tree huggers.

most environmentalist extremists tend to be urban yuppies just as most animal rights fanatics think Bambi was a documentary
 
Top Bottom