An unusual alliance of Republican lawmakers and animal rights advocates is to create storm clouds along with others for a plan to protect owls threatened by killing more common owls.
Last August, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved plans to film about 450,000 Burleigh Owls in California, Oregon and Washington over 30 years. Burleed owls competed with spotted owls in the northern Pacific Northwest and spotted California owls, kicking them out of the territory.
Advocates of the approach, including conservation groups and well-known scientists, believe that ull is needed to avoid disastrous consequences for spotted owls.
However, the Union argues that the effort is too expensive, infeasible and inhuman. They have urged the Trump administration to cancel it, and lawmakers could pursue a reversal through special Congressional actions.
Last month, the Times cancelled three fukrote-related grants to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, totaling about $1.1 million, including one study to remove owls from more than 192,000 acres in Mendocino and Sonoma counties.
On December 13th, 2017, a female burred owl sits on a branch of a wooded hill outside Philomas, Oregon.
(Don Ryan/Applications)
Peter Tira, a spokesman for the state’s Wildlife Agency, said federal funds were allocated and the two got malfunctioned before they could never get off the ground. The other was almost complete when I finished collaborating with a University of Maryland biologist and a better understanding of the owl dispersion patterns in western forests.
“Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump, we are eliminating wasted programs, reducing unnecessary costs, and ensuring that all dollars serve a clear purpose,” a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in a statement when asked if the grant had ended.
Another lever is that Congress uses Congress’ review laws to completely overturn the owl murder plot.
The government’s Accountability Office concluded in a decision in late May that the plan would be subject to the law. This may also be used by the new presidential administration to reverse rules issued by federal agencies in the last month of previous administrations. Both council rooms must pass a joint resolution to revert it.
In the months leading up to GAO’s resolution, a bipartisan group of U.S. House members wrote two letters to the Secretary of the Interior to build a reason why the owl’s plans should not move forward. In total, 19 Republicans and 18 Democrats signed the signings, including seven California lawmakers – David Baradao (R-Hanford), Sidney Kamlager Dove (D-Los Angeles), Gil Cisneros (D-Covina), Josh Harder (D-Tracy), Linda T. Sanchez (D-whittier), admimtier (d-whittier) (d-whittier) and jim gryita (d-whittier). (d-merced).
Avid Trump supporter, Rep. Troy E. Nairs (R-Texas), signed the first letter, saying, “We are currently exploring other options to end this unnecessary plan.
Kamlager-Dove said he opposed killing some species earlier this year to preserve another species. “And as an animal lover, I cannot support the widespread massacre of these beautiful creatures,” she said.
If a resolution is introduced, passed and signed by President Trump, the plan will be over. The Fish and Wildlife Department will not allow similar rules to advance unless expressly permitted by Congress.
Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Information Center, helps reduce the population of owls and is known as the Congressional Review Act Yokai.
It is “an invasion of a field by the Congress that relies on high institutional expertise and scientific understanding,” he said. “It’s vibe vs science.”
A California spotted owl is shown in the Tahoe National Forest in California on July 12, 2004.
(Debra Reid/AP)
Wheeler said he believes the program is more likely to be stripped amid budget cuts than it would be eliminated through the law.
“If we don’t move forward with owl removal, it would mean the extinction of the patchy owls in the north and the extinction of the spotted owls in California,” he said.
Science is on its side, he said. Long-term field experiments have shown that spotted owl populations have been stable when owls are killed.
For Wayne Pasel, an animal welfare activist who opposes the owl cult plan, it’s a hopeful event.
“Even if they had full funds for this, I don’t think it could be successful,” said Pasel, president of Animal Wellness Action and the centre for the humanitarian economy. The land that requires control of prohibited owls is too vast, he said. And he said owls from elsewhere simply jump in and replace those that fell.
Just 3,000 spotted owls to the north are left on federal lands. Brown birds of prey with white spots are listed as being threatened under both California and federal endangered species laws.
Spotted owls in California are also in decline, with federal wildlife officials proposing to protect two groups of endangered species.
Both sides of the fierce debate agree that spotted owls are competing for nested places and food, such as forests and squirrels flying north.
Barred and spotted owls look similar and can even breed. However, barked owls become more aggressive and slightly larger. Furthermore, in addition to being more generalist when it comes to what they eat and where they live, they can make their fellow raptors muscular.
Federal wildlife officials and some conservationists consider bared owls to be invasive.
When Europeans settled the Great Plains, they suppressed the fire and planted trees.
“I would call this an invasion and I would call these non-native species,” Wheeler said.
Conversely, some people see the arrival of owls along the west coast as an extension of natural range.
There are also conflicting views on the costs of eradicating so many owls.
Opponents estimate that it is estimated from the $4.5 million contract awarded to Native American tribes in Northern California last year to the $4.5 million contract awarded to hunt around 1,500 banned owls over four years.
However, a 2024 research paper concluded that removal of prohibited owls in the northern spotted owl range would cost between $4.5 million and $12 million per year in the early stages and would likely decrease over time. At $12 million a year, the 30-year plan will run $360 million.
Pasel’s Center for Animal Wellness Action and Humanitarian Economics sued the Fish and Wildlife Service in Washington’s U.S. District Court over the plan. Animal friends, another animal welfare group, filed a lawsuit in Oregon.
Wheeler’s Environmental Information Center has stepped in litigation defending the plan, and these cases continue to move forward.
Source link
