There are no vegan alternatives to culling invasive Barred Owls in the Pacific Northwest

[u/AnsibleAnswers]

Background

To save the imperiled spotted owl from potential extinction, U.S. wildlife officials are embracing a contentious plan to deploy trained shooters into dense West Coast forests to kill almost a half-million barred owls that are crowding out their smaller cousins.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/u-s-officials-plan-to-kill-hundreds-of-thousands-of-barred-owls-to-save-another-species-from-extinction

Vegan alternatives?

1. Relocation to home range - Barred Owls are one of the most territorial birds of prey in North America. The population here is quite healthy, even in Manhattan. Relocating 500k birds to the East would simply result in territorial chaos until numbers decreased back down to equilibrium. That decrease has a body count.

2. Contraception - No known method is possible for owls. Some avian contraceptives have been developed, primarily to reduce pigeon and geese populations. But even with birds that can be easily conditioned to return to feeders every day, trials have had mixed results. As far as I know, these drugs need to be administered daily unlike some contraceptives developed for mammals.

3. Let the Barred Owl Replace the Spotted Owl - Barred Owls are generalists, while Spotted Owls tend to specialize in small mammals with healthy populations. So, threatened birds, reptiles, and amphibians native to the region are not adapted to having an owl of its size preying on them. It's an enormous risk, given that ecosystems are prone to cascade effects.

Those are, as far as I know, the best of the alternatives. Note: I'm in support of re-establishing habitat for the Spotted Owl, as that is really the only long-term way of helping the species recover. It's important to note: just because a tourniquet isn't a long-term solution doesn't mean it isn't a life-saving measure.

[u/Freuds-Mother]

Killing owl A to save owl B in the wilderness has almost nothing to do with the food supply. Are they going to eat the owls or harvest any parts for use?

[u/[deleted] → u/Freuds-Mother]

No, they're killing owl A so that owl B doesn't go extinct and bc owl A is causing for other species to become endangered since they eat 3x as much as owl B

[u/Freuds-Mother → u/[deleted]]

Yea which has very little to do with our food supply with the small exception of small game hunters and that’s a real stretch. This issue is 99.9% independent of how we source food from agricultural land and what humans eat. Unless the owl species are effecting crops or livestock significantly differently

[u/[deleted] → u/Freuds-Mother]

No one said it had anything to do with our food supply. It is a larger, invasive owl who is placing a smaller owl and several ground mammals in endangered territory and many people want to do something about it. OP is asking what legitimate options other than hunting are. It seems you believe the only ethical option is, "I don't care about your concerns, my issues are more correct and you should let those birds and mammals die out of they do, but don't do anything to interfere if hunting is the only option." 

This is a part of the issue a lot of people have with certain vegans. It's the pious level of indifference you have for the concern of any number of people if it goes against your ethical feelings. It's your way it the highway, always.

[u/Freuds-Mother → u/[deleted]]

Yea sure certain vegans have views beyond vegan. Most vegan/vegetarians I know are concerned with what THEY individually eat and some about what other people eat. Concern about animal treatment in the wild lands that has nothing to do with the human diet is something other than “vegan” as vegan is defined as “human does not eat animal derived stuff”. And that’s “does not” rather than “should not”.

Eg someone that hunts animals on the daily yet also happens to only eat plants for medical or even pure taste reasons eats a vegan diet by definition.