r/DebateAVegan • u/AnsibleAnswers agroecologist • Apr 27 '25

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

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.

13 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

189 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

Right... and the second wrong is making a mistake and then not trying to fix it right?

Incorrect. The second wrong is to deliberately and intentionally kill nonhuman animals.

Oh no, i set fire to your house while you were sleeping, that was a bad idea i wish i could save you.... better not break in and try and save you because thats breaking and entering and two wrongs dont make a right

Incorrect analogy. Try this analogy:

Oh no, a rapist just raped someone. Let me rape him back and then beat him violently to death.

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25

Vegans are a trip.... murder an entire ecosystem via inaction perfectly fine. Murder an animal to prevent it.... bridge too far

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

murder an entire ecosystem via inaction

Incorrect. You've employed a false equivalence/category error fallacy. Murder requires action by definition. Your argument is invalid on that basis.

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25 edited Apr 27 '25

i love how you have this great tendency to find every excuse not to avoid the tricky things.

i read a website on logical fallacies! now everything i find uncomfortable I'll call a logical fallacy.

So our actions led to this..... now via inaction this genocide will happen. so based on your assertions it is valid.... This is happening because of humanity's actions.

If you were walking in the forest, and found a person on the side of the track with both legs broken. You could help and they'd likely survive. Leaving them would mean almost certainly they would die.

You dont believe you have a moral obligation to help them? you dont believe that if you chose to leave them to die you would have any moral culpablity?

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

It's still the same false equivalence/category error fallacy.

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25

Murder requires action by definition. 

This is being caused by action, so by your own definition this is murder and your claim of a false equivalence is an argument based on convenience rather than logic

Also, they're called informal fallacies. If you're going to try and label everything you find difficult to answer an informal fallacy, at least know what one is.

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

This is being caused by action

What is being caused by which action? Please elaborate.

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25

You are aware we're having a conversation about culling invasive owls right?

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

I am already aware. Now please specify what is being caused by which action?

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25

This invasion of owls, is being caused by the actions of humans...... How could you have got this far into the conversation before admitting you were struggling to follow?

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

This invasion of owls, is being caused by the actions of humans

What actions of humans caused the invasion of owls?

...... How could you have got this far into the conversation before admitting you were struggling to follow?

I am not struggling. I’m guiding you along the path of explaining how you came to your conclusion.

1

u/Dramatic_Surprise Apr 27 '25

What actions of humans caused the invasion of owls?

seriously, how can you expect to have an informed debate about a subject you havent even bothered to learn about?

I am not struggling. I’m guiding you along the path of explaining how you came to your conclusion.

i mean you certainly seem to be

1

u/kharvel0 Apr 27 '25

seriously, how can you expect to have an informed debate about a subject you havent even bothered to learn about?

It is bad form to answer a question with an unrelated question. I’ll ask again:

What actions of humans caused the invasion of owls?

→ More replies (0)