'The Wrong Invasive Species'

Editor:

So let’s see If I understand this.

The westward migration of the invasive European human species resultedin trees being planted all across the Great Plains.

Those trees, in turn, paved the way for the barred owl to migrate westward across the continent to invade the old growth forests on the West Coast (“‘Complex Tradeoffs’,” Jan. 30). All the while, those same old growth forests were being decimated by the invasive human species, making it much harder for the spotted owls to survive and easier for the barred owls to take over and drive the spotted owls toward extinction.

So the solution is to blame and kill a gazillion barred owls to maybe save some of the now homeless spotted owls?

Looks to me like we’re blaming the wrong invasive species here.

Douglas George, Eureka

Editor:

In response to “Complex Trade Offs” (Jan. 30), I’d like to point out the value of subjecting such decisions to ethical as well as scientific scrutiny.

As science evolves, it reveals its blind spots. We look back on, say, the bounty hunting of gray wolves now with abhorrence, as we look back on many other instances of our heavy-handed attempts to control wildlife and the environment.

A cull of the barred owl may prove effective in saving the spotted owl from extinction, but it also validates culling as a solution. And as we continue to consider killing such a large number of a species a viable, or even preferred solution, it is only a matter of time before we get it wrong again.

When we decide in favor of the barred owl cull, we decide not just in favor of spotted owls, but for culling itself. And we know from experience, this is already a solution we embrace a little too readily.

Jonathan Maiullo, Arcata