this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
305 points (99.4% liked)
Green - An environmentalist community
5315 readers
26 users here now
This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!
RULES:
1- Remember the human
2- Link posts should come from a reputable source
3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith
Related communities:
- /c/collapse
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/[email protected]
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- /c/[email protected]
- SLRPNK
Unofficial Chat rooms:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
New trees also cannot support wildlife the same as old trees. Animals like owls need large, old, dead trees with large cavities, as they cannot make their own nests. Forests need to develop for almost 200 years for those conditions to exist. It's also needs to be speciea of trees that will support the lives of prey animals as well. Without time and balance, the forest is essentially dead for anything but logging. Save old trees, cut new trees!
Brought to you by your friends at [email protected]
I'm 100% in favor of preserving old-growth forests, but would it be effective to build habitats specificially for owls, distributed throughout both new and old-growth forests?
It's mainly the small and medium adaptable owls that are still doing well that will use nest boxes. Owl boxes are also decently large since owls stay in the nest until essentially they are full grown and 10 to 20 feet (3 to 6m) off the ground.
Large owls don't cavity nest and just need lots of tall dense trees with a thriving population of small mammals.
Birds of prey will also learn where nesting boxes are and take advantage of that. I was at a bird banding event the other day and they said they had to move their capture nets every season because raptors will learn where they are and pick birds out of it.
There are just many things that are hard or expensive to recreate by hand.
Thanks, that makes sense. So the only workable solution for the largest owl species is to not ruin their environment in the first place, and for smaller species building habitats is a risky proposition. Hopefully we're successful in preserving what remains of our primordial forest cover then.
Exactly. And it really stinks when governments sell out and let them die out even under emergency situations.
British Columbia's Last Spotted Owl
And in the US, from NPS
Many owl species are at risk but there is a very long battle between Spotted Owls specifically and the timber industry going back decades, so there is a lot of documentation about them.
There's hate merch and everything going back near 40 years.
Guardian: All I See are Ghosts
Thank you for sharing that. I don't know who it was, but some months back I was introduced to a particular document describing creative tactics for protecting old-growth forests. All I can say is, I'm glad there are at least people giving anti-environmentalists hell, and making it a war to achieve the destruction demanded by short-sighted profit-seeking.
I suppose it's the same with every facet of life. Protecting what we have is more difficult than finding ways to tear it down. Like how software security is a constant game of whack-a-mole, fixing security vulnerabilities as they're found.
Yes, we're capable of great good, but also great bad, especially in groups. Someone is always going to want to take everything for themselves.
Keep learning and stay alert to what's going on around you!