Can Eliminating the Barred Owl Be Beneficial for the Northern Spotted Owl?

Northern spotted owl (left) and barred owl (right)

The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) had published a proposal in November 2023 to cull approximately half a million barred owls in order to protect the northern spotted owls in the American Northwest. The proposal has recently gained attention from dozens of animal welfare and wildlife protection organizations who signed a letter disputing the plan. The letter urges Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland to reject what it calls a "reckless" plan. Conservationists, including the USFWS, and animal welfare organizations have been locked in a debate regarding the moral issue of killing one species to protect another. The Fish and Wildlife Service stated that without taking action in culling the barred owl population would result in the extinction of its less aggressive and threatened relative the northern spotted owl. It further added that the barred owl is displacing the northern spotted owl in the northwestern states. The proposal would guarantee the northern spotted owl's survival by eliminating over 470,000 barred owls across California, Oregon, and Washington over a span of thirty years. The proposal would also help prevent decrease in the population of the California spotted owl, which is also threatened by barred owls. On the other hand,Wayne Pacelle, president of the Center for a Human Economy and its lobbying force, Animal Wellness Action, who co-authored the letter, called the plan "unworkable" and that it's unclear it would be successfully implemented across such a long time frame. He further argued that lethal management programs usually succeed on closed ecosystems such as islands, and that a management program covering such a far-flung region wouldn't be as effective. Retired emeritus researcher Cameron Barrows from University of California Riverside's Center for Conservation Biology supported the proposal saying that the spotted owls would disappear if the barred owl management plan is not implemented. He also criticized the letter opposing the plan, saying it would mean "We'd rather have barred owls than spotted owls." One Washington-based conservation organization called Birds Connect Seattle also backed the proposal by publishing a letter in January 2024 citing "preventive extinction" as one of its priorities. Its executive director Claire Catania stated that it acknowledges the management plan's need.

I very much believe that while it is necessary to cull the barred owl population in the American Northwest, strong emphasis needs to be placed on preventing another possible wave of barred owls into the area. Originally from the eastern U.S, barred owls were forced to travel across the country in search of new forests due to habitat destruction in their native homeland. The northern spotted owl was initially under threat as a result of the logging industry, which reduced its old-growth forest habitat into patches where this species now lives. Now, these forests are being taken over by the highly adaptable barred owls. Therefore, the competition between these two owl species is indirectly attributed to human-induced factors. I would strongly suggest that significant measurements need to be implemented to prevent barred owls from coming into the northern spotted owl home range. This includes conducting surveys across vast stretches of land in areas outside the American Northwest in order to locate and determine any presence and numbers of barred owls. Once located, the owls should be humanely captured and relocated to their former haunts. This brings me to another point that proper forested areas should be identified in the eastern U.S as ideal barred owl habitat and therefore protected from human encroachment and habitat destruction. I also think that the owl population in the Midwest should be thoroughly studied in order to understand how it is being affected by the barred owl and act accordingly.    

Pakistan's Zoo-turned Wildlife Rescue Center

IWMB ranger Anees Hussein greeting Baboo at the Margalla Wildlife Rescue Center.

Zoos have provided people a chance to view wild animals for centuries. For many, it is a form of convenience without having to step out of their comfort zone and travel to faraway lands, where the animals they come to see roam free. Although zoos allow visitors to witness wild animals in awe, they have been subjected to controversy over the years. Not only do they deprive the animals of their freedom, but some have gained notoriety for the mistreatment of the animals. One of these controversial facilities was Pakistan's Islamabad Zoo. Formerly known as Marghazar Zoo, it opened in 1978 and was initially a refuge for chinkaras (Indian gazelles) and leopards living in the neighboring Margalla Hills before it started bringing in more animals and attracting visitors. From 2008 to 2010, the zoo underwent an extensive upgrade as a recreational area and wildlife sanctuary. This extension not only included animal enclosures, but also educational and research facilities.
 

Remains of Islamabad Zoo: A disused ferris wheel and a food stall amongst overgrown vegetation

However, despite making beneficial developments, Islamabad Zoo came into negative spotlight in September 2016 when an Asian elephant named Kaavan became mentally ill as a result of being chain-bound for the past twenty years. Originally from Sri Lanka, Kaavan's life at the zoo began in the mid-1980s and in 1990, he received a female elephant named Saheli as his mate. Unfortunately, tragedy struck when Saheli died in 2012 due to an injury in one of her legs. Saheli's death, combined with being kept in horrendous conditions, took a heavy toll on Kaavan's mental health as he exhibited signs of distress such as continuous head-bobbing. Rather than take proper steps to help Kaavan, the zoo staff kept him chained subjecting him to a great deal of negligence. Kaavan's neglect generated international attention and prompted a freedom campaign led by singer Cher. At the same time, Islamabad Zoo came under scrutiny regarding the health and well-being of its animals. Investigations revealed that like Kaavan, many other animals were subjected to neglect by the staff - some of which resulted in death. For example, in July 2017, four lion cubs died after being given high intake of Welmingnch milk instead of lioness milk. Later that year, an ostrich died as a result of staff negligence. In August 2018, a wolf mauled six deer at the zoo's extension. Observers criticized the zoo for providing the animals with inadequate or bad quality food, placing and locking them in small cages, and their poor health.
 

Teddy, one of seven Asian black bears at the center.

Islamabad Zoo's legacy ultimately came to an end in 2020 when the High Court ordered the zoo to be closed, following both local and international protests against the treatment of its animals. As a result, many animals, including Kaavan, were relocated to sanctuaries outside of Pakistan. That same year, the court ordered the zoo's grounds to be allocated to the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board (IWMB), a government organization in charge of conserving the wildlife of Margalla Hills National Park. In response to everyday reports of injured and trafficked wildlife, IWMB slowly began to use the former zoo's grounds as a rehabilitation center for rescued animals, in partnership with local animal rights groups and a non-profit conservation organization, Second Chance Wildlife. The center, known as Margalla Wildlife Rescue Center, had rescued more than 380 animals since 2020. These included Asian black bears, Indian pangolins, rhesus macaques, several species of birds, and a three-month-old Bengal tiger. In addition to receiving reports of injured animals, the center also conducts raids to rescue animals when hearing about criminal activities. Some of the animals were saved from poachers, while others, such as the bears, were used for entertainment purposes like "dancing" and fighting. One of the former residents at the center was a named Baboo, who was found in a critical condition. According to IWMB ranger Anees Hussein, he had several bone fractures and been suffering malnutrition following early separation from his mother. Over the 14 months after Baboo's rescue, a small team of the center's staff and volunteers nursed him back to health. Yet as he grew, it became clear that the center could not provide Baboo with more space and company of other tigers. On February 14, after a long fundraising and administrative procedure, Baboo was successfully relocated to South Africa's Isindile Big Cat and Predator Sanctuary.
 

Center staff and volunteers bidding farewell to Baboo at Islamabad International Airport's cargo wing.

The IWMB is planning to establish a sanctuary that can forever house animals that cannot be released into the wild. However, there is an ongoing challenge of fundraising as the center depends on heavily on public donations to meet the increasing cost of maintaining the facilities and taking care of the animals. According to Second Chance Wildlife co-founder Leah Boyer, the center is "operating on a subsistence budget from one week to the next." The team hopes to continue expanding the center's capacity to rehabilitate wildlife, including big cats. For example, leopards are native to the area and incidences of human-leopard conflict are not uncommon. However, the center's mission is not supported by everyone. The Capital Development Authority (CDA), which had earlier managed the zoo, continuously tried to reclaim the grounds and parts of Margalla Hills National Park to reopen the old zoo. Nevertheless, it did not dispute the High Court's judgment and is not likely to win.

Conservation activists protesting against CDA's attempt to reclaim the old zoo.

I find it really amazing how a former zoo is being converted into a wildlife rescue center, especially when that zoo gained notoriety for the treatment of animals. Islamabad Zoo was a prime example of a zoological facility that imposed mistreatment and cruelty to its animals through sheer negligence by the staff that ultimately ends in death. Kaavan, who had been subjected to such mistreatment, was relocated to Cambodia where he now lives a better life following the zoo's closing. Although he is far from the pain and suffering he endured in Pakistan, he is truly a poster child of why zoos in general should focus on proper care and well-being of animals. I don't deny that zoos are far from the wide open spaces that provide wild animals unlimited room to move freely, but I strongly believe that zoo enclosures should be large enough for the animals to stretch their legs. They should also be filled with foliage to mimic various animals' respective native habitats and the animals should be provided with enrichment objects to encourage their wild survival instincts. The staff should be highly dedicated and have proper resources to care for the animals. Most importantly, zoos should provide visitors opportunities in an effort to educate, inspire, and enlighten on the importance of wildlife and conservation. Furthermore, they should support conservation by establishing special facilities to rehabilitate animals that are victims of some type of environmental or wildlife crime. Unfortunately, not many zoos adhere to such standards and there are still many such places all over the world that need to be improvised like in the case of Islamabad Zoo. Also, the Margalla Wildlife Rescue Center has been relying on public donations for fundraising. I strongly urge the government of Pakistan to provide funding to maintain the center's facilities and care of its animals. In addition, there are other zoos in the country where animals are suffering and measurements need to be implemented to establish more such rehabilitation centers and sanctuaries so that the animals don't have to be sent abroad.     

Botswana's Elephants Victimized by Political Fighting

A pair of elephants at a watering hole

Botswana is renowned for having the largest elephant population in Africa. According to experts, statistics indicate that the country's elephant population numbers approximately 130,000 which is considered, at this moment, stable. However, in recent months, Botswana's elephants have been suffering immensely in recent months due to ivory poaching. In the past three months, at least 60 elephants have been killed in Botswana's northern region, including Chobe National Park, one of the world's best wildlife destinations. The poachers are specifically targeting the few remaining "big tusker" elephants which have already been hunted to near-extinction. The animals' tusks are being smuggled out of Botswana by organized, heavily-armed, and sophisticated gangs from Zambia who are working for syndicates in and around Lusaka. In Zambia, the tusks are cut into small pieces before being packaged and transported through other African countries and then sent to Asia. Conservation sources asserted that the Botswanan government's wildlife department had been sluggish to react and had not responded "adequately." No arrests had been made so far. Experts further added that aerial surveys of elephant herds in Botswana revealed high volumes of carcasses, which would cause alarm if discovered in other countries. In addition, the total number of elephants killed is higher than 60 due to other carcasses not being found yet.

An elephant family

It is extremely disheartening to hear about elephants being constantly slaughtered left and right by poaching gangs. But what really adds to the frustration is the slow response by Botswana's government as pointed out by Keith Lindsay, a veteran elephant biologist and conservation advisor, and Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) executive director Mary Rice. They have indicated that poaching gangs have been taking advantage of the sluggish governance and enforcement Botswana's spacious wilderness areas for many years. Ms. Rice further added that the country's government deployed restricted wildlife patrols in response and cautioned that most of Tanzania's elephant population elephant population was decimated a decade ago when authorities failed to act against the poachers. The political connection between the plight of Botswana's elephants and the country's role dates back to the end of the presidency of former president Ian Khama, whose second term of office ended in 2018. At the time, hunting was banned in the country but resumed when following the election of Mr. Khama's former ally and deputy, President Mokgweetsi Masisi. The relationship between the two men disintegrated resulting in Mr. Khama currently living in exile in South Africa. According to Christopher Vandome, senior research fellow at Chatham House's African Program, concerns grew as it became clear that President Masisi was not to be Mr. Khama's puppet. In addition, he also refused the former president his demands for special authorizations such as a larger staff and appointing Mr. Khama's brother Tshekedi Khama as vice president. But most importantly, President Masisi reversed a lot of Mr. Khama's conservation policy and efforts in order to further disocciate from the former president. As a result, illegal poaching of Botswana's elephants increased significantly and the current government did not undertake significant measurements in order to mitigate poaching in the country.

Elephant herd on the move

I cannot express in any words about the factors that contributed to the surge in Botswana's elephant mortality rate in recent months. It is extremely outrageous that the current government is paying little attention to the ongoing plight of ivory poaching and not taking any significant action to ensure their protection on the long run. This really goes to show how politics can have a negative impact on wildlife protection and conservation. Botswana, like most African countries, relies on tourism as a source of economy and among its wild places, Chobe National Park is the most biologically diverse making it one of the country's top tourist destinations to see and experience wildlife. Any form of hunting is deemed detrimental to the tourism industry and would result in ecological imbalance. This is especially true in the case of elephants, which play a major role in shaping the landscape. By trampling grasslands, they make room for smaller species to coexist. They also dig dry river beds to create water holes used by other animals when rainfall is low. In addition, they disperse seeds in their dung while travelling vast distances to generate new green growth. 

A lone elephant in a watery habitat

One of the striking features about this news is a statement by research director of the Elephant Crisis Fund Chris Thouless. He warned that the high amounts of elephant carcasses could be a natural phenomenon. He further added that there is no strong evidence that the elephants died as a result of poaching. I strongly believe that a great deal of research and studying needs to be implemented in order to better understand Botswana's elephant mortality rate. This means collecting biological samples and running scientific tests in order to fully determine whether elephants died as a result of just poaching or some kind of natural circumstance. In addition, quantitative figures need to be determined in order to get a clear and accurate picture of what percentage of Botswana's elephants died from poaching and what percentage died of some natural phenomenon. I think if one comes across an elephant carcass that has been completely emptied of tusks, it should not be assumed that elephant was killed by poachers. A thorough examination of the carcass needs to be conducted to see if any bullets are present inside the body. Furthermore, samples should be collected and closely studied to determine whether the animal died as a result of poisoning or some other natural or unnatural cause. Conducting scientific research can greatly help understand Botswana's elephant mortality and also provide information in implementing steps to prevent further deaths. However, such measurements require also political will and I strongly urge the government of Botswana to change its approach in protecting the country's elephants and wildlife. This includes improvising its policies regarding conservation and deploying more personnel in patrolling the wilderness areas to combat poaching.