In an article for television station KCET, reporter Chris Clarke examines the current debate over spotted owl habitat in California's burned Sierra Forest. The owls have begun living in the burnt trees from the catastrophic Rim Fire; however, logging companies want to remove the trees while they are still useful as wood. Further, many fear the burnt trees increase the risk of more fires. The Federal Government has already given permission to logging companies to collect the trees, but Environmentalists are now blocking it in the courts. Here is his article: "Spotted Owls Using Burned Sierra Forest Slated for Logging"
This is just one article about this topic. There are many all over the internet -- including television news stories -- your evidence can come from any source you choose. Just be sure to cite your source (i.e., tell me where your evidence came from.)
What do you think? Should the habitat be preserved for the spotted owl, or should the burned out trees be cleared away to save the area from potential fires? Use evidence from the article to support your perspective. Remember the S-E-E response format for using evidence! Thank you all again for maintaining polite discourse with your classmates.
I believe that the loggers should clear the trees to prevent future fires. I say this because if there were to be another wildfire, all the owls would die and there would be no way to save them
ReplyDeleteI also believe that they should let the owls stay. I believe in this idea because you would be taking away the owls habitat and it's home.
ReplyDeleteI personally do not 100% agree with either but if I can only choose one then I think they should remove the trees. Clearing the forest will prevent further fires. I do not want the owls to be scared possibly hurt by people. But what I would hate even more to happen is the owls dying in a big forest fire. Another fire might even be more catastrophic than the Rim fire.
ReplyDeleteMy evidence from the text would be just about all of it from both sides. If environmentalist really are trying to protect the owls they should let them find a new home. One that does not have an extreme chance of burning them any minute. And if the wood there is still useful then it is another small reason to support this statement. Thank you for reading my comment and remember that it is only for the owls own good to find a new home.
I'm sorry that the website link is not interactive. However, please feel free to look at the website, and hopefully, it is helpful.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Oscar because I believe that with some tress cleared out, there would be not that much fires and the owls would have a safer invornment.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Kylee about the necessary precautions must be taken
Good start, Paulina. Was there anything in the article that helped you come to that conclusion? Don't forget to use textual evidence!
DeleteI believe that they should cut down the trees to prevent wildfires, but I wish that they'd save the owls before they get rid of the trees. For example, the trees could burn easily since they were burned before and it turns into charcoal. Because of this, the fire could spread easily and burn homes and maybe even more wildlife. This can kill most if the owls and it would hurt other organisms. The owls could probably find a new home. I choose to cut the trees because you may only lose 1 or 2 owls because of transportation or you could lose most of the owls and many other organisms. This could save lots of money.
ReplyDeleteI will have to politely disagree with Adrian because of the fact that no one should have to give up their home due to the possibility of a wild fire.We live in homes that can as easily burn down as the forest could,but we still live in them.The article even stated that if they logged the forest it would be much more of a threat then a fire would.I believe the best action to take would be to not take away the owl's homes.It would be hard for the owls to find a better home for them than this forest,the article stated that this forest was better for the owls to hunt and etc making it the most ideal home for them.In conclusion we could just take more precaution when humans are near the forest.For example we can be careful not to smoke near the trees and so on.If we logged down the forest it would kill these owls.
DeleteNicely said, you guys. I love the way you consider every angle and acknowledge your classmates' point of view.
DeleteThank you for remembering to cite your source. Excellent use of textual evidence to support your claim!
ReplyDeleteI would have to disagree with Kylee A. but not totally. The trees should be removed for wild fire hazards, but the owls shouldn't get their habitat tooken away without getting a new one. The owls should be placed in a habitat that will never be took from them like a state park or zoo. If the trees are not removed, it could cause more organisms to lose their habitats or die than if you just cut the trees down and transport the owls to a new home. This would save a lot of lives.
ReplyDeleteSince the trees are already burned then one day the tree could just fall or die and the owls won't have a habitat whether a wild fire took place or not. We have to decide if we want to prevent a fire and move animals to a new habitat or if we want to leave the trees there and let a wildfire happen. If a wildfire were to happen then all the organisms will be killed including the owls. I chose to prevent the wildfire from taking place. I think that is the best option.
Clearing the forest would be a very bad idea. This is because you would not need to clear any of this burnt out forest caused by a fire because it deposits rich nutrients into the ground, making new trees. Also if you clear away all of the trees, then you would also be destroying future homes for animals. However, I do believe that some trees should be cleared away, such as trees that have already fallen.
ReplyDeleteI think that the forest should be a Spotted Owl sanctuary. I think this because not only would the owls be living in the forest, but other animals would live there too. Also there could be a great number of animals that could rehabilitate in the forest. There is no matter in the question, the forest should not be completely cleared and should be made into an owl sanctuary.
-Isaac E.
I agree with Isaac about the owl sanctuary and how they should be living in a forest. In my opinion the forest should be cleared partially so that the owls would have a forest to live in and the chances of wild fire would be a little less.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Katelyn about that you shouldn't take the owls should be placed somewhere where the owls will not be moved or relocated. But I also disagree with Katelyn. The reason is that if you cut down the trees then it would it might kill and scare the owls then preventing them from coming back.
Clearing the trees would be a very good idea in my opinion because you would prevent fires and wildfires. But this is kind of a cause and effect situation, the cause would be us taking the trees away which would agian prevent fires and wildfires but the effect would be you and everybody else taking away possibly the owls lives but certainly their homes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Katelyn because again as i already said if you take away the trees which would prevent fires and wildfires you are again taking away the owls homes and you wouldn't be giving it back to them. I agree with Paulina and Oscar but not totally 100% again and again you would take away the trees which would prevent fires and wildfires and you would be giving them a safer enviroment to live in, but how would they live in a safer enviroment/habitat if you are taking it away from them. My suggestion which would kind of not work out in my opinion unless we actually test it and see what happens but it is to make them adapt to another enviroment/habitat which would if not work be bad news for the owls but if it does work great! but it would take a little while. (patience is key).
Is there anything in the article you could present as textual evidence to help support your argument?
Deleteagain* (first paragraph)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jackson. The trees should be removed to prevent further wildfires. However, I do agree to Jackson's second statement, to an extant. The owls should stay in the trees while some are chopped down, if it is possible not to harm them in the process. If it is not possible not to harm them, they shoud be taken and temporarily sheltered until their environment is restored, or until a new environment is found/prepared. Although it can cause stress for the animals, it is better than risking another large forest fire. I agree that removing the trees may be another risk to environment in regards to nutrients, but we could just plant and care for new trees ourselves. The logging companies could just be trying to get a few extra bucks, but its not worth the risk. After all, another large forest fire mean more water wasted to put it out.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Quintin because moving the owls to a temporary shelter while their habitat restores, is a great idea. Everyone would be happy even the owls, because we wouldn't have fires anymore and the owls can stay where they are.
ReplyDeleteBut I would want the owls to migrate or move to a new home. I want people to take out the owls because i would want them to be safe where no one would mess with them. They do deserve to live where they are but i ,as a animal lover, would want them to be somewhere else to thrive and be happy. Also, we can make another place their home other than burnt trees that are highly to start a potential fire. We can take the owls out of the habitat and bring them to a another place that won't create natural disasters, then we can take the trees out before further fires occur.
I agree with Noah and Quintin. The owls will be fine if they get moved. As I have said below, people have their lives in danger if the owls don't get moved. We all need to put aside the way we think "how cute!!! A fuzzy little owl! Who cares if people die its cute!!" We can still think that way but don't rely on those thinking skills. Always think about the other side of the argument. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you Noah I'm just putting some words of wisdom out there. ;)
DeleteI think that the loggers can cut down the trees if they want to. If the fire had never even happened they would have been able to cut the trees down anyway. The owls can either move or they can be moved. There are many people who might die if the owls stay. There are the residents because wildfires will be more likely to happen and then they will be able to spread faster and their houses and even they have a larger chance of being burned, killed or becoming homeless. Then there are the firefighters. Their lives are in danger because they are the ones who have to put out the fire and they might not see or feel the fire coming up behind them. Then the firefighters wives might have to become a single mom and will have to take care of her children. This is just the beginning of the long list of negative outcomes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jackson because if you take the owls away, you take them from their own home. You wouldn't want to be taken away from from your home. I think that they should not take the owls away. If they disliked it couldn't they just fly away. I want them to be happy. This may sound rude but, even if they are unsafe they could be themselves. If you were taken away would you be happy? Think of them as it was you. I got my article from http://www.kcet.org/news/redefine/rewild/birds-1/spotted-owls-using-burned-sierra-forest-slated-for-logging.html.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you, Noah, Spotted owls are important and should not be taken from their home. Fires burn all the time, sometimes because we make them happen. The burnt trees become soil and the cycle of rebirth begins. In this cycle of rebirth, the spotted owls have found a home, but now we have begun to take it away. Spotted owls are already endangered, as http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/species/data/northernspottedowl/ states.
ReplyDeleteAs well as being endangered, spotted owls are beneficial to us. Spotted owls are an "indicator" species (kswild.org/what-we-do-2/biodiversity/species-profiles/nso). That means that the health of the spotted owl indicates the health of old-growth forest ecosystems. So if you're killing the spotted owls, their health is, well, dead. This indicates that the ecosystem is also dead.
We're not considering how, if the forest is cut down, so many other animals die. There could easily be other endangered animals in the forest, or animals we don't even know about. Already so many trees have been cut down, and the Amazon Rainforest is slated to be gone by 3000.
Quintin, there isn't really a temporary habitat for the owls. It's either this, or we kill most of the owls and take a few to some sort of shelter. Most likely, the owls would begin to forget how to hunt for themselves, and get used to humans. This would be catastrophic for them, and they would die out. Let's put it like this. Pretend a hurricane are the lodgers, and we're the spotted owls. The hurricane is threatening to take away our homes, but it's okay, "because we can just move them to a temporary home until their home is replenished". That's what happens. People move to Red Cross shelters, but they're not happy. Their dream homes have been destroyed.
Kylee, I think you hit the nail on the head with your ideas. We should bring in a biologist, and figure things out, instead of being reckless. Everyone will be happy too. If people want to live near the forest, they'll have to deal with the risk. If they're brave enough, their kids will get to grow up watching the forest animals, the cycle of rebirth, and especially fall asleep to the beautiful sounds of hooting.
To conclude, due to these reasons and more, I think the spotted owls deserve to have a home that's as wonderful as they are. 99.9 percent of all animals that have lived are now extinct, and the spotted owls shouldn't be one of them.
----------------------
Thanks for reading! Happy Sunday, and as always, try to reply or give feedback!
Cheers, Sriha S.
Sorry about the spaces in Paragraph One, they weren't there when I typed it up. I'm not sure what happened there....Some small glitch I guess!
DeleteCheers, Sriha S.
Great job of digging further into the topic with your own research! The information you discovered definitely adds a lot to the discussion.
DeleteI believe that we should cut down the trees to prevent forest fires because if fires ever occur it will not just destroy the owls habitat, but many more too. I also disagree with Sriha because although it is true that forest fires could be caused by human carelessness it could be caused by natural things too. Forest fires could even be started by the sun's heat or even lightning strikes. Forest fires cannot just take animals lives, but human lives too. In North America there was a forest fire called The Great Fire of 1910. The Great Fire destroyed three million acres of land and took the lives of 86 people.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the owls could find another area to live, they could learn to adapt to another area of the forest where the trees could not start a forest fire. I find it irrelevant that the owls have to live in older trees that are dangerous too the forest. The wood of the trees that are cut down could be used in other ways for us humans. Fire is how we get our electricity every day and how some people use fire too cook their food. This is why I believe we should cut down old trees to prevent forest fires.
- Ian B.
Info - http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/some-common-causes-of-wildfires
I was also implying that many a times, we start fires on purpose. This burns down some trees and destroys the old ones, so that new trees can grow and become new members of the forest.
DeleteThe owls can't really find a new place to live. They're endangered, and owls live in old-forest ecosystems. This is the ideal place, sort of like if you find the ideal house at an ideal price (which would be cutting a few close trees out), then that house gets destroyed.
Cheers, Sriha S.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJulian, I had to delete your comment because you used your full last name. Remember, last initial only, for safety reasons.
DeleteThis is Julian M.'s Comment:
I believe that we should cut down the burned trees, but like how Isaac & Megan said, to move the spotted owls & organisms that will help it survive, in the temporary 'sanctuary', with some of those burned trees, while the forest grows back. As stated, http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/04/wildlife-advocates-sue-feds-over-allowing-logging-on-sierra-nevada-land-burned/ here. people are suing the company that allowed logging in the affected area, it is in danger to burn down more of the forest, if we don't cut it down. Though the owls are thriving in there, they should be transported somewhere else, as it is possible at most 200,000 spotted owls to die, if another fire happens.
As stated in Ms. Mansour's evidence, people are still making up their mind from the fire, that happened in 2013! Also, there is 3 spotted owls that are in this forest: the Mexican Spotted Owl, the Californian Spotted Owl, & the Northern Spotted Owl, who all had a previous 'home' other than the Rim Fire.
Altogether I believe that they should cut down those trees, not the whole forest, but they should also, relocated most, if not all owls resided there to their proper home or sanctuary, until the Sierra Forest is normal again, and the wood from the cut trees, can be used as fuel in it's raw state or as charcoal.
I love how the debate seems to be 50/50 in our class, just as in the real world. You guys are doing a nice job of being considerate and acknowledging others' points of view.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jackson because if the trees continue to stay, there is a chance another wild fire will occur. This causes the owl to either get hurt or die from the fire. But if the trees are cleared from the area, we could transport them to a safer environment that will less likely have fires. Then we could use the open space to make buildings or houses. This will benefit us and will reduce the possibility of more fires and disturbing the owls.
ReplyDeleteIf we clear the area, we could use the would for many supplies. By cutting down the trees, we could use the wood to help us. We could use it as fire wood for heat, we could build more homes, and we could also make supplies such as paper or pencils. The wood also be used in many other ways. For example, we could use the wood to create fuel.
We should still clear the area because we would only clear the area that was burnt. Instead of moving the owls to a new area, we could just move the owls to another area of the forest. That would save them the work of adapting to a new area far from their home. In addition, they would be more comfortable living in an area they know well. The owls could be taken to another area, then live perfectly in the same forest just in a different area.
In conclusion, we should clear the area and save the owls by moving them to a new area in the same area. This will make them more comfortable in the area. With these solution, we could save the owls and create a new area to make buildings and more homes for us humans.
Textual evidence??
DeleteI believe that the U.S Forest Service should leave the spotted owls alone for two main reasons. My first reason is that the spotted owls prefer burnt trees than regular trees. This is one of my main reasons because ×Chris Clarke's article says,"In a letter sent to USFS on ×Thursday, the groups are saying USFS's position is based on obsolete science, and that spotted owls may actually prefer burned forests for hunting." This can tell us that if the U.S Forest Service collected the burnt trees, the spotted owls would not hunt as well. Also the groups that signed the letter to protect the owls were ×Wild Nature Institute, the John Muir Project, and the Center For Biological Diversity. They are persuading the USFS to protect the owls and avoid cutting trees within a mile and a half of nesting sites used by the owls. As you can see, the USFS should not collect the trees because the spotted owls prefer the burnt trees than the regular trees.
ReplyDeleteMy second main reason is that if the USFS collected the trees, it would harm many spotted owls. It would harm the spotted owls because the burnt trees are basically their habitat and if the USFS collected the trees, they are basically taking away the spotted owls' home. In addition, the ×Rim Fire area is filled with many animals such as the spotted owls. Also in ×Chris Clarke's article, it says,"The USFS would take out trees on about 30,000 acres of land, making it one of the largest logging operations in USFS history. This tells us that the USFS is not just taking away homes from the spotted owls, but other animals too. As you can see, the spotted owls should be left alone because they might harm the owls and spotted owls prefer burnt trees better than regular trees. -Isaiah A.
I think that the brunt trees should be cut down. If the trees stay then there will be a risk of having another wildfire and it would harm the owls and other organisms as well. For example, USFS has long held that forest fires threaten owls, and that salvage logging is necessary to encourage regrowth of healthy trees that provide owl habitat.
ReplyDeleteMaybe before clearing out the trees, the owls can be sent to a sanctuary for a while. This could prevent owls from going completely homeless. When the trees grow back, then the owls can go back to living in the forest.
-Julianne R.
I think that they should cut down the trees. IN the next fire, the owls might get hurt. For example, in the website KCET it says that 52 square miles got burned. In the next fire it can be even bigger. The owls might get stuck in the branches in the next fire and die. Also other areas not just the forest could get burned down. The fire can spread even more.
ReplyDeleteIt is not safe for the owls. The fumes might get into the owls system and they can die. Animal experts should bring the owls to a safe environment for them to live at. The best thing for the owls is to cut the trees down. There are many harms that can happen to the owls.
Maya C.
I believe that the burnt forest should be preserved for the spotted owls. You can't just take away the owls home especially if they are already endangered and made their home in the forest. If the loggers really want/need the trees for wood the article I read says that they can still cut down trees but they have to be at least 1 mile away from where the spotted owls are living or roosting.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with Maya because the article I read states that Recent science and survey results like those from the Rim fire are repudiating the old, outdated assumption that fire is bad for owls. Logging has always been the real danger to spotted owls, not fire.” This means that the argument that fires can kill the owls isn't all that true. But I do agree with Maya because if they really do have to cut down the trees they should move the spotted owls and other animals living in the forest to a safer enviornment.
I believe that the forest should be logged for many reasons. Although the forest does supply a great habitat for the owls there are also many dangers. With the dried wood and wood burnt wood that the forest supplies it will be really easy for another fire to happen. This makes a great risk for the population of the owls as well the still usable wood inside the forest.
ReplyDeleteIf we log the forest we could transport the owls to a safer environment. This eliminates the risk of the population of the owls dropping down. Although some people might go against the idea of logging the habitat, you should think of what will happen if we don't log it. It will only be a matter of time until the forest will burn down again. So if we don't act now it will be to late to save anything.
My thoughts on this matter between cutting down trees or keeping them because owls have made shelter there is leaning more towards keeping the trees for the owls. The owls should be able to keep the trees for themselves because they claimed it after it burnt down. Yes, it might still be a hazard due to it catching fire again, but I think the owls might want to take their chances. I am not trying to speak for them but think, wouldn't you rather stay at the place you claimed that has fire hazards or would you want people to cut you house and start all over with finding shelter losing lives in the process.Ya seems pretty simple. Its the most humane thing to since we already kill the environment and animals everyday anyways.
ReplyDeletePlus if they cut the trees down the process would without a doubt kill hundreds of owls and leave hundreds devastated and homeless. It makes me sad to think that we should cut down the habitat of over animals for our own needs. If you look deeper you can discover that this isn't just the owls were tearing apart and discussing but our whole environment. We kill trees, we kill animals, we kill owls. This subject means more than just owls, were talking about our whole world we live in everyday. We honestly should start looking for a new planet to live on soon because we are killing our environment starting with owls.
Eva S.
I agree with Quintin and Noah. I think it would be perfect if we could move the owls to a temporary shelter! Besides, if the trees are very dangerously likely to catch on fire again, then the owls would die in the process. It would be like saying "lets leave our pet goldfish in the flammable oil because they can still live in it (if they could)! the pet goldfish have a horrible chance of dying and the fire could spread to the rest of the house!
ReplyDeleteNot only could the owls get harmed, but the forest could get harmed too! If the wood doesn't get removed quickly, then the entire forest is in danger, including other species of animals living in it! Besides, the trees are already dead. If we move the owls into some kind of sanctuary (Isaac's idea) or temporary shelter, then we have nothing to lose! If we don't act quickly, then the forest could catch fire again!
Asha A.
DeleteI believe that the forest should be logged. I think this because the trees could catch on fire again and burn even more land than previous times. I also think this because the owls can be relocated to either a different forest or a bird sanctuary or some sort. Yes, the owls did already have a home there and are comfortable there, but if the trees catch fire again, the owls and their homes will burn.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, the wood from the trees is still useful. If you cut the down, they can be used as fuel. There are machines that would usually be powered by coal but also with wood. It also still useful for fire wood. The forest should be logged.
I believe the trees should be preserved for the owls. The owls claimed the trees after they burned down. Technically the trees are now the owls'. Although the owls may get harmed if another fire erupts, the owls chose to live there and nest there. We should preserve the trees, how would you feel if someone kicked you out of your home for no reason?
ReplyDeleteThe owls have a right to live in those trees. We should preserve the trees for the spotted owls.
I think that they shouldn't cut down the trees. The owls will actually have a better chance of surviving in the forest now. There will be
ReplyDeletelots of easy prey because the animals don't have a place to hide. The trees that were burned reproduce by being burned.this will cause lots of trees to gow back in the future.
If they cut down the trees the owls will be forced to move to a different evironment . They may be hunted by other animals. They might not be able to find food to survive and the population would decline tremendously. The world doesn't need another endangered species.