Letters to the Editor: Killing one owl to save the spotted owl: ‘I mean, how silly is this conversation?’

To the editor: Should we go into the forest with shotguns to save the spotted owl? I mean, how silly is this conversation? (“Kill barred owls so spotted owls can live? Wildlife service should put plan on hold,” editorial, April 2)

We had this insane discussion 30 years ago when I was the author of the Heritage Tree State Resolution at the California Democratic Convention. And from the way your editorial was worded, I still see the one all-important sin of omission: Nobody’s willing to tackle the problem instead of one of its symptoms.

That problem is logging, logging, logging.

Joseph John Racano, Los Osos, Calif.

..

To the editor: The editorial against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s plan to protect the spotted owl fails to recognize the value of protecting endangered species.

We have already lost many species of birds and should do everything we can to preserve the species that are left. Far from letting nature take its course, the loss of spotted owls is directly caused by human activity, including the logging of most old-growth forests.

U.S Fish and Wildlife should stick to the plan to prioritize preserving the spotted owl as a native species.

David Bendall, Aliso Viejo

..

To the editor: My wife and I are avid bird fans. We live in a part of Orange County where we have a number of bird species that prey on other birds. They also help control the populations of rats, rabbits, snakes and other animals.

That said, we don’t support killing barred owls to aid the spotted owl.

It seems like nearly every time mankind tries to control nature, we screw it up. As much as it seems like the right thing to do, nature should be left alone to run its course, especially since the barred owl is expanding its range naturally.

Dave Hill, Laguna Hills