The Service analyzed the impacts on the human environment from the no-action alternative and five action alternatives. All action alternatives include management options to reduce barred owl populations through lethal removal in areas within the northern spotted owl’s range and to prevent the development of barred owl populations within the California spotted owl’s range. Alternatives are detailed in Section 2 of the final EIS and include:

• Alternative 1: No Action 
• Alternative 2: Preferred Alternative - Proposed Strategy Implementation
• Alternative 3: Management Across the Range
• Alternative 4: Limited Management by Province/Population 
• Alternative 5: Management Focused on Highest Risk Areas
• Alternative 6: Management Focused on Best Conditions

The Service's preferred alternative in the final EIS is Alternative 2. This alternative includes managing barred owls in the northern spotted owl's range at different scales, such as spotted owl sites, general management areas, and specially designated areas. The focus is on finding and removing barred owls before they can establish populations in the California spotted owl's range or associated invasion pathways.

The strategy aims to address the threat posed by the non-native and invasive barred owl to native northern and California spotted owls in certain areas of Washington, Oregon, and northern California. It involves measures to reduce barred owl populations and their negative impact on the federally listed northern spotted owl, as well as steps to prevent threats to California spotted owls, which are proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act. The strategy also emphasizes the importance of restricting the expansion of barred owls into the California spotted owl’s range before the invasive bird becomes more established.

Barred owls invade Western forests from their historical range in eastern North America, threatening the long-term survival of federally listed northern spotted owls and, more recently, California spotted owls, which are proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act. Currently, there are no comprehensive tools available to address the substantial barred owl threat. 

If barred owls are left unmanaged, the northern spotted owl will likely face extinction in all or the majority of its range. California spotted owls also face a similar risk as barred owl populations continue to expand southward into their range. Implementing proactive barred owl management to limit their expansion throughout the California spotted owl’s range would help prevent barred owls from becoming a severe threat to California spotted owls. 

Barred owls are now well-established on the west coast. Their populations will continue to produce young that can disperse within and beyond the current range of barred owls. Therefore, long-term barred owl management will be required at some level.

When managing invasive species invasive species
An invasive species is any plant or animal that has spread or been introduced into a new area where they are, or could, cause harm to the environment, economy, or human, animal, or plant health. Their unwelcome presence can destroy ecosystems and cost millions of dollars.

Learn more about invasive species , there are two general approaches depending on the progression of the invasion. At the advancing front where few individuals are present, management is focused on early detection and rapid response to remove invaders and limit the invasion. Once invasive species are established, the focus is on control and management. Both require a long-term commitment. 

In the California spotted owl’s range, and the very southern tip of the northern spotted owl’s range in Marin and Sonoma Counties, barred owls are at the early stages of invasion and, as described in the purpose and need of the EIS, an early detection and rapid response mode is appropriate. In the remainder of the northern spotted owl’s range, barred owls are established, and a control and management approach is needed. 

In the range of the northern spotted owl, 11 physiographic provinces are included in the preferred alternative: Olympic Peninsula, Western Washington Cascades, Eastern Washington Cascades, Western Washington Lowlands, Oregon Coast Ranges, Western Oregon Cascades, Eastern Oregon Cascades, Oregon Klamath, California Klamath, California Cascades and California Coast. 

In the California spotted owl’s range, the Sierra Nevada and Coastal-Southern California populations are included in the preferred alternative. In addition, the preferred alternative includes associated areas that may provide pathways for barred owls to enter the California spotted owl’s range, such as coastal mountains south of San Francisco.

In the northern spotted owl’s range, barred owl management could occur around spotted owl sites, general management areas, and designated areas. These are prioritized in each province to focus barred owl management on areas with the greatest need or the greatest potential for success. A description of these management types is available in Sections 2.3.1 and 2.4.1 of the final EIS.

In the California spotted owl’s range, barred owl management could occur anywhere in the range of the subspecies or potential invasion pathways. If adopted, the Service will coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to allow for effective implementation of barred owl management, following state laws and policies.

The preferred alternative does not allow the removal of barred owls across the entire United States. It is specifically focused on the ranges of northern and California spotted owls and their associated invasion pathways in California. It does not apply to areas where barred owls may be present outside of these specific regions. More information on invasion pathways can be found in Section 2.4.2 of the final EIS.
 

If the proposed strategy is adopted, the Service would receive a permit under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Service could then designate interested Tribes, federal and state agencies, companies, or specific landowners to implement barred owl management on their lands if actions are consistent with the strategy, conditions of the permit, and state laws and policies. Management activities will be limited to areas identified in the strategy. Those who volunteer to implement the strategy will be accountable for annual monitoring and reporting.

No. If finalized, implementing the proposed Barred Owl Management Strategy will be voluntary. However, the Service strongly believes widespread implementation of barred owl management is necessary to conserve spotted owls. The Service will coordinate closely with Tribes, federal, state, and private partners on its implementation.

The preferred alternative includes monitoring the effectiveness of barred owl removal. This information will allow the Service to periodically evaluate the successes and failures of the various implementation efforts. The Service will use this information to determine if modification to the location or approach would be justified and how to best implement the components of the preferred alternative.

The main threats to the northern spotted owl are barred owls, a non-native species in the Pacific Northwest, and habitat loss. These threats were identified when the northern spotted owl was listed as threatened under the ESA in 1990, but their magnitude has changed over the years. Ongoing efforts help to protect and enhance habitat for the federally listed northern spotted owl, but there are no comprehensive tools to address the substantial barred owl threat. 

Barred owls are larger, more aggressive and have a wider prey base than native spotted owls. As a result, they displace northern spotted owls, disrupt their nesting, compete with them for food, and occasionally attack them. In many parts of the northern spotted owl’s range, barred owls now greatly outnumber spotted owls. Research shows that northern spotted owl population declines are more pronounced in areas where barred owls are present, and declines are greatest where barred owls have been present the longest and are in larger populations. 

The Service has concluded barred owls meet the definition of “invasive” because they are not native to the range of the northern and California spotted owls and were unintentionally introduced through human-related activities and caused significant environmental harm. Barred owls are also likely to harm other species through predation or competition and are considered a risk to create a trophic cascade in some forest systems. 

The expansion of barred owls from their historical range in eastern North America was likely a result of human-caused changes to the conditions in the Great Plains and northern boreal forest. Changes in climate, fire suppression, the extirpation of bison and beaver, and tree planting associated with European settlement created patches of forested habitat in the Great Plains and altered the northern boreal forest, in turn altering natural barriers that previously inhibited the barred owl’s expansion westward. As a result, barred owls were able to move westward and are now competing with native species in Washington, Oregon and California. 

Their populations began to expand west of the Mississippi River, likely around the turn of the 20^th century. Barred owls reached the northern spotted owl’s range in British Columbia, Canada, around 1959 and continued to expand southward. They were first documented in Washington in the 1970s and now outnumber northern spotted owls in most of the subspecies’ range in California, Oregon and Washington. 

Section 7 Section 7
Section 7 Consultation The Endangered Species Act (ESA) directs all Federal agencies to work to conserve endangered and threatened species and to use their authorities to further the purposes of the Act. Section 7 of the Act, called "Interagency Cooperation," is the mechanism by which Federal agencies ensure the actions they take, including those they fund or authorize, do not jeopardize the existence of any listed species.

Learn more about Section 7 (a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act directs the Secretary of the Interior and all federal agencies to proactively use their authorities to conserve threatened and endangered species. The 2011 Revised Northern Spotted Owl Recovery Plan identified habitat loss and barred owl competition as the primary threats to spotted owls. There are ongoing efforts to protect and enhance habitat for the northern spotted owl such as through the protection and management of late-successional reserves on federally managed lands, and similar efforts on state and private forests through conservation plans. However, there are no comprehensive existing tools to address the significant barred owl threat.

About one-third of the northern spotted owl’s recovery plan focuses on addressing the threat of the invasive barred owl. The Service, along with partners including the Hoopa Valley Tribe, initiated an experimental removal of barred owls in 2013 to test the feasibility of barred owl removal and determine whether it improves conditions for spotted owls. The experiment, completed in 2021, showed that barred owl removal helped northern spotted owls within the removal areas. The Service has also permitted the experimental removal of barred owls by the Yurok Tribe, Green Diamond Resource Company, Sierra Pacific Industries and the University of Wisconsin. Information from these studies was used to develop the proposed Barred Owl Management Strategy and final EIS.

Although the purpose of barred owl management is to conserve the northern spotted owl and limit barred owl expansion into the California spotted owl’s range, other native wildlife species that are prey for, or competitors with, barred owls are likely to benefit from barred owl removal. One example is the western screech owl, which is both preyed upon by barred owls and suffers from competition for resources with barred owls; screech-owl population declines have also been linked to the barred owl expansion. 

Barred owls are generalist predators and opportunistic hunters, eating almost any species they encounter, including small mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, earthworms, snails, slugs, insects and crayfish. Where barred owls are plentiful, reducing their numbers can alleviate local predation impacts on native prey species and lessen competition with other native wildlife for the same food resources. 

As a new predator and competitor in western forests, the impact of the barred owl is likely more serious for species that are already rare or at risk. Some at-risk species that are potential prey for barred owls include red tree voles, western grey squirrels, foothill yellow-legged frogs and marbled murrelets. Species that may compete with barred owls for food resources include spotted owls, Pacific martens, fishers, Sierra Nevada red foxes and Cascade red foxes. Table 3-26 of the final EIS has a complete list of at-risk forest species.

Yes. The barred owl poses a significant threat to the northern spotted owl, but habitat loss remains a concern as well. When the spotted owl was listed in 1990, its old-growth habitat had declined by an estimated 60% to 88% since the early 1800s. Efforts have been made to slow the loss of northern spotted owl habitat on federal lands from timber harvest, but the amount of habitat lost to catastrophic wildfire has surpassed that lost to timber harvest in recent years. To help the northern spotted owl recover, both habitat preservation and barred owl management are necessary.

Barred owl management was a recovery action in the 2008 Recovery Plan for the northern spotted owl and in the 2011 revision. The 2011 Revised Recovery Plan for the northern spotted owl identified past and current habitat loss, along with competition from barred owls, as the most pressing threats to the northern spotted owl. Research on potential barred owl management methods began in 2009 on Green Diamond Resource Company lands in northern California. The recovery plan identified 12 recovery actions specific to the barred owl threat, including Recovery Action 29: Design and implement large-scale control experiments to assess the effects of barred owl removal on spotted owl site occupancy, reproduction, and survival.

In 2013, the Service and its partners initiated the Barred Owl Removal Experiment to investigate the effect of barred owl removal on spotted owl population dynamics. The Barred Owl Removal Experiment demonstrated success in reducing populations of barred owls, a strong, positive effect on the survival of northern spotted owls, and a weaker, though still positive, effect on spotted owl dispersal and recruitment.

The Barred Owl Removal Experiment provided the information necessary for the implementation of Recovery Action 30: Manage to reduce the negative effects of barred owls on spotted owls. The final EIS describes and analyzes options to implement Recovery Action 30. 

Yes. The Service considered ethical issues in the development of the Barred Owl Removal Experiment in 2013 and again in the development of the proposed Barred Owl Management Strategy. As part of the Service’s development of the barred owl removal experiment, a stakeholder group was established in early 2009. This group included representatives of broad-interest environmental organizations, bird-specific conservation groups, animal welfare organizations, the timber industry, Tribes, state and local government agencies and others. 

The information provided by the group was one of a variety of sources of information that helped the Service consider the ethical aspects of potential barred owl research decisions. The Service also used information gathered during the public comment periods on the notice of intent and draft EIS.

Yes. The Service’s barred owl removal experiment compared spotted and barred owl populations in four study areas across the northern spotted owl’s range — one in Washington, two in Oregon, and one in northern California. The experiment, and other similar studies, demonstrated that the removal of barred owls resulted in reduced and declining barred owl populations within the removal areas. In areas where no removal occurred, barred owl populations continued to increase. 

The removal of barred owls had a strong and positive effect on the survival of spotted owls. In the Service’s experiment, spotted owl populations stabilized in the treatment areas where barred owls were removed. Spotted owl populations declined at 12% per year in paired control areas without barred owl removal. The removal experiment demonstrated that barred owl removal can be an effective method for the conservation of spotted owls. 

The experiment was completed in 2021. For additional information about the study, please visit https://www.fws.gov/project/barred-owl-study-update. 

European settlement allowed barred owls to breach the historic barrier of the Great Plains and northern boreal forest, so their presence here is not natural. Unless the Service manages the invasive barred owl population, the federally listed northern spotted owl will be extirpated in all, or a significant portion, of its range. On behalf of the American people, the Service, and other federal agencies, have a legal and ethical responsibility to do everything the Service can, within the confines of our respective authorities and funding, to prevent the extinction of the northern spotted owl and help it recover. 

Human-caused climate change climate change
Climate change includes both global warming driven by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases and the resulting large-scale shifts in weather patterns. Though there have been previous periods of climatic change, since the mid-20th century humans have had an unprecedented impact on Earth's climate system and caused change on a global scale.

Learn more about climate change , as with other human changes to the natural environment, may allow some species to move into ecosystems in which they did not evolve. This may, or may not, cause issues for the remaining native species of that ecosystem. If an entire biological community shifts together in response to changing climate conditions, there would often be no need to manage any of the individual species. If any single species moves into a new ecosystem in response to the changing climate, but does not cause problems for species native to that ecosystem, similarly there would be no need to manage that species. However, if one species moves into an existing ecosystem, and causes substantial alterations in ecosystem processes or significant population declines in native species, then management may be necessary to prevent the loss of species or ecosystems.

The Service developed the proposed Barred Owl Management Strategy using the best available scientific information and considered various management methods. The Service examined nonlethal methods such as translocation, permanent captivity, and reproductive interference, as well as the possibility of managing habitat to favor spotted owls over barred owls. However, after evaluation, it was determined that none of these non-lethal methods are likely to be feasible, practical, or applicable at a large enough scale to achieve the purpose and need described in the final EIS. The purpose is to rapidly reduce barred owl populations to improve the survival and recovery of northern spotted owls and to prevent declines in California spotted owls from barred owl competition, as further explained in Section 2.10 of the final EIS.

Yes, there have been many occasions when the Service and other agencies found it necessary to carry out removal measures for one species to safeguard another species listed under the ESA or a species of concern. A few examples include the removal of red-tailed hawks to help endangered parrots in Puerto Rico; rat and mongoose removal to protect seabirds in Hawaii; brown-headed cowbird removal to protect Kirtland’s warblers and southwestern willow flycatchers; and removal of foxes, crows, and ravens to protect western snowy plovers. Such measures are given careful consideration and include evaluating the potential for other, non-lethal options. 

Removal has also been used as a management tool by many agencies across the country to control invasive species invasive species
An invasive species is any plant or animal that has spread or been introduced into a new area where they are, or could, cause harm to the environment, economy, or human, animal, or plant health. Their unwelcome presence can destroy ecosystems and cost millions of dollars.

Learn more about invasive species such as invasive carp, Burmese python, feral hogs, rats, mongoose and nutria. Invasive species can thrive in areas where they do not naturally occur. They degrade, change, or displace native habitats, prey upon and compete with native wildlife and thus are major threats to biodiversity. Consequently, invasive species control is commonly used to protect and maintain native species and ecosystems.

The removal methods protocol included in Appendix 2 of the final EIS was developed from proven methods used during several experiments involving barred owl removal. The protocol contains specific training requirements and elements to greatly reduce the potential for such a mistake. Since 2009, more than 4,500 barred owls have been removed under scientific collecting permits using this protocol with no loss of spotted owls or other non-target species, suggesting that the potential for accidental shooting is extremely low.

The protocol has specific requirements that removal specialists be able to accurately identify spotted owls and barred owls using both visual and auditory means, and confidently distinguish between the two species, and that they prove this ability before being authorized to conduct removal. In case of any doubt on the identification, the removal attempt would be halted, and a new attempt would be conducted later.

While this protocol is designed to avoid injury to non-target species, removal specialists would be required to identify the nearest veterinary resources, wildlife rehabilitation facilities and specialists, in case they are needed. Appendix 2 of the final EIS outlines the specific methodology for barred owl removal.

Every effort would be made to minimize the risk of unnecessary injury or trauma to barred owls. Protocols would be in place so that barred owl removal methods would be conducted as safely, humanely, and efficiently as possible. To ensure that any barred owls wounded, but not killed, during removal do not continue to suffer, all people involved in removal would be trained in effective, humane methods of field euthanasia and have all necessary material available at all times during removal.

The Service's strategy does not favor one owl species over another. If fully implemented, the preferred alternative would allow specific areas for spotted owl populations to survive and grow while maintaining both spotted and barred owls on the landscape. The preferred alternative would result in the removal of barred owls from less than half of the northern spotted owl’s range in Washington, Oregon, and California. Within the California spotted owl’s range, the preferred alternative aims to limit the invasion of barred owls. In total, this would only amount to the annual removal of less than half of 1% of the current North American barred owl population.

Yes. The Service estimates a maximum of about 450,000 invasive barred owls, or about 15,000 per year, could be removed over 30 years under full implementation of the preferred alternative. This is an upper limit that may be removed assuming maximum implementation of the preferred alternative, and it would result in the annual removal of less than one-half of 1% of the current North American barred owl population. We used a maximum number of barred owls removed to ensure we did not underestimate the potential impacts of removal on barred owls and other resources. 

Implementation of the preferred alternative would require authorization under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, through the issuance of a special purpose permit. These permits may be issued for up to three years and can be renewed. The permit would enumerate the number of barred owls authorized for removal under the permit, based on our estimate and request in the application. However, these values would represent the 3-year estimate and may be revised with each renewal. 

The California spotted owl is comprised of two primary populations. In February 2023, the Service proposed listing the Coastal-Southern California distinct population segment as endangered and the Sierra Nevada DPS as threatened under the ESA. California spotted owls are listed as a species of concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Barred owls have recently invaded the range of California spotted owls in the Sierra Nevada. California spotted owls face similar threats as northern spotted owls from barred owl competition as barred owl populations continue to expand southward. 

The southward invasion of the barred owl has reached the range of California spotted owls in the Sierra Nevada. Without barred owl management, the distribution and density of the invasive barred owls are expected to increase throughout the California spotted owl’s range, similar to the history of the northern spotted owl’s range. Invasive species are difficult to remove once established. By including California spotted owls in the preferred alternative, the Service can limit the invasion of barred owls into the range of the California spotted owl. 

If barred owls succeed in establishing populations in the range of California spotted owls, the preferred alternative will allow a rapid response to reduce those barred owl populations and prevent them from impacting California spotted owl populations. 

An interagency, intergovernmental team assisted the Service with developing the proposed Barred Owl Management Strategy. The team included representatives from the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, states of Washington, Oregon, and California, and the Yakama Nation. 

The Service’s 2011 Northern Spotted Owl Recovery Plan, which identified the need to manage barred owls, and the Barred Owl Removal Experiment initiated by the Service in 2013, were developed with stakeholder and public input. The Service sought public and stakeholder input on barred owl management during public comment periods when it issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS in July 2022 and a notice of availability for the draft EIS and draft strategy in November 2023. The Service held one virtual public meeting during public scoping and two public meetings during the comment period on the draft EIS.

During the 60-day comment period, the Service received 8,613 comment letters on the draft EIS and draft strategy, including more than 8,000 comments based on a single template letter. Comments covered a variety of perspectives and included themes such as decreasing or increasing the size of management areas, exploring non-lethal management methods further, focusing on spotted owl habitat protection, concerns about who would remove barred owls and whether removal would impact non-target species, as well as the effectiveness, ethics, and cost of removal. The Service carefully reviewed all comments and has considered them in the drafting of the final EIS. A summary of the public comments received and our responses to substantive comments is available in Appendix 6 of the final EIS.

The final EIS is an important step toward a Service decision on whether to adopt and implement the preferred alternative or another alternative. The final EIS evaluates the impacts on the human environment from the preferred alternative, as well as the other alternatives considered and the no-action alternative, taking public feedback on the draft EIS and draft strategy into account. A minimum of 30 days after publishing the final EIS, the Service will issue a record of decision. 

In the ROD, the Service will describe its decision, which may be to select the preferred alternative, or another alternative described in the FEIS, including the no-action alternative. If the Service selects an alternative that includes barred owl management, the Service will issue a Migratory Bird Treaty Act special purpose permit for actions consistent with the decision to authorize the take of barred owls. For all authorizations that take a migratory bird, the Service ensures the species to be taken will continue to be conserved. Washington, Oregon, and California may also require permits or authorization for the management of barred owls. The Service is working with all states to address state authorizations.

Please visit the Service’s Barred Owl Management website for information on the proposed strategy and, if adopted, its implementation.