Our littlest owl has no status? How very dare they!

[Deb London]

One of my small but significant wildlife "moments" this year was discovering a population of Little Owls locally. I think they are fantastic creatures.

I was researching them today and discovered that numbers have dropped, with the UK population estimated to be down by 24 per cent between 1995 and 2008. Then I saw that they had "no status". I read further and saw that this was because they were introduced (correct me if I'm wrong). I was surprised to learn this.

They have been around since the 1800s.

What makes a species "status-worthy"? And why bother to give figures like "down 24 percent" if no one gives a hoot (pun intended)?

[KentYeti]

I think they are fantastic little creatures too Deb.

Ever so small, but lots of character. I regularly see one at Elmley, in the RSPB reserve on the Isle of Sheppey. Can get quite nosiy around dusk as it flies around the farm buildings.

Made me laugh the other night. It was sitting on top of the tall chimneys on the Wardens House being very vocal indeed. Until the Grey Heron that "lives" in the nearby scrape replied very noisily. "Oops, not the reply I wanted" said the Little Owl as it flew off! LOL!

Anyway, one of the things I am having difficulty understanding in the still short time since I became a devout birder, are things like status, and if bird is British or not.

Fer crying out loud, they's birds, with wings and they fly around! Respect them all , wherever they come from. Introduced or not, escaped from captivity, or just turned up here or not.

You've really hit a sore point with me there at the moment Deb. You may have noticed I'm getting rather hooked on Owls. And I so enjoyed my time with Kaln, the Eagle Owl that flew for us at the Barn Owl Centre recently. What a character, what a truly wonderful bird. Yet it seems we may be thinking about culling those few Eagle Owls that have either escaped and bred here, or have actually flown in from mainland Europe, (as ANY bird is entitled to do IMHO), and bred. And who can say, hand on heart if those few birds in the North are escapees or some that did make an unusual, for Eagle Owls, water crossing to make their home here? And does it matter?

Yes, a "new" species, (if they are new, there is just a possibilty they did once live in the UK), that will have some impact on existing wildlife here. Mainly rabbits, but just possibly on Hen Harriers as well. But that is how Mother Nature works.

Sorry to have babbled on Deb.

But owls, little and big do have their place here, and should be given the status that goes with it.

Bryan

[Deb London]

Glad to have a passionate response Bryan. Hopefully we'll find out why some owls don't seem to have a place here.

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by Deb London

One of my small but significant wildlife "moments" this year was discovering a population of Little Owls locally. I think they are fantastic creatures.

I was researching them today and discovered that numbers have dropped, with the UK population estimated to be down by 24 per cent between 1995 and 2008. Then I saw that they had "no status". I read further and saw that this was because they were introduced (correct me if I'm wrong). I was surprised to learn this.

They have been around since the 1800s.

What makes a species "status-worthy"? And why bother to give figures like "down 24 percent" if no one gives a hoot (pun intended)?

Successful introductions of Little Owls took place in Kent and Nottinghamshire towards the end of the 1800s (from c1975 in Kent, and 10-15 years later in Nottinghamshire if I remember correctly - can't be bothered to look it up) and had spread quite widely by the 1920s. A little over a hundred years isn't really all that long for a species to have been present though.
They are not typically given a conservation status (ie "Red listed" etc.) because they are not native - the same is true of other introduced species, including introduced populations of species that also occur in a wild state (eg. Greylag Goose and Barnacle Goose), with the naturalised populations not given a conservation status.
Note that species that colonise entirely naturally are considered native, regardless of how long they have been present, while species that are only present because man has brought them to an area are never considered native.
The fact that an introduced population isn't considered worthy of a conservation status doesn't mean that no one is interested in monitoring whether the population has changed though - as an example very few people "give a hoot" about whether the introduced American Mink population is doing well or not, but most people interested in the conservation of native species would be interested in whether the population was increasing, stable, or declining (if figures were available), and a few (IMO stupid people) would consider an increase in the numbers of mink to be a good thing.

Re-introduced species are given a conservation status though - which I guess reflects the fact that they were once known to have been present, and if time and money has been put into reintroducing them it seems a shame to let them die out again if this can be prevented.

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Fer crying out loud, they's birds, with wings and they fly around! Respect them all , wherever they come from. Introduced or not, escaped from captivity, or just turned up here or not.

If all wildlife require equal respect (and therefore equal treatment) regardless of how it becomes established, then you have to view American Mink, and the many other examples of introduced species that have adversely affected our wildlife in the same way.

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Yet it seems we may be thinking about culling those few Eagle Owls that have either escaped and bred here, or have actually flown in from mainland Europe, (as ANY bird is entitled to do IMHO), and bred. And who can say, hand on heart if those few birds in the North are escapees or some that did make an unusual, for Eagle Owls, water crossing to make their home here? And does it matter?

Yes, a "new" species, (if they are new, there is just a possibilty they did once live in the UK), that will have some impact on existing wildlife here. Mainly rabbits, but just possibly on Hen Harriers as well. But that is how Mother Nature works.

Any bird that can manage it is of course entitled to come here under its own power, but in the case of Eagle Owls (and Little Owls) there is plenty of evidence that the birds breeding here have been brought across by man and have then escaped or been released (some of the first recorded breeding Eagle Owls still had jesses, and many are known to escape and then evade capture), but the "evidence" for even a single individual (let alone enough to start a self sustaining breeding population) arriving here naturally is limited to people thinking "it might potentially be possible". So the balance of probability effectively has a few dozen Eagle Owls sat on the side of the scales that represents 'introduced by man', and a single Little Owls feather on the side that represents "natural colonisation".

Originally Posted by KentYeti

But owls, little and big do have their place here, and should be given the status that goes with it.

They have, its just that the introduced ones aren't considered to require a conservation status.

Originally Posted by Deb London

Glad to have a passionate response Bryan. Hopefully we'll find out why some owls don't seem to have a place here.

Think about other introduced species - some seem to be 'benign' so although they aren't considered worthy of any special conservation efforts they are left alone. The other option is to treat them as pest species with all possible attempts made to eradicate them. Realistically why should conservation funds that could otherwise potentially help other species be used to help those that are only here because man brought them here?

[KentYeti]

Thankfully Roy with the freedoms still available to me I don't have to view American Mink in any way at all. Especially as my limited understanding of them is that they are not birds, don't have wings and don't fly.

Unless they start predating wild British Eagle Owls to any significant degree.

Whether I can get to see and photo a wild British Eagle Owl is of course another matter. But I am content for the moment to enjoy watching and photographing them in captivity.

As well as those lovely Little Owls which thankfully I can watch with some regularity in the wild locally.

In addition I wonder if there is any research that points to Little Owls once having been resident in the UK, as it seems Eagle Owls could well have been up to around the time there was still a land bridge between the UK and what we generally now refer to as mainland Europe. "...some limited fossil evidence of eagle owls in Britain" back in those distant days is part of what the RSPB has to say on that.

I shall have to research Little Owls a bit more.

And Deb. I am starting to think about installing a nest box for one as I am told they inhabit the local church which is only a few hundred metres away from my home! And I have a lovely big oak tree they will be very welcome to perch in.

Bryan

[Deb London]

I found a web page with some Little Owl nest box details.

http://www.xexexexexexexexexexexexe....stboxes_32.pdf

Just in case you hadn't seen it.

http://www.barnow ltrust.org.uk/content_images/pdf/Little_Owls_Nestboxes_32.pdf

(Remove the space - don't know why it went all exxy-exxy-exxy).

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Thankfully Roy with the freedoms still available to me I don't have to view American Mink in any way at all. Especially as my limited understanding of them is that they are not birds, don't have wings and don't fly.

No, mink aren't birds, and don't fly, and they also aren't a European species. However, the fact that birds have wings and can fly doesn't automatically mean that they are likely to reach the UK and colonise - therefore introduced bird species should (IMO) be treated the same way as other introduced species (ie. they don't warrant a conservation status, and should be removed if they cause problems for native wildlife).
The exception might be if a species was globally threatened, and the introduced population was important because of this.

Originally Posted by KentYeti

In addition I wonder if there is any research that points to Little Owls once having been resident in the UK, as it seems Eagle Owls could well have been up to around the time there was still a land bridge between the UK and what we generally now refer to as mainland Europe. "...some limited fossil evidence of eagle owls in Britain" back in those distant days is part of what the RSPB has to say on that.

I shall have to research Little Owls a bit more.

Little Owls have been identified in the fossil record in the UK, but apparently not the recently (about 1/2 million years ago).
There are lots of other species that have been found in the fossil record in the UK, but just because a species was once present here it doesn't mean that they should automatically be welcomed if they establish introduced populations (and presence in the fossil record doesn't automatically show that the species lived in the wild in the UK).

[Deb London]

Originally Posted by RoyW

No, mink aren't birds, and don't fly, and they also aren't a European species. However, the fact that birds have wings and can fly doesn't automatically mean that they are likely to reach the UK and colonise - therefore introduced bird species should (IMO) be treated the same way as other introduced species (ie. they don't warrant a conservation status, and should be removed if they cause problems for native wildlife).
The exception might be if a species was globally threatened, and the introduced population was important because of this.




Little Owls have been identified in the fossil record in the UK, but apparently not the recently (about 1/2 million years ago).
There are lots of other species that have been found in the fossil record in the UK, but just because a species was once present here it doesn't mean that they should automatically be welcomed if they establish introduced populations (and presence in the fossil record doesn't automatically show that the species lived in the wild in the UK).

Well I think the powers that be should see sense.

This is my thinking:

No conservation status means no protection. The way things are in the UK at the moment, that leaves them in a precarious position. To give them no status might be a death sentence in various situations. Improbable maybe, but not impossible. But they've lived here without problems for more than a century. It's not right, I say!

[Dogghound]

Originally Posted by Deb London

No conservation status means no protection.

Little owls are still protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is an offence to kill or injure them, taken them from the wild, damage or destroy their nests, take their eggs, disturb nest building adults, disturb young in the nest, disturb adults at the nest.....

So they are protected, the conservation status is more of a way of monitoring populations and prioritizing species for conservation which are in decline. Little owls are widespread and although they suffer losses through habitat degradation and harsh winters, they are very adaptable and quickly recover. They are also widespread across their range.

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by Deb London

Well I think the powers that be should see sense.

This is my thinking:

No conservation status means no protection. The way things are in the UK at the moment, that leaves them in a precarious position. To give them no status might be a death sentence in various situations. Improbable maybe, but not impossible. But they've lived here without problems for more than a century. It's not right, I say!

Not quite "no protection", they still have the protection that is given to all birds in the UK particularly during the breeding season (other than a few named exceptions), and they will still be catered for on reserves and other areas with the provision of nest boxes etc.

The point is that they are not given a conservation status because they are not considered to be species that it is important to conserve. There may not be any effort made to eradicate them (unlike some other alien species), but their presence is also not actively encouraged (so if they do fall in numbers there is unlikely to be any effort made to help the numbers recover - unless they respond to measures put in place to help other species). Golden, and Lady Amherst's Pheasants are two examples that spring to mind. Numbers of both have fallen, and Lady Amherst's Pheasants now have a sub-category of their own on the British list (C6 - "Former naturalised species whose populations are considered to be no longer self sustaining, or extinct).

If the American Mink, Signal Crayfish, Harlequin Ladybirds, Canada Geese, Japanese Knotweed, or other introduced species fell to a level which meant they could become extinct in the UK would you consider this to be a problem?
Whether or not a species is 'liked' should have no effect on the conservation status, but whether it is a species that naturally belongs here is an important consideration.