Quote Originally Posted by goshawks00 View Post
I like this part the best , so did I read this right.."let's keep cutting timber to hasten their extinction...
They wrote:
The NGRT
considers threats from genetic isolation
to be high for the Queen Charlotte
Islands, and low to none elsewhere in
British Columbia (NGRT 2008, pp. 16,
18–19). We concur with this assessment.
We believe that the greatest threats from
inbreeding depression or other impacts
associated with low genetic diversity
would come as populations adjust to
reduced habitat availability, which we
believe will be lowest in about 120 years
on the Queen Charlotte Islands, and in
about 50 years for the rest of the DPS,
when conversion of available old
growth to second growth forest will be
nearly complete (except on a few timber
tenures), and timber harvests will be
composed primarily of second growth


(see discussion under
Factor A, above).
I find it interesting, and more than a little troubling that the basis of the listing is that goshawks dont like logging activites. There is a lot of BS statements in there justification for those statements.

I do have to qualify this by saying I have never been on Vancouver Island (well, not more outside of an urban area anyway), and never been to the Queen Charlottes.

But I have spent many spring weekends in the temperate rainforest looking for goshawks. They are far more common in and near heavily logged areas than in pristine habbitat. The Final Rule speculates that for some reason the prey species in the Canadian population segment of the Laingi goshawks does not adapt well to the edge habitat created by logging. I find it very hard to believe that this is the case when those same species which occur just across the interantional border in the US, where I live, thrive in clear cuts. The rainforest goshawks down here LOVE to hunt on the edges of clear cuts - I frequently see them still hunting while perched right on the edge of a clear cut.

Trying to recall where I read it now, but I read a study done on Vancouver Island that was comparing nesting success in pristine unlogged territories and territories that occured in logged areas. The study was funded by the tree huggers, and show a distinct bias in favor of those who paid the bills (hope no one died of shock just there), but in the raw data of the study there was a distinct increase in fledgling rates in the logged areas.