September, 22 2010, 10:27am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jeff Miller, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 499-9185
California's Largest Burrowing Owl Population Is in Rapid Decline
IMPERIAL VALLEY, Calif.
New surveys show a 27-percent drop in the number of breeding burrowing owls in California's Imperial Valley and provide some of the most striking evidence yet that the species is badly in need of state protections. Recent surveys of the state's largest burrowing owl population have been conducted by the Imperial Irrigation District. The Imperial owl population has declined from an estimated 5,600 pairs in the early 1990s to 4,879 pairs in 2007, then dropped sharply to 3,557 pairs in 2008.
"It's alarming to see such a rapid, single-year drop in owl numbers in an area that is supposed to be a stronghold. Breeding owls been eliminated from a quarter of their former range in California over the past two decades as their habitat has been destroyed and they've been shoved aside for urban development," said Jeff Miller, conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity, which led several groups in petitioning for state Endangered Species Act protection for the owl in 2003. "A state threatened listing is clearly needed for burrowing owls, which are likely to disappear from major portions of the state. It is now uncertain whether owls will persist in areas they were thought to be secure, including the Imperial Valley."
Burrowing owls in the Imperial Valley nest almost entirely in ground-squirrel burrows along earthen irrigation canals and drains. They represent nearly half the state's breeding pairs. Once common in California, burrowing owls have been driven out of much of the state, with large populations primarily in areas of intensive agriculture, including parts of the Central Valley, along the lower Colorado River and the Imperial Valley.
The California Fish and Game Commission rejected the 2003 petition following a highly controversial assessment by the Department of Fish and Game. After the vote, it was revealed that agency biologists evaluating the petition concluded that the burrowing owl should be protected as a "candidate" species and considered for endangered or threatened status, but the Department suppressed their report and recommended against listing.
Burrowing owls face multiple significant threats, including habitat loss and fragmentation by urban development, elimination of burrowing rodents and destruction of burrows, pesticides, predation by nonnative species, vehicle strikes, collisions with wind turbines and shooting. The state has allowed landowners to evict and "passively relocate" owls from development sites, with inadequate mitigation and no assurances that relocated owls are able to survive.
It is unknown what is causing the Imperial owl decline, but loss of suitable foraging areas from fallowing of agricultural fields due to water transfers and ground-squirrel eradication programs may play a role. There is no evidence that the Imperial owls are moving elsewhere in California.
The information about Imperial Valley burrowing owl declines is buried in a 2009 annual report by the Imperial Irrigation District to the State Water Resources Control Board that can be found at https://www.iid.com/Media/2009-Report.pdf on page 176. The significant decline in the Imperial Valley has not been publicized by the Department of Fish and Game, which is currently preparing a state burrowing owl "Conservation Strategy" designed to prevent listing, and will rely primarily on voluntary measures and provide no effective legal protection for owl habitat.
Background
The western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea) is a small, ground-nesting bird of prairie and grassland habitats. Its breeding range is west of the Mississippi River to the Pacific, north into Canada and south to Mexico. The species has declined significantly throughout North America, is listed as endangered in Canada and threatened in Mexico, and is state-listed as endangered in Minnesota and threatened in Colorado. Many other states, including California, list it as a state "species of special concern." California supports the largest remaining breeding and wintering populations of western burrowing owls. There are no state or federal laws that protect burrowing owl habitat, which is rarely purchased by agencies to conserve the owl or other grassland-dependent species. An estimated 91 percent of all burrowing owls in California occur on private land, much of which is threatened by future development.
Early accounts of the burrowing owl in California described it as one of the state's most common birds in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Owl numbers have dropped steadily since the 1940s; by the mid-1990s surveys estimated 9,450 owl nesting pairs in the primary range of California burrowing owls, with 5,600 pairs thought to nest in the Imperial Valley. The number of breeding owl colonies in the survey area declined by nearly 60 percent from the 1980s to the early 1990s, and the statewide number of owls is now thought to be continuing to decline by about 8 percent per year due to urban development. The Institute for Bird Populations conducted a follow-up statewide survey in 2007 and 2008, and preliminary data indicates owl populations continue to decline in most areas of the state. Breeding owls have been largely eliminated from Sonoma, Napa, Marin, western Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego counties.
Most of the state's remaining breeding owls are concentrated in the Imperial Valley, an area that makes up only 2.5 percent of the state's land area. These owls face threats from conversion of agricultural lands to urban development, plans to line earthen canals with concrete, and ground-squirrel eradication. Throughout the vast majority of the owl's range in California, breeding owls persist in only small, declining populations of birds that are highly susceptible to extirpation.
The Department's conclusions regarding the burrowing owl listing petition were widely criticized by owl experts as fraught with inaccuracies, speculation and inconsistencies. The agency's reasoning that listing of the burrowing owl was not warranted relied on erroneous premises: that there was insufficient information on the historic range and abundance of the species; that a shift in owl population density has occurred, with increased densities appearing in the Imperial Valley balancing out reduced densities elsewhere in the state; that significant exchange occurs between regional populations; and that the Imperial Valley and other larger populations can maintain the species by augmenting declining populations elsewhere.
But banding data on owls in California shows little evidence of connectivity between regional populations, and larger southern populations have never been shown to serve as source populations for declining owl colonies elsewhere. The recent decline in the Imperial Valley undermines the Department's arguments about a stable overall state population. Significant breeding-owl declines have been shown in almost every part of the state; the species is threatened in a significant portion of its range.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
'Concerning, Shortsighted, and Detrimental': Trump Attacks National Endowment for the Arts
"Creative expression is the lifeblood that vivifies a free and democratic culture," said the head of one nonprofit publisher. "Every story a writer tells is one Trump cannot control."
May 06, 2025
Arts institutions around the country expressed sadness and outrage after the Trump administration notified theaters, literary arts organizations, and other groups on Friday that their National Endowment for the Arts grants were being withdrawn or canceled. The message came the same day that U.S. President Donald Trump proposed eliminating funding for the independent federal agency.
"Any attempt to dismantle the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)—by eliminating funding, reducing staff, or canceling grants—is deeply concerning, shortsighted, and detrimental to our nation," said CEO of Americans for the Arts, Erin Harkey, on Saturday. "NEA grants have touched every American, supporting projects in every congressional district and helping the arts reach parts of the country, including often overlooked rural communities."
According to NPR, which itself receives two NEA grants valued at $65,000, hundreds of groups across the country on Friday received a message from the NEA that grants offered for the 2025 fiscal year were being terminated or withdrawn. The email read, in part, "the NEA is updating its grantmaking policy priorities to focus funding on projects that reflect the nation's rich artistic heritage and creativity as prioritized by the president."
"Consequently," the email continued "we are terminating awards that fall outside these new priorities." According to NPR, the email states the president's priorities include projects that "celebrate the 250th anniversary of American independence," "make America healthy again," and "foster skilled trade jobs," among others.
Impacted organizations have submitted information about their terminated or withdrawn NEA grants to a public tracker, which as of Tuesday afternoon lists over 200 groups. According to the spreadsheet, total funding revoked as of 3:00 pm Eastern Time tallied $5.9 million.
According to reporting from The Washington Post, it was not immediately clear whether the NEA is able to rescind grants it has already awarded, something that grantees who spoke to the outlet raised. The NEA was established by Congress in 1965 is the largest funder of arts and arts education countrywide, also according to the Post.
The move to revoke funding "not only threatens the stability of countless community-based programs but also places a heavy burden on smaller arts organizations that rely on consistent support to serve, educate, and inspire," wrote Lina Lindberg, a grant strategist, on LinkedIn on Tuesday.
The nonprofit publisher Electric Literature announced on Monday that its 2025 NEA grant was terminated, but struck a defiant tone in the public statement.
"Creative expression is the lifeblood that vivifies a free and democratic culture. Trump is obsessed with a heritage and legacy of his own imagination. For him, literature is forward facing and therefore dangerous. Every story, even about the past, is a new story. Every story a writer tells is one Trump cannot control," wrote the organization's executive director, Halimah Marcus. "Electric Literature will continue to publish culturally enriching stories about the past, present, and future with honesty and heart."
Portland Playhouse posted on Instagram that the administration had withdrawn the nonprofit theater's $25,000 NEA grant on the eve of the opening night of a production the funding was meant to support.
"To receive this news on the eve of opening night is deeply disappointing. While we have no plans currently to cancel our production, moving forward without the support of this critical funding presents a significant challenge for our company," the playhouse wrote. "We know we're not alone. Arts organizations across the country are grappling with reduced support at a time when the need for community, connection, and cultural expression is vital."
According to n+1's development director Dani Oliver, the magazine on Friday learned about the termination of its $12,500 2025 NEA grant "meant to help us pay our authors, our editors, and to have the magazine distributed to our readers."
"We're trying to stay optimistic, but with the administration's other announcement this week that the NEA might be shut down in its entirety, it's hard to do so," Oliver added.
Earlier Friday, Trump proposed completely getting rid of the NEA in his budget blueprint for fiscal year 2026.
Next to where the NEA appears in the budget, the document explains that "the budget includes the elimination of, or the elimination of federal funding for, the following small agencies."
In addition to NEA, Trump's budget also proposed eliminating funding for the National Endowment for Humanities and the Institute of Museum and Library Services. The New York Timesreported Friday that "the proposal to eliminate the endowments drew a quick and furious reaction from Democrats."
The Times also reported that on Monday a group of senior officials at the NEA announced their resignations.
One observer, Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, connected the grant terminations to the effort by Republicans in Congress to pass a round of tax cuts that will primarily benefit the wealthy. "The next thing Trump is trying to tear down: the arts," he wrote on X Tuesday. "All to fund tax cuts for billionaires."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lina Khan Accuses Trump FTC of Trying to Let Oil Exec 'Off the Hook' for Price Gouging Scandal
As FTC chair, Khan stopped a fossil fuel CEO from "cashing in and joining Exxon's board," said one lawmaker. "Now, with Trump bending to the whims of Big Oil, he's considering overturning that punishment."
May 06, 2025
"So much for America First," said one progressive lawmaker on Monday regarding the Federal Trade Commission's new push to reverse a ban on two fossil fuel CEOs from serving on the boards of ExxonMobil and Chevron—the oil giants that were acquiring their companies.
The FTC is accepting public comments until May 12 on a petition filed by former Pioneer National Resources CEO Scott Sheffield, which would set aside the Biden administration's consent order; finalized days before President Donald Trump took office, that barred Sheffield from serving on Exxon's board.
The order also applied to John Hess, CEO of Hess Corp., which was being acquired by Chevron.
Then-FTC Chair Lina Khan barred the CEOs from becoming board members over concerns that they would collude with representatives of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to ensure Americans continued paying high oil prices.
Sheffield and Hess both communicated with OPEC officials, including "the past and current secretaries general" of the organization "and an official from Saudi Arabia," according to an FTC probe under the Biden administration.
The two executives and their companies denied the allegations. Republican members of the FTC at the time voted against Khan's ban on the board positions, claiming it overstepped the agency's authority.
But on Monday, Khan urged those who oppose oil price fixing by energy giants to submit public comments on the Trump administration's "proposal to release Sheffield from accountability."
"The FTC is now trying to let this oil executive off the hook," said Khan, a law professor at Columbia University.
Exxon, the largest U.S. oil company, bought Pioneer in a $59.5 billion deal last year. Chevron's purchase of Hess for $53 billion is currently pending during arbitration proceedings.
The FTC's investigation last year found that Sheffield communicated with OPEC about cutting oil production and driving up consumer prices while publicly blaming government policies. One analysis found such price fixing schemes by corporations were to blame for 27% of the inflation spike that American families faced in 2021.
Sheffield pushed to "keep gas prices high so his shareholders could make even more money," said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) on Monday. "Lina Khan's FTC prevented him from cashing in and joining Exxon's board. Now, with Trump bending to the whims of Big Oil, he's considering overturning that punishment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amid Forced Starvation in Gaza, NGO Coalition Decries Israel's New Registration Rules
"Under international humanitarian law, occupying powers are obligated to facilitate impartial humanitarian assistance and ensure the welfare of the protected population."
May 06, 2025
A coalition of 55 international humanitarian groups operating in Palestine on Tuesday denounced Israel's new rules for registering foreign-based nongovernmental organizations, a move that came amid the Israeli government's forced starvation and "complete siege" of Palestinians deprived of lifesaving aid in the embattled Gaza Strip.
In March, a new law on the registration and visa issuance process for international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) took effect. Israeli and international critics condemned the new rules—which dozens of European lawmakers called "purposely vague" and "highly discretionary"—as aimed at barring INGOs from helping Palestinians, who are suffering from a genocidal invasion and siege in Gaza and decades of illegal occupation, apartheid, and colonization in the West Bank including East Jerusalem.
"Under the new provisions, INGOs already registered in Israel may face de-registration, while new applicants risk rejection based on arbitrary, politicized allegations, such as 'delegitimising Israel' or expressing support for accountability for Israeli violations of international law," the 55 groups said in an open letter.
"Other disqualifiers include public support for a boycott of Israel within the past seven years (by staff, a partner, board member, or founder) or failure to meet exhaustive reporting requirements," the letter states. "By framing humanitarian and human rights advocacy as a threat to the state, Israeli authorities can shut out organizations merely for speaking out about conditions they witness on the ground, forcing INGOs to choose between delivering aid and promoting respect for the protections owed to affected people."
"INGOs are further required to submit complete staff lists and other sensitive information about staff and their families to Israel when applying for registration," the signers noted. "In a context where humanitarian and healthcare workers are routinely subject to harassment, detention, and direct attacks, this raises serious protection concerns."
"These new rules are part of a broader, long-term crackdown on humanitarian and civic space, marked by heightened surveillance and attacks, and a series of actions that restrict humanitarian access, compromise staff safety, and undermine core principles of humanitarian action," the letter adds.
In addition to blocking or delaying aid shipments to Gaza under a siege and targeted starvation policy that United Nations experts have repeatedly called genocidal, Israeli forces have killed, wounded, kidnapped, tortured, and otherwise abused at least hundreds of aid workers; banned the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees; falsely accused humanitarian workers of being terrorists; obliterated Gaza's healthcare infrastructure; and much more.
Israel has also suspended the visas of foreign humanitarian officials and suspended the work permits for Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank. Meanwhile, Israeli lawmakers are debating legislation that would impose a tax of up to 80% on foreign government funding to INGOs and bar them from seeking legal redress.
In the United States, the administration of President Donald Trump has eliminated or dramatically reduced humanitarian funding, including via the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This has forced numerous aid agencies to cut back or halt operations in Palestine.
"Under international humanitarian law, occupying powers are obligated to facilitate impartial humanitarian assistance and ensure the welfare of the protected population," the 55 INGOs said in their letter. "Any attempt to condition humanitarian access on political alignment or penalize organizations for fulfilling their mandate risks breaching this framework."
"The International Court of Justice ordered Israel to allow unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza in three legally binding provisional measures orders in 2024," the letter adds. Israel has been accused of ignoring the orders by the ICJ, which is currently weighing a genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are also fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which last year issued arrest warrants for the pair for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with the 19-month assault on Gaza that has left more than 185,000 Palestinians dead, injured, or missing and most of the coastal enclave's population forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened.
In a Tuesday interview with Al Jazeera, Bushra Khalidi, policy lead at the Jerusalem branch of Oxfam—one of the 55 groups that signed the letter—said that "Gaza is in the worst possible phase" since the beginning of Israel's onslaught, as mass starvation worsens amid a tightened blockade and pledges by Israeli leaders to conquer and ethnically cleanse the coastal enclave.
"We've not been able to operate, basically, since the second of March," she added. "Our food distribution has completely halted. We have nothing in the warehouses... Catastrophic doesn't even describe the situation in Gaza. It's hell."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular