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
Report Exposes Instacart's Hidden AI Price Experiments That Could Cost Families $1,200 Per Year
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2025
Consumer advocates on Tuesday called on the Federal Trade Commission and state officials to investigate artificial intelligence-enabled pricing experiments used by Instacart, the grocery shopping app millions of Americans rely on, that charge up to 23% more for some shoppers than others when they buy the same item at the same store.
Consumer Reports joined the advocacy group Groundwork Collaborative and the labor-focused media organization More Perfect Union to uncover Instacart's pricing experiments enabled by Eversight, an AI pricing software that Instacart acquired in 2022. The company's CEO said last year that the experiments have helped the company “to really figure out which categories of products our customers [are] more price sensitive on"—in other words, to tailor prices based on a customer's shopping habits, whether they're near a competing store, and other factors.
The groups' study, Same Cart, Different Price, describes how researchers ran five tests with 437 participants, studying the prices of a basket of items bought at two Target stores and three Safeway stores using Instacart.
In one test at a Safeway in Washington, DC, shoppers logged on to the app to buy a carton of eggs from the same brand at the same time and found that the price they were given varied widely. Some shoppers were charged just $3.99 for the eggs, while others saw a price as high as $4.79—20% higher.
Shoppers at a Safeway in Seattle saw a 23% difference in prices for Skippy peanut butter, Oscar Mayer turkey, and Wheat Thins crackers. At two different Safeways in Washington, DC, Instacart quoted shoppers at one store a price that was 23% higher than at another for Signature Select Corn Flakes.
"It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
For the same basket of groceries, shoppers at the Seattle store were asked to pay as much as $123.93, while others were charged just $114.34.
"The average price variations observed in the study could cost a household of four about $1,200 per year," said Groundwork.
Justin Brookman, director of tech policy at Consumer Reports, said Instacart's tactics "hurt families who are simply trying to purchase essential groceries."
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said Brookman. "Companies must be transparent and upfront with people about pricing, so that they can make informed choices and keep more of their hard-earned money. We encourage the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate Instacart’s pricing tactics."
Groundwork noted that Instcart's website acknowledges that it runs price tests, but states that "shoppers are not aware that they’re in an experiment" and are having their grocery prices selected for them via algorithm.
While Instacart has claimed its price experiments are "negligible," the groups emphasized that they're being used "against the backdrop of the fastest increase in food prices since the late 1970s."
After previous reporting on companies' use of "shrinkflation," "dynamic pricing," and other practices that keep prices high even as pandemic-era labor and supply chain issues have subsided, "today’s report shows Instacart’s experiments are yet another way corporate pricing tactics are squeezing American families," said Groundwork.
The study did not find evidence that Instacart is giving shoppers different prices based on their ZIP code or income, as companies like Amazon, Delta Air Lines, and Home Deport have been accused of doing.
But the groups said Eversight gives the company the capability to use that data to make pricing decisions tailored to particular shoppers.
“Instacart is quietly running pricing experiments on millions of shoppers during the worst grocery affordability crisis in a generation, and it’s costing households as much as $1,200 a year,” said Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens. “They have turned the simple act of buying groceries into a high-tech game of pricing roulette. When the same box of Wheat Thins can jump 23% in price because of an algorithm, that’s not innovation or convenience, it’s unfair. It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
The groups credited some state and federal lawmakers who have begun to take notice of pricing practices like Instacart's; US Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced the Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act in July with the aim of prohibiting the use of automated systems to set prices. New York has enacted the first-of-its-kind Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act, which requires companies to prominently disclose to customers, "This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data" when they use methods like Instacart's. Other state legislation has been introduced in Colorado, California, and Pennsylvania to ban the use of surveillance to set prices.
The groups called on the FTC to take action under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which bans "unfair methods of competition." Those could include “'price discrimination not justified by differences in cost or distribution,' which appears to match Instacart’s pricing experiments and fluctuations," the report reads.
The FTC could also bring enforcement cases or initiate rulemaking to officially label AI-enabled pricing strategies as an "unfair or deceptive practice," affirming that companies who use them are breaking a consumer protection standard.
"Fair and honest markets are the bedrock of a healthy economy," reads Tuesday's report. "Companies like Instacart offer great convenience, but they are increasingly pursuing corporate pricing practices that unfairly decouple the price of a product from its true cost. As more consumers learn about, and decry, these practices, perhaps companies will change course. But if they do not, policymakers should intervene and require them to change their practices."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Warns US Allies Against Complicity in 'Criminal' Trump Boat Bombings
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea," said Human Rights Watch.
Dec 09, 2025
A leading human rights organization on Tuesday pushed allies of the United States to more forcefully condemn and take steps to stop President Donald Trump's deadly boat strikes in international waters, attacks that experts have characterized as extrajudicial killings.
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea,” Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), said in a statement. “The rules-based international order depends on countries speaking out against violations, even when they’re committed by powerful friends.”
HRW specifically urged countries at risk of complicity to closely examine their maritime cooperation and intelligence-sharing with the Trump administration, which claims—without evidence—that every vessel targeted was involved in drug smuggling operations that posed a threat to the US.
"The UK, France, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands have significant influence in the Caribbean due to their overseas territories in the region," the group said. "All three governments are also participants in Campaign Martillo, a multinational counternarcotics detection, monitoring, and interdiction operation that includes US Navy and Coast Guard vessels, along with military and law enforcement units from a dozen other nations, including Canada."
"Australia and New Zealand, which are part of the 'Five Eyes' intelligence sharing community with the United States, UK, and Canada where the governments share all signals and geospatial intelligence by default, may also find themselves implicated in the strikes and should take steps to evaluate their own risks," HRW added.
While officials from the nations named by HRW have criticized and distanced themselves from the Trump administration's strikes, their comments have largely been vague and tepid—especially when compared to the responses of some South American leaders. Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, for instance, said her country "is not involved in these US actions" and that "it is for the United States to articulate the legal basis of its actions."
HRW also pointed to Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand's statement that “the United States has made clear that it is using its own intelligence” to target the vessels in international waters.
"It is not sufficient to accept the US government’s assurances that it is not leveraging shared intelligence for its unlawful strikes," said HRW. "In contrast, when asked directly about the legality of the strikes, [Ahmed] declined to address the matter, saying instead that 'it is within the purview of US authorities to make that determination.'"
Last month, the UK reportedly suspended some intelligence sharing with the US due to the boat strikes. But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the CNN reporting a "fake story," and the UK's foreign secretary cited Rubio's comment when asked about the report.
HRW said major US allies "should make public any internal legal assessments as to whether the US strikes are violating international law, use their bilateral relationships to raise concerns directly with US officials, and push for individual criminal accountability for those responsible."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Raid on UNRWA Compound Slammed as 'Dangerous Precedent'
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," said UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini.
Dec 08, 2025
United Nations officials and others strongly condemned Monday's raid by Israeli authorities on a facility run by the UN's office for Palestinian refugees in occupied East Jerusalem—an act one rights group decried as part of an ongoing effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate" the lifesaving agency.
Israeli police and other officials forcibly entered the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) compound early Monday, pulling down a UN flag on the facility's roof and replacing it with an Israeli one. Israeli officials said the raid was ordered over unpaid taxes.
"They call it 'debt collection'—we call it erasure," Claudia Webbe, a socialist former member of British Parliament, said on social media. "Over 70,000 dead in Gaza, they now seek to kill the memory of the living. The occupation must end."
Police vehicles including motorcycles, trucks, and forklifts entered the compound, while communications were cut and furniture, computer equipment, and other property were seized from the facility, according to UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini.
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," Lazzarini said in a statement.
"To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world," he added.
Secretary-General António Guterres was among the other senior UN officials who condemned Monday's raid.
“This compound remains United Nations premises and is inviolable and immune from any other form of interference,” he said.
“I urge Israel to immediately take all necessary steps to restore, preserve, and uphold the inviolability of UNRWA premises and to refrain from taking any further action with regard to UNRWA premises, in line with its obligations under the charter of the United Nations and its other obligations under international law," Guterres added.
In late 2024, Israeli lawmakers approved a ban on UNRWA in Israel over disproven allegations that some of its staffers were Hamas members who took part in the October 7, 2023 attack. Those accusations led to numerous nations suspending financial support for UNRWA, although most of the countries have since restored funding. Israel has also sought to ban UNRWA from Gaza since early 2024.
Israeli forces have killed more than 370 UNRWA staff members since October 2023 and destroyed or damaged over 300 of the agency's facilities in Gaza. Lazzarini and others have also accused Israeli forces of torturing UNRWA staffers in a bid to force false confessions of Hamas involvement.
In October, the International Court of Justice—which is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel—found that UNRWA has not been infiltrated by Hamas as claimed by Israeli leaders.
Others also condemned Monday's raid, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), which called the action part of an effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate a United Nations agency providing vital services to millions of Palestinian refugees."
"Governments should condemn Israel's unlawful moves against UNRWA and urgently act to stop further abuses," HRW added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


