Very colonizer-brained. We certainly can delineate ourselves to a certain degree. At what scope have we tried leaving well enough alone for nature to run its course? Human "wisdom" has caused untold damage, what makes you so certain that same wisdom is what's best?
And this isn't a call for humanity to stop progressing or anything(though maybe....) just that well intentioned conservation seems short sighted and self serving. I'm not convinced our intervention is what will halt the decay.
~~removing~~ eating kudzu instead.
And what happens when this intervention causes new unforeseen consequences? How many disruptions until we leave well enough alone?
We don't live in nature. We literally live in a human society. Rights do apply to us within our own realm lmao.
Edit: You probably stack rocks.
I don't fully agree. Extinction can be natural, what right do humans have to intervene in this? Just because conservation makes us feel nice?
Each situation is extremely intricate of course, so maybe this is the right choice in this instance, such as preventing a larger impact to a local ecosystem, or if the barred owls were introduced directly unnaturally. But direct human intervention should always be greatly scrutinized. We already do enough damage indirectly from exploiting global resources.
Wtf do all owls look the same to you??
The classism, holy shit. Most of this thread is dripping with tone deafness from my fellow hexbears wtf.
You do not, under any circumstances, "gotta hand it them".
Women and iceberg bear struggle session dropping when?
Holy hell
It better have been revolutionary 
I would simply 
against the spicy orange cheeto.
Life on Earth existed for hundreds of millions of years before human industrialisation, why are we so necessary to it's continuation? Why isn't withdrawing to a certain extent an option? Sounds like you're arguing for the contradiction of infinite growth like a good capitalist.