Airport is no place for hawk preserve

 

This is where Sacramento plans to put nearly 3,000 new homes

Advocates for the Swainson’s hawk, listed as threatened by the state, are unhappy with the habitat mitigation land chosen for the hawks, which is an orchard west of the airport, adjacent to the Teal Bend golf course. Advocate Jude Lamare said the site is too close the airport, where 11 Swainson’s hawks have been counted as hit and killed by jets in the last four years.

The hawks forage in various places around the Natomas basin, but, as development continues, nesting areas will be reduced, forcing more birds into limited sites, including the one next to the airport. “If you are picking a ‘forever’ home for threatened avian species, it would not be next to a runway,” Lamare said. “You are squeezing the species down.”

(Bizjak, Tony, This is where Sacramento plans to put nearly 3,000 new homes)

Read more here.


A Message from Judith Lamare, President of the Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk, a member organization of Habitat 2020/ECOS. May 29, 2017

Here is a text you can copy and email to urge the City to reject the Moody Preserve as part of the Greenbriar project. Use this in the Subject line of your email: Item 19 May 30, 2017: No Hawk Preserve Next to Airport

Dear City Leaders:

  • Please reject the proposed Moody Preserve as part of the Greenbriar Project at your meeting on Tuesday May 30. (Agenda Item 19)
  • The property is about 600 feet from the Airport’s west runway.
    Eleven Swainson’s Hawks have been listed as fatalities in the FAA bird strike data base for SMF between 2013 and 2016.
  • Airport operations are expected to grow by 30 percent over the next twenty years.
  • This is the wrong location to preserve in perpetuity for conservation of a threatened bird species.
  • Please require the Greenbriar developer to provide another mitigation site that offers more protection to the Swainson’s Hawk, listed as threatened under state law.

The email string to use is:
MayorSteinberg [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org, Angelique Ashby <aashby [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Allen Warren <awarren [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Jeff S. Harris <JSHarris [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Steve Hansen <SHansen [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Jay Schenirer
<jschenirer [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Eguerra [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org,”Lawrence R. Carr” <Lcarr [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, Rick Jennings <rjennings [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org>, clerk [at] cityofsacramento [dot] org,swainsonshawk [at] sbcglobal [dot] net

Thank you for your help in averting a bad decision on conservation for our threatened wildlife.

Judith Lamare, President
Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk
www.swainsonshawk.org
swainsonshawk [at] sbcglobal [dot] net


Read the letter from the Environmental Council of Sacramento, Habitat 2020 and Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk here.

Share this

Greenbriar: where Sacramento plans to put nearly 3,000 new homes

By Tony Bizjak

May 29th, 2017

The Sacramento Bee

Advocates for the Swainson’s hawk, listed as threatened by the state, are unhappy with the habitat mitigation land chosen for the hawks, which is an orchard west of the airport, adjacent to the Teal Bend golf course. Advocate Jude Lamare said the site is too close the airport, where 11 Swainson’s hawks have been counted as hit and killed by jets in the last four years.

The hawks forage in various places around the Natomas basin, but, as development continues, nesting areas will be reduced, forcing more birds into limited sites, including the one next to the airport. “If you are picking a ‘forever’ home for threatened avian species, it would not be next to a runway,” Lamare said. “You are squeezing the species down.”

Read more here.

 

Share this

Folsom annexation blues

October 20, 2016

By Scott Thomas Anderson

Sacramento News and Review

Showered by developer cash camouflaged through a political action committee, the Folsom City Council has quietly led an aggressive annexation campaign that could impact traffic, air quality and wildlife in northeast Sacramento County for decades to come.

[…]

The Environmental Council of Sacramento has raised concerns about the plan, including the impacts on smog and traffic, the effects on hawks and migratory birds and—most prominently—its seeming reliance on a nonexistent stable source of water: The city council voted in 2013 to supply thousands of future residents of the development with surplus water from conservation efforts within Folsom’s perilous local supply.

“They overallocated their water,” said Matt Baker, land use and conservation policy director at ECOS. “They’ve really not provided any kind of plan for an event that could drastically reduce their supply in an extremely dry year.”

Read the full article here: https://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/folsom-annexation-blues/content?oid=22531569

Share this