Mountain View: Mayday for Burrowing Owls

Burrowing Owls at Shoreline: Teresa Cheng

Mayday, Mayday, Mayday: Burrowing Owls at risk in Mountain View

Synopsis

The City of Mountain View has been on the front lines of Burrowing Owl conservation and recovery efforts since 2012. This summer, City staff dropped the ball. Biologists have been absent from Shoreline since July and habitat enhancement, as well as critical Burrowing Owl recovery programs, has been either suspended or badly mismanaged. Despite the documented commitment of the City Council to the Burrowing Owls and to biodiversity, the future of Burrowing Owls and other vulnerable species at Shoreline is now uncertain. In 2023, there were only 51 adult Burrowing Owls (forming 21 successful breeding pairs) in the entire South Bay Area. Of these, 17 adult Owls including 5 successful pairs were at Shoreline. We cannot allow the protection of Shoreline Burrowing Owls to erode further.

What is happening?

Mountain View’s previously adopted and outstanding “Burrowing Owl Preservation Plan” and “Shoreline Wildlife Management Plan” had been implemented at Shoreline Park by Mountain View’s expert staff biologist, Mr. Philip Higgins, as well as an additional biologist and scores of devoted volunteers. These programs focus on improving habitat and monitoring Burrowing Owls populations. At the same time, the biologists have been implementing synergistic Burrowing Owl conservation programs which are sponsored and funded by Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency. The most successful of these programs is the Juvenile Burrowing Owl Overwintering program. 

This program captures juvenile Owls during the breeding season, protects them over the winter, then places genetically-matched pairs in small enclosures to allow them to breed. Some of the young Owls from the enclosures are then released, and some are taken back into the program for overwintering or captive breeding. Pairs of Owls are matched to increase genetic diversity and thus, increase the viability of the Burrowing Owl population and the success of the recovery program in the South Bay. In the spring of 2024, several pairs of wild Burrowing Owls nested at Shoreline. There were also 3 enclosures, each containing a breeding pair of Burrowing Owls from the Overwintering program.

But since Mid-July, the Burrowing Owl biologists have been absent from Shoreline. The consequences of this unexplained absence is consequential:

  • The pairs of Owls in the enclosures, with their offspring, remained constrained weeks after they should have been released or retained for the Overwintering program, and

  • Monitoring of wild Burrowing Owls nests has stopped and thus, long term local and regional Burrowing Owl research was interrupted.

In a letter to Council, City staff suggest that they cannot discuss issues related to the month-long absence of staff biologists at Shoreline due to confidential personnel matters. They assert that they have been continuously implementing the Burrowing Owl Plan and the Wildlife Management Plan. We do not believe that this is an accurate representation of what has transpired at Shoreline since mid-July.

Furthermore, it seems that senior staff plans to replace the expert full-time staff biologist position with consulting services to provide project evaluations, and with potential agreements with the Habitat Agency or consultants for other Burrowing Owl services. However, a full-time staff position is a requirement of the Burrowing Owl Preservation Plan, and through the years we have seen many cases in which burrows were bulldozed even though Owls may have been underground

The welfare, care, and preservation of the Burrowing Owl population at Shoreline requires expertise based on academic and professional education and in-depth, day to day knowledge of the park, the kind of knowledge that comes from being there.

What you can do?

Talking Points

  • Please thank the City Council for its leadership during the past 12 years! Until this summer, Mountain View had been at the forefront of Burrowing Owl conservation and we appreciate this immensely!

  • Please ask the City Council to restore its leadership and public trust.

  • Please tell the City Council a little about yourself and why you care about Burrowing Owls and other native species at Shoreline and adjacent areas (such as Black Skimmers, White-tailed Kites, Monarch butterflies, egrets, and even jackrabbits). If you have volunteered for Shoreline conservation efforts, or love to birdwatch at Shoreline, please mention your personal connection and passion.

  • Please express to the City Council that Burrowing Owls are almost extirpated in our region. Implementation of the Mountain View Owl Preservation Plan and other conservation programs are critically needed if we are to save the owls from local extinction.

  • Please explain that the Burrowing Owls Preservation Plan and the Shoreline Wildlife Management Plan must be implemented under the supervision of a full-time biologist who is knowledgeable and passionate about the owls and other vulnerable species and who holds State and Federal permits to handle Burrowing owls. The very same Burrowing Owl biologist should also conduct any necessary monitoring, project evaluations and coordination to ensure that Owls are not inadvertently harmed.

  • Please ask the City Council how they will ensure that the action items and the requirements of the Burrowing Owls Preservation Plan and the Shoreline Wildlife Management Plan are implemented by staff.

If you are interested in a script for public comment, we are at your service! Please contact advocate@scvas.org and title your email “BUOW script please”.

Palo Alto: 10 minutes to protect the Palo Alto Baylands

Killdeer: Tom Grey

New Survey: Please take 10 minutes to save the Palo Alto Baylands!

What is happening?

Palo Alto is embarking on a Long Range Facilities & Sustainability Plan for the City’s airport. This Plan will guide the airport development for the next 20 years. Looking to accommodate increased future use and large airplanes, the City offers several alternatives for expanding the airport. All but the “no project” alternatives would encroach into Palo Alto parkland and Baylands. A new Survey is now available online, which illustrates the alternatives and asks for public preferences. The deadline to respond is July 15. Information about this project can be found here.

Why is it important?

Situated on the Pacific Flyway, Palo Alto Baylands provide habitat for 270 species of local and migratory bird species, and several endangered species. Hundreds of thousands of visitors flock to the Baylands and adjacent parklands for recreation, education, and relaxation. The Baylands are loved and appreciated by Palo Alto and East Palo Alto residents, and by visitors from other communities. As the sea level rises, the Baylands provide resilience and nature-based solutions to flood risks. Proposed Alternatives 2,4 and 5 of the proposed expansion of the airport threaten to fill the duck pond and marshlands. These alternatives include various configurations for lengthening or re-aligning runways, expanding aircraft parking, and altering levees to protect the airport from sea level rise. These alternatives will destroy habitat for resting and feeding during migration, negatively impacting the survival and breeding of numerous bird species. 

Alternative 3 would expand the airport into the golf course, thereby taking parkland away and filling freshwater wetlands on the golf course. This alternative will also pave a large open space area for aircraft parking.

All but the no-project alternative will destroy habitat for resting and feeding during migration, negatively impacting the survival and breeding of numerous bird species. Airport expansions and increased flights will intensify noise disturbance to birds, visitors to the baylands, and East Palo Alto residents, disrupting sensitive shorebird flocks, diminishing recreational spaces, and worsening the already significant disturbance to East Palo Alto residents. 

While the plan includes transitioning to clean solar power and unleaded aviation fuel, these upgrades do not mandate runway expansion. Any expansion of runways, support systems, or airport use will harm Baylands wildlife, the enjoyment of residents, and the community of East Palo Alto. Alternatives should be offered that can safely accommodate the sensitive habitat surrounding the airport.

What you can do?

Please find 10 minutes to respond to the survey! The survey is available here. Deadline is July 15th. Please read about the alternatives and scroll down to answer a few questions.

Please choose Alternative 1 (no-action) for all questions that ask you to rank or prioritize alternatives. When asked for an explanation, please say a few words about the value of the baylands to you and to the public, and consider social justice, education, and the protection of birds and nature. For example: “Expansion of the footprint and increased use of the airport will have a negative impact on birds and wildlife in the Baylands, on the people who enjoy the Baylands and Byxbee Park for education, recreation, and relaxation, and on the residents of the community of East Palo Alto.” 

In addition, please ask for a new, balanced alternative that focuses on resilience and sustainability features without expanding the footprint of the airport.

For example (mix and much as space allows):

  • The proposed alternatives do not provide a wide enough scope of possibilities and do not balance the needs of the airport with the needs of the community and the protection of nature. We need additional alternatives to be analyzed.

  • We need an alternative that maintains the current footprint of runways and aprons, add a vertiport at the south-west corner, and increase sustainability elements without expanding into parkland and wetlands.

  • Let's continue to accommodate airplane models that currently use the airport safely, but stop allowing use by more demanding airplanes that require runway expansion for safe operations. We need alternatives that increase sustainability features without increasing the paved footprint of the airport

Please say that the project needs to address environmental justice and the protection of nature at the baylands.

Palo Alto: Palo Alto Airport vs. Bay Wetlands

American Avocet and chick: Chris Overington

Palo Alto Airport vs. Bay Wetlands: Survey and Public Meeting

What is happening?

Do you frequent the Palo Alto Baylands to watch birds and enjoy nature? 

The City of Palo Alto is working on a Long-Range Facilities and Sustainability Plan for the Palo Alto Airport. This plan will look into potential expansion of runways and intensification of operations in the next 20 years at the Palo Alto Airport.

There are 2 ways to learn about the plan and to provide input:

  1. Submit a comment online

  2. Participate in a public meeting (June 20th) to:

    • Review facility requirements, environmental and sustainability considerations

    • Review draft airport alternatives

    • Introduce the concept of runway location and levees as a result of sea level rise

Community input and guidance will be key throughout the planning process. Please join this public meeting on the planning effort underway.

Why is it important?

The Palo Alto Airport is adjacent to the wetlands of the Palo Alto Baylands, the duck pond, Byxbee park and San Francisquito Creek - places that serve millions of migratory birds and the people who love them. Some of the locations that are considered for expansion would take away the duck pond, wetlands, and potentially move levees to protect the airport from Sea Level Rise. 

Airport expansion, changes in runway location and levees, increase in number of flights and ongoing use of leaded fuel have an impact on birds and birders.

What you can do?

Please email the City Council and tell them not to cut fees for parks!

  1. Participate in the public meeting: Thursday, June 20th, 2024, 06:00 PM - 08:00 PM Baylands Café at Baylands Golf Links, 1875 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto, CA, 94303

  2. Submit an online comment

You will be asked:

  • What role does the Airport play in your life? (Please consider: do you use the airport? enjoy events there? Does it interfere with your enjoyment of birds and nature?)

  • What would you like to learn more about as part of the Palo Alto Long Range Facilities & Sustainability Plan? (Please note: your response can be supportive or unsupportive of the plan)

  • Additional comments (Please note: your response can be supportive or unsupportive of the plan)

San Jose: Help Protect Park Funding!

American Robin: Mary Ann Robertson

Tell Council: Developers Should Pay Their Fees!

Downtown developer fees have been discounted for years. There’s a proposal to cut fees further AND extend the cuts throughout the city. The fees pay for major park repairs and new parks for underserved areas and near new big developments. The San Jose City Council will be meeting Tuesday, June 18. You can find further details on the meeting agenda under item "8.2".

What is happening

For years, the City of San Jose has been trying to encourage residential high-rise development in the Downtown neighborhood, with little success due to the high cost of this type of development. In 2017, park impact fees for Downtown high-rises were significantly reduced, but according to City staff, only two new high-rises have been completed since then. Now, staff is proposing cutting park fees again by 50%, even though the city’s own study acknowledges that these fees only account for a tiny fraction of the total cost of development and are unlikely to make the difference as to whether a project gets built. 

In addition, City staff is recommending exploring similar cuts in park impact fees for all multi-family residential housing throughout the entire city. This could radically harm San Jose’s ability to provide enough parkland to serve the whole community.

Why it matters

Parks are necessary for a healthy and thriving community. The pandemic made it abundantly clear that people need to be able to get outside to relax, socialize and enjoy nature. Particularly for those who do not have their own backyards, access to parks is a matter of equity. Cutting fees for multi-family developments will hurt most those who live in those new developments. 

Parks and urban green space provide tangible health benefits. Studies have shown that stress levels are lower and ADHD symptoms are reduced when people get out into nature. In addition, trees and other vegetation absorb carbon from the atmosphere, reduce air pollution, and lower temperatures on hot summer days. 

As climate change causes our city to become hotter, it is more important than ever to provide enough parks and green space to keep pace with new development. Studies show that neighborhoods with fewer trees and less green space can be up to 20 degrees hotter than neighborhoods with sufficient greenery.

What you can do

Please email the City Council and tell them not to cut fees for parks!

Email Addresses: city.clerk@sanjoseca.gov, district1@sanjoseca.gov, district2@sanjoseca.gov, district3@sanjoseca.gov, district4@sanjoseca.gov, district5@sanjoseca.gov, district6@sanjoseca.gov, district7@sanjoseca.gov, district8@sanjoseca.gov, district9@sanjoseca.gov, district10@sanjoseca.gov, mayoremail@sanjoseca.gov

Subject: 6/18/24 Agenda Item 8.2: Downtown Residential High-Rise Incentive Program Extension

Body:

Dear Mayor Mahan and Councilmembers, 

Please protect San Jose’s parks by voting NO on item 8.2(c) and 8.2(d) on the 6/18/24 City Council agenda, “Downtown Residential High-Rise Incentive Program Extension.” Both the drastic cuts to park fees for Downtown high-rises and the potential for further park fee cuts for all multifamily developments citywide would drastically affect San Jose’s ability to provide enough parkland to serve the whole community. Parks are necessary for a healthy and thriving community. The pandemic made it abundantly clear that people need to be able to get outside to relax, socialize and enjoy nature. Particularly for those who do not have their own backyards, access to parks is a matter of equity. That means that cutting fees for multifamily development will hurt most those who live in those new developments. 

Parks and urban green space provide tangible health benefits. Studies have shown that stress levels are lower and ADHD symptoms are reduced when people get out into nature. In addition, trees and other vegetation absorb carbon from the atmosphere, reduce air pollution, and lower temperatures on hot summer days. 

As climate change causes our city to become hotter, it is more important than ever to provide enough parks and green space to keep pace with new development. Studies show that neighborhoods with fewer trees and less green space can be up to 20 degrees hotter than neighborhoods with sufficient greenery. 

Please do not cut park fees any further! Please vote NO on item 8.2(c) and 8.2(d) on the 6/18/24 City Council agenda.