Birding bulletin newsboard

Protect birds at wind farms

2012-02-09T14:21:00.000-08:00

Here is an American Bird Conservancy petition reporting on a growing and difficult problem despite wind energy's potential. It it the collision of birds with fast metal , mostly raptors that crash into wind turbines.

click on this link and sign on .

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5400/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=9510

******************************

Future Corporate takeover of Floyd Bennett Field sections ???

2012-02-07T18:35:00.000-08:00

If having Aviator Sports is bad enough, look what the door open to .... Getting wide now with all that open grassland space looking grand for corporate rental leasing of a park land.... Never ends... I am sending you the latest ridiculous idea concerning Floyd Bennett Field and its under threat grasslands if birders and conservationists don't unite to save FBF..And I heard this attempt is trying to avoid Public hearings.Its a scary precedent ( for birds, birders and wildlife and of course habitat loss) .Pass the word....Peter,Brooklyn Bird Club

http://nbii-nin.ciesin.columbia.edu/jamaicabay/

This is the US Congressional bill http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/R?cp112:FLD010:@1(hr373)

which would allow the National Park Service to lease part of Floyd Bennett ( or other gateway property) to National Grid Gas (NYC 's primary gas company) , with one bill phrase saying ""To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to allow the construction and operation of natural gas pipeline facilities in the Gateway National Recreation Area, and for other purposes".

see the right side bar of the above 1st link which includes the 2nd link , the House rep bill

February, 2012

New York City Natural Gas Supply Enhancement Act Threatens Floyd Bennett Field

The U.S. Congress is considering H. R. 2606 New York City Natural Gas Supply Enhancement Act which authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) issue permits to allow the planning, construction, operation, and maintenance of natural gas pipeline facilities in the Gateway National Recreation Area (New Jersey-New York); and (2) enter into a lease agreement to allow the occupancy and use of an aircraft hanger building on Floyd Bennett Field (Brooklyn, New York) to house facilities associated with the operation of natural gas pipeline facilities.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/R?cp112:FLD010:@1(hr373)

Fighter Kite string (manja) found in Floyd Bennett (Kings County)

2012-01-31T04:33:00.000-08:00

Birders,

A blight has developed with a popular kite war game, originated from southern Asia (banned in Pakistan) , carried over to here to the wide open spaces of Floyd Bennett Field. The harmful string used to fly the kites, called manja, is a very strong high tensile usually red ( or another color) string coated and embedded with glass ! The purpose of this war game is to cut the competitor(s) kite strings in the sky.You get the idea. see this link

http://tinyurl.com/FBmanja

The problem arises when this string is left behind , discarded unto the fields, posing great danger and threats to birds that use these fields for roosting, feeding or resting. Can one envision a Short -eared owl being a victim ?

Last month , me and another birder found remains of manja which I rolled up at least 1000 feet across field A, my glove shredded afterwards. Last week, birders ( who contacted me yesterday) found remains of fighter kite string in field C where the Northern Shrike was and those birders also collected the string, also getting their gloves damaged. Its a widespread problem that is not enforced , likely because no stated policy or action has been clarified by Gateway administrators. I sent a letter to the Gateway superintendent tonight stating my concerns and need to ban and enforce by the US Park Police. I stated also the requirements of the Migration Bird Treaty Act in the spirit of that law even if it doesn't cover fighter kite string.

If you happen to come upon this nemesis kite string, I advise you tell the Gateway staff person at the Visitors Center, if possible collect the string with a stick ( never bare hands).Or carry rawhide gloves and a plastic bag if you visit Floyd Bennett.

Let me know if you find any and I 'll forward to the appropriate people or give you the superintendent contact info.

Here's more

To give you an idea of how dangerous this fighter kite string is, please read these links below of what the glass string did to a human being's neck. The second link includes pictures and comments about the kites at Floyd Bennett and Flushing Meadow (Queens County) . In the first link,apparently a young man had his throat slashed by some of the string. The "sport" has been outlawed in Pakistan because of the injuries.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1046683--kite-string-slices-man-s-neck

The following NY Times link shows eleven slides , some showing the cuts on the kite flyer hands which the string no doubt will kill birds or at least maim their limbs or bodies and produce extreme prolonged suffering.

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2011/10/09/nyregion/20111002KITEss.html

For more about Fighter Kites, read this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_kite

NYC releases its Wetland Protection policy draft proposal

2012-01-24T15:17:00.000-08:00

http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/wetlands_strategy.pdf

http://awalkintheparknyc.blogspot.com/2012/01/city-releases-wetlands-strategy-draft.html

The attachment in the link above ( "Read On" in the second link ) is a very important conservation proposal put out by our city Jan 18th ( last Thursday) . The draft is 63 pages long but necessary to understand how critical this proposal is in the fight to save places like 4 Sparrow Marsh ( 64 acres) which the latest development plan threatens the marsh ecology with a large car dealership Kristol Auto next door at the current Toys R Us site; Kristol Auto is under investigation by the NY State Dept of Environment Conservation (NYSDEC) for its current location elsewhere for brownfield contamination

And in the long fight as well for Ridgewood Reservoir , Still under determination by NYSDEC to declare Wetland which carries restrictive protection from the city's plan to build ballfields inside the reservoir ( for more if you haven't been apprised--> http://ridgewoodreservoir.blogspot.com/

If you can comment on the proposed Wetlands policy, please do even if it isn't much. The deadline is February 18th.

Thanks for Brooklyn's birds and her habitats !

Peter

Westchester parks /Nature Centers proposed closures

2011-11-27T08:32:00.000-08:00

From the NYS Birds Listserve:

Subject: County to close parks

From:

Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 10:33:20 -0500

X-Message-Number: 3

For anyone who hasn't heard......

Jeanne

We need your help!

Westchester County Plans to CLOSE Edith Read Wildlife Sanctuary and 5

other Nature Centers, and lay off the Curators/Naturalists.

As you may be aware, Westchester County's proposed 2012 budget includes

210 layoffs and further cuts across many departments. A large percentage of

these layoffs and cuts have come from the Conservation Division of the

Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation, including the closing of

all six nature centers and cancellation of all wildlife monitoring, habitat

maintenance, and nature education programs. This Division is entrusted

with protecting the natural resources of County parkland, and these layoffs

further erode environmental programs that have already been reduced. Further

information on the budget can be found here:

_http://www3.westchestergov.com/news/3102-astorino-proposes-2012-budget-with-zero-increase-in-county-tax-levy_

(http://www3.westchestergov.com/news/3102-astorino-proposes-2012-budget-with-zero-increase-in-county-tax-levy)

Here are the list of nature centers whose buildings will close and whose

staff will be eliminated if this budget is adopted:

-- Edith Read Wildlife Sanctuary in Rye, NY

-- Marshlands Conservancy in Rye, NY

-- Cranberry Lake Preserve in West Harrison, NY

-- Croton Point Nature Center in Croton-on-Hudson, NY

-- Trailside Nature Museum (Pound Ridge) in Cross River, NY

-- Lenior Preserve in Yonkers, NY

We urge you to please make every effort to attend one of the public budget

hearings listed below to let your concerns with these budget cuts be

known.

The Southern Westchester County Regional Public Hearing on the 2012 Budget

will take place on Tuesday, November 22 at 7pm at New Rochelle High

School, 265 Clove Road, New Rochelle.

The Northern Westchester County Regional Public Hearing on the budget will

take place on Wednesday, November 30 at 7pm at Somers High School, 120

Primrose Street, Lincolndale.

The third and final Regional Public Hearing on the 2012 Budget will take

place on Tuesday, December 6 at 7pm in the Board Of Legislators Chambers on

the 8th Floor of the Michaelian Office Building in White Plains.

Please take a moment to call, e-mail and/or send a hard copy letter to all

of your legislators NOW - before you forget!

Their address is:

800 Michaelian Office Building,

148 Martine Ave, 8th Floor,

White Plains, NY 10601

Please use the attached letter as a template, and feel free to change it

and personalize it - particularly the first sentence. You can also e-mail

your letters. Sending both hard copy and e-mail letters would be the best

option. For a directory of legislators please go to:

_http://westchesterlegislators.com/contact-us.html_

(http://westchesterlegislators.com/contact-us.html)

Please also send a letter to the County Executive, Robert Astorino at:

_ce@westchestergov.com_ (mailto:ce@westchestergov.com) or

_http://www3.westchestergov.com/home/e-mail-the-ce_

(http://www3.westchestergov.com/home/e-mail-the-ce)

and hard copy to:

County Executive,

900 Michaelian Building,

148 Martine Ave.,

White Plains, NY 10601

Please send a letter to the Commissioner of Parks, Recreation &

Conservation Kathleen O'Connor at:

_parksinfo@westchestergov.com_ (mailto:parksinfo@westchestergov.com)

and hard copy to:

25 Moore Ave.,

Mt. Kisco, NY 10549

Thank you for your support!

Sincerely,

Friends of Read Wildlife Sanctuary

The issue of JFK Airport de-icing chemicals into Jamaica Bay

2011-11-23T09:13:00.000-08:00

One of the reasons Jamaica Bay is impacted and severely stressed is pollution.Such an issue if JFK Airport use of De-icing chemicals and its ensuing runoff where there is no capture of the toxic chemical. Here's a link to a report of a meeting this past week about environmental impacts on the bay including runoff toxic agents

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2011/11/jfk-airport-plan-to-discharge-toxic-chemicals-into-jamaica-bay-sparks-backlash-from-environmentalists/?mid=535

Why 4 Sparrrow development proposal went under

2011-11-08T16:52:00.000-08:00

From the Sheepshead Bites online news.

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2011/11/four-sparrows-development-nixed-under-shadow-of-corruption/

IBTimes : "Ridgewood Reservoir Changes Met With Approval, Degree of Skepticism "

2011-10-28T11:42:00.000-07:00

From International Business Times, an article

http://tinyurl.com/Ridgerez

for the history and issue go to http://ridgewoodreservoir.blogspot.com/

4 Sparrow Marsh Development plans scrapped

2011-10-26T17:47:00.000-07:00

News was received that the proposed retail project on the upland 4 Sparrow marsh area was cancelled.

See the links below for the confirmation and site profile

http://www.nyc.gov/html/oec/html/ceqr/project_10dme005k.shtml

It means no development for now.

Site profile :

http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/parks_divisions/nrg/forever_wild/site.php?FWID=21

The dangers of glass windows

2011-09-15T12:06:00.001-07:00

From the NY Times :

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/nyregion/making-new-yorks-glass-buildings-safer-for-birds.html

Hummingbird courtship ability: fly n flutter

2011-09-09T04:39:00.001-07:00

From the National Science :

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=121361&WT.mc_id=USNSF_51&WT.mc_ev=click

Rockaway Wind Farm proposal KAPUT !

2011-08-30T18:27:00.000-07:00

http://gothamist.com/2011/08/25/rockaway_wind_farm_put_out_to_pastu.php

Rockaways Wind Farm Put Out To Pasture

(Via Tobinbridge's Flickr)According to NY1, the offshore Rockaway wind farm that Bloomberg endorsed back in 2009 is all but dead. New York Power Authority, the company behind the plans, just had its CEO resign and now says that it has other things to worry about. "At this point, with our leadership somewhat in flux and having also announced two other major projects, the Hudson Transmission Project and also Recharge New York, we've got a full plate," said Power Authority's Vice Chairman, Jonathan Foster.

Apparently it has now been over a year since the company was given permission to apply for a federal lease on the ocean floor, and it just revoked an application with New York state's power operator. Critics say that it's not surprising. Wind power is a foreign concept here, so companies get skittish about it.

But that's not the main reason. The big deal? Money, of course. An analyst says it would cost anywhere from $2 billion to $4 billion to install the turbines. Uncertainty, plus excessive costs, equals "Nah, we'll pass" when it comes to big corporations.

Still, officials who support the idea aren't giving up. Queens Senator Malcolm Smith said, "I am going to be communicating with the new head of the Power Authority, when we get a clear understanding of who that is, and try to push this idea. This is not just for the Rockaways. This is for something that is going to impact the entire city and the entire state."

Developer wants to build on a marsh edge....not a good idea

2011-08-25T16:55:00.001-07:00

In Staten Island adjacent to Great Kills Park, a home builder wants a NYSDEC variance to extend into the marsh...Why ??? Area gets flooded according to experts there. For more:

http://www.silive.com/southshore/index.ssf/2011/08/building_detached_homes_on_sta.html

The effect of nature NY TIMES article

2011-08-16T19:53:00.001-07:00

http://tinyurl.com/NYTaug1

NY Tiimes article on JBWR

2011-07-30T05:36:00.001-07:00

http://tinyurl.com/jbwrnytimes

Latest on Ridgewood Reservoir

2011-06-21T16:23:00.000-07:00

With the NYC Dept of Parks bizarre focus on partially destroying Ridgewood Reservoir habitats, here's the latest on the rumor mill:

http://ridgewoodreservoir.blogspot.com/2011/06/more-four-sparrow-marsh-documentation.html

(Ridgewood Reservoir straddles the Brooklyn Queens border)

Another harebrained proposal for Floyd Bennett's future ?

2011-06-14T10:03:00.000-07:00

From the NY Daily News:

http://tinyurl.com/FBcampground

Definitely some habitat loss we are looking at ......

LI Pine Barrens alert

2011-06-13T20:56:00.000-07:00

From Long Island Pine Barrens Society

Pine Barrens Preservation- CRITICAL ACTION ALERT!

Dear Friends -

With the State Legislature expected to adjourn as early as Friday, please help us make one final push to get the Carmans River/ Core Preservation Area expansion bill passed. It will be before the NYS Senate and Assembly this week.

Please take 1 minute today to email the sponsors of the bill and tell them that you support this historic preservation measure. (sample letter and contact info follows below) It doesn’t matter if you don’t reside in any of these districts. Just send the email anyway- our leaders in Albany need to hear from all Long Islanders!

We are so close, but we need your help now. Please send your email today or tomorrow at the latest and ask your friends and family to do the same.

SAMPLE EMAIL TO LEGISLATORS:

Dear ,

RE: S 5663/ A 8265 (make sure you reference these bill numbers in the subject line of your email)

I am writing to urge your support for Expansion of the Core Preservation Area of the Central Pine Barrens in Brookhaven Town to protect the Carmans River watershed. The bill numbers are A 8265 and S 5663.

The measure would protect 1,100 hundred additional acres of land, most of it in the 0-5 year time-of-travel in the Carmans River watershed. The Pine Barrens region is an important natural resource for all residents of Long Island and an opportunity to preserve more land in the Carmans River watershed must not be missed. Please support this bill.

Sincerely,

CONTACT INFO FOR BILL SPONSORS:

The Honorable Kenneth P. LaValle

Senator, District 1

New York State Senate

Email: lamounta@nysenate.gov (send directly to LaValle’s aide who will expedite delivery to the Senator)

The Honorable Lee M. Zeldin

Senator, District 3

New York State Senate

Email: anziano@nysenate.gov (send directly to Zeldin’s aide who will expedite delivery to the Senator)

The Honorable Robert K. Sweeney
Assemblyman, District 11
New York State Assembly

Email: Sweeney@assembly.state.ny.us

The Honorable Daniel P. LoSquadro
Assemblyman, District 1
New York State Assembly

Email: losquadrod@assembly.state.ny.us

The Honorable Fred W. Thiele
Assemblyman, District 2
New York State Assembly

Email: lombardol@assembly.state.ny.us (send directly to Thiele’s aide who will expedite delivery to the Assemblyman)

The Honorable Dean Murray
Assemblyman, District 3
New York State Assembly

Email: murrayd@assembly.state.ny.us

The Honorable Steven Englebright
Assemblyman, District 4
New York State Assembly

Email: coppolc@assembly.state.ny.us (send directly to Englebright’s aide who will expedite delivery to the Assemblyman)

THANK YOU!

You are subscribed to the Pine Barrens Society email-list. The Pine Barrens Society is a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization in the State of New York. To unsubscribe or invite a friend, please call (631) 369-3300 or email info@pinebarrens.org. As a subscriber, your contact information will be kept private. For more information on our work, visit www.pinebarrens.org.

National Bird Conservancy Programs at risk of de-funding

2011-06-06T14:02:00.000-07:00

The following email alert from ABC Birds regarding the US House of Reps debating the Bird Conservation Bills. Please act if you care about birds' future in North America.

Peter

Note : the Brooklyn Bird Club is a member of the Bird Conservancy Alliance (BCA)

**********************************

To: Bird Conservation Alliance (BCA)

From: Steve Holmer, Director

Date: June 6, 2011

Alert: Urge Your Senators Not to Slash Funding for Bird Conservation

The House of Representatives plans on cutting at least $2 billion in funding from the Interior Appropriations bill that includes key bird conservation programs. If passed by the Senate, these destructive cuts will harm birds and wildlife as well as undermine decades of successful conservation efforts.

Your Senators need to hear from you this week before the June 10 deadline for submitting program requests. To send letters to your Senators, click here:

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5400/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=7069.

Please forward this link to your members so that they can take action as well.

Programs targeted:

· The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act, the only federal U.S. grants program specifically dedicated to the conservation of our migrant birds throughout the Americas.

· Joint Ventures, which coordinate, plan, and implement projects that benefits birds, and have protected more than 13 million acres of important bird habitat so far.

· State Wildlife Grants, the nation’s core program for preventing birds and wildlife from becoming endangered in addition to supporting strategic conservation investments in every state and territory.

· The North American Wetlands Conservation Act, which provides funding for conservation projects that benefit wetland birds.

Senators need to hear from bird advocates like you today to ensure that these critical bird conservation programs continue to be funded. Click here: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5400/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=7069

We have made it easy for you to take action now - simply click on the link below, enter your zip code, and then send the automatically generated email to your Senators asking them to express their support for these programs in their annual appropriations request. Feel free to take a little extra time to add some thoughts of your own to the text we have provided.

Thank you for your help in ensuring the next generation of Americans will have a chance to appreciate the native birds we enjoy today.

Take action today:

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5400/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=7069

Dear Senator:

I call on you to provide the highest level of funding possible to several key bird conservation programs I believe are crucial to maintaining healthy and abundant bird populations throughout the United States which also have a proven track record of success.

Funding for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act grants program is crucial since it is the only federal U.S. grants program specifically dedicated to the conservation of our migrant birds throughout the Americas. It has a proven track-record of success advancing conservation for many declining species, such as the Cerulean Warbler, and other birds American see in their backyards.

Joint Ventures (JVs), which cover the entire country and are key to carrying out bird conservation help by identify local land use priorities. JVs provide coordination for conservation planning, and implementing projects that benefits birds and other species and have protected, restored, or enhanced more than 13 million acres of important habitat for migratory bird species.

State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program was created to assist states with their voluntary efforts to protect the more than 12,000 at-risk wildlife species around the United States from becoming endangered. The program leverages more than $100 million per year in state, tribal, local, and private dollars that directly support jobs in virtually all states. Slashing funding for this program also undermines the federal government’s ten year investment in State Wildlife Action Plans.

The North American Wetlands Conservation Act has a proven track record of success leveraging over $2 billion in matching funds affecting 20 million acres through the work of more than 4,000 partners and has fostered public and private sector cooperation for migratory bird conservation, flood control, erosion control, and water quality. For every dollar of money invested in the program, an average of 3.2 dollars is raised to match the federal share by non-federal entities.

These are programs that Congress should be highlighting as models of successful government programs that are working, instead of drastically reducing.

As you may know, birds have been a driving force behind the American conservation movement since its early day when unregulated hunting, the use of toxic pesticides, and the destruction of wetlands threatened our wildlife and wild places. But birds are also big business. A report by The Outdoor Industry Foundation found all outdoor wildlife related recreation activities generate $730 billion annually for the U.S. economy. The report estimated that bird watching and other wildlife viewing contributes $43 billion annually to the economy. An estimated 66 million Americans participate in wildlife viewing, which supports 466,000 jobs. Retail sales of gear average $8.8 billion, trip related expenditures total $8.5 billion, and state and federal tax receipts amount to $2.7 billion.

I urge you to express your support for these programs by including them in your annual appropriations request to ensure the Senate supports the highest level of funding possible for these important programs.

Steve Holmer

Senior Policy Advisor &

Director, Bird Conservation Alliance

202-234-7181 ext. 216

sholmer@abcbirds.org

Skype: sholmerabc

Golden-winged Warbler status enlistment

2011-06-03T09:48:00.001-07:00

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2011-0028; MO 92210-0-0008]

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on

a Petition To List the Golden-Winged Warbler as Endangered or

Threatened

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 90-day

finding on a petition to list the golden-winged warbler (Vermivora

chrysoptera) as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the

petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information

indicating that listing the golden-winged warbler may be warranted.

Therefore, with the publication of this notice, we are initiating a

review of the status of the species to determine if listing the golden-

winged warbler is warranted. To ensure that this status review is

comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and

other information regarding this species. Based on the status review,

we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, which will address

whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in the Act.

DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request

that we receive information on or before August 1, 2011. Please note

that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES

section, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic comment is

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. After August 1, 2011, you must

submit information directly to the Wisconsin Ecological Services Field

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below). Please note

that we might not be able to address or incorporate information that we

receive after the above requested date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the box

that reads ``Enter Keyword or ID,'' enter the Docket number for this

finding, which is FWS-R3-ES-2011-0028. Check the box that reads ``Open

for Comment/Submission,'' and then click the Search

[[Page 31921]]

button. You should then see an icon that reads ``Submit a Comment.''

Please ensure that you have found the correct rulemaking before

submitting your comment.

U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-

R3-ES-2011-0028; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM;

Arlington, VA 22203.

We will post all information we receive on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any

personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information

section below for more details).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, Wisconsin Ecological

Services Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Office, 2661 Scott Tower Drive,

New Franken, WI 54229-9565; by telephone (920-866-1725); or by

facsimile (920-866-1710). If you use a telecommunications device for

the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Information

When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial

information indicating that listing a species may be warranted under

section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, we are required to promptly review the

status of the species (status review). For the status review to be

complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial

information, we request information on golden-winged warbler (Vermivora

chrysoptera) from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the

scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties. We

seek information on:

(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:

(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;

(b) Genetics and taxonomy, such as information related to the

hybridization between the golden-winged warbler and the blue-winged

warbler (Vermivora cyanoptera);

(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;

(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and

projected trends; and

(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its

habitat, or both.

(2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing

determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which

are:

(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range;

(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or

educational purposes;

(c) Disease or predation;

(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or

(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued

existence.

If, after the status review, we determine that listing the golden-

winged warbler is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see

definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), under section 4 of the Act,

to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time we propose

to list the species. Therefore, within the geographical range currently

occupied by the golden-winged warbler, we request data and information

on:

(1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential

to the conservation of the species'';

(2) Where such physical and biological features are currently

found; and

(3) Whether any of these features may require special management

considerations or protection.

In addition, we request data and information on ``specific areas

outside the geographical area occupied by the species'' that are

``essential to the conservation of the species.'' Please provide

specific comments and information as to what, if any, critical habitat

you think we should propose for designation if the species is proposed

for listing, and why such habitat meets the requirements of section 4

of the Act.

Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as

scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to

verify any scientific or commercial information you include.

Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action

under consideration without providing supporting information, although

noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section

4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any

species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on

the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.''

You may submit your information concerning this status review by

one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit

information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--

including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the

Web site. If you submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying

information, you may request at the top of your document that we

withhold this personal identifying information from public review.

However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will

post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.

Information and supporting documentation that we received and used

in preparing this finding is available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal

business hours at the Wisconsin Ecological Field Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires

that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or

reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial

information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. We

are to base this finding on information provided in the petition,

supporting information submitted with the petition, and information

otherwise available in our files. To the maximum extent practicable, we

are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition

and publish our notice of the finding promptly in the Federal Register.

Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information

within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day

petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a

reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition

may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial

scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to

promptly conduct a species status review, which we subsequently

summarize in our 12-month finding.

Petition History

On February 10, 2010, we received a petition, from Anna Sewell,

requesting the golden-winged warbler be listed as endangered or

threatened under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as

such and included the requisite identification information for the

petitioner, as required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an April 16, 2010,

letter to the petitioner Anna Sewell, we responded that we had reviewed

the information presented in the petition and determined that issuing

an emergency regulation temporarily listing the species under section

4(b)(7)

[[Page 31922]]

of the Act was not warranted. This finding addresses the petition.

Previous Federal Action(s)

To date, no Federal actions have been taken with regard to the

golden-winged warbler.

Species Information

The golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) is a neotropical

migrant (breeding in North America and wintering in Central and South

America) belonging to the Order Passeriformes and Family Parulidae

(Sibley 2003, p. 429). It is classified as a discrete species by the

American Ornithologists' Union (AOU 1998, p. 534). The golden-winged

warbler is a small-sized passerine, weighing only 8.8 grams (g) (0.31

ounces (oz)). Total body length is 120.65 millimeters (mm) (4.75 inches

(in)), with a wingspan of 190.5 mm (7.5 in). Diagnostic features

include slate gray plumage on the chest, breast, nape and mantle, with

contrasting yellow patches on the upper wing coverts (sets of small

feathers that cover the upper wing area) and crown. An adult male in

breeding plumage expresses a black throat patch and auriculars (groups

of feathers that cover the sides of a bird's head where the bird's ear

openings are located), with contrasting white supercilium (a plumage

feature on the head) and malar region (around the cheeks). All of those

features are less distinct in females. Both sexes can show a yellow

wash on the mantle extending to secondary coverts (Confer 1992, not

paginated; Sibley 2003, p. 429).

Golden-winged warblers breed across the north-central and eastern

United States, expanding into southeastern Canada. The breeding range

can be thought of as two distinct areas: The northern portion, which

extends into southern Canada (southwestern Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba,

and eastern Saskatchewan) and spreads south into Minnesota, Wisconsin,

and Michigan, and the eastern portion, which includes parts of the

Appalachians (Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee) and into

Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York, with low

numbers in Connecticut, Vermont, and New Hampshire (InfoNatura 2007;

Buehler et al. 2010, p. 8, 31). Breeding locations between the two

distinct areas (Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois, and western New York) hold

low numbers of birds (Sauer et al. 2008, not paginated; Buehler et al.

2006, not paginated). The northern and eastern breeding ranges are

linked by a narrow corridor located in the St. Lawrence River Valley in

north central New York (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 8). Wintering locations

include areas in southern Central America and northern South America

(Buehler et al. 2006, not paginated).

For breeding sites, the golden-winged warbler depends mostly on

early successional habitats. These are habitats that have previously

undergone an amount of disturbance by a natural or human-caused event

that creates a structurally diverse landscape. These habitats can occur

in upland or lowland areas (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 2). Landscapes that

consist of forest edge, shrubs, forests with open canopy, habitats with

grassy openings, and wetlands with scattered trees can be viable

nesting habitats (Rossell et al. 2003, p. 1099; Buehler et al. 2010, p.

10). Breeding sites have been documented in abandoned farmlands,

powerline cuts, recently logged sites, and locations along stream

borders (Confer 1992, not paginated; Service 2009, not paginated).

Habitat tracts of 10-50 hectares (ha) (24-37 acres (ac)) can support

several pairs and are preferred over both smaller and larger areas

(Confer 1992, not paginated). Nest success measures vary throughout

breeding range and within the breeding season; however, rough estimates

are between 40 percent at sites in New York to approximately 75 percent

at sites in North Carolina (Buehler et al. 2007, p. 1440; Buehler et

al. 2010, p. 20-21). Population estimates are approximately 210,000

individuals globally (Partners in Flight PIF Landbird Database).

The diet of the golden-winged warbler consists of small bugs,

larvae, and spiders (Service 2009, not paginated). Golden-winged

warblers can lay three to six eggs, in nests that are low to the ground

and concealed by vegetation (Buehler et al. 2007, p. 1440).

Evaluation of Information for This Finding

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing

regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species

to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and

Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an

endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors

described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:

(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range;

(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or

educational purposes;

(C) Disease or predation;

(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or

(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued

existence.

In considering what factors constitute threats, we must look beyond

the exposure of the species to a factor to evaluate whether the species

may respond to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to the

species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species responds

negatively, the factor may be a threat, and, during the subsequent

status review, we attempt to determine how significant a threat it is.

The threat may be significant if it drives, or contributes to the risk

of, extinction of the species such that the species may warrant listing

as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined in the Act. The

identification of factors that could impact a species negatively may

not be sufficient to compel a finding that substantial information has

been presented suggesting that listing may be warranted. The

information should contain evidence or the reasonable extrapolation

that any factor(s) may be operative threats that act on the species to

the point that the species may meet the definition of endangered or

threatened under the Act.

In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information

regarding threats to the golden-winged warbler, as presented in the

petition and other information available in our files, is substantial,

thereby indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Our

evaluation of this information is presented below.

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment

of the Species' Habitat or Range.

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition claims that threats causing the present or threatened

destruction, modification, or curtailment of the golden-winged

warbler's habitat or range include habitat loss and modification. The

petition suggests that loss of early successional habitat has

contributed to declining population trends throughout the species'

range (Petition, p. 11; Hunter et al. 2001; NatureServ Explorer).

Golden-winged warblers require early successional landscapes

originating from natural or anthropogenic disturbance. Prior to

European settlement, early successional landscapes occurred via

stochastic events such as natural fires and storms, and through

disturbances to landscapes from other species (for example, bison, elk,

and beaver habitat modifications) (Petition, p. 11; Hamel et al. 2005).

After European settlement in the

[[Page 31923]]

19th century, conversion of natural landscapes to agriculture resulted

in the suppression of natural fires and a decrease in natural land

disturbance. Golden-winged warblers shifted from using naturally

created, early successional breeding habitat, to early successional

habitat created by anthropogenic means (Petition, p. 12; Klaus and

Buehler 2001). Within recent decades there has been a decrease in early

successional habitat due to reforestation of the eastern United States,

development, and changes in agricultural practices. The petition claims

that the golden-winged warbler now breeds within a matrix of human-

developed landscape (urban/suburban development, agriculture, and

reforestation practices), thus leading to its decline in what was

historically viable breeding habitat (Petition, p. 12;

NatureServe2010).

The petition also claims that golden-winged warblers now rely on

human interference to create early successional habitat that consists

of shrubs, open canopy, habitats with forested edge, and/or grassy

patches (Petition, p. 12; Klaus and Buehler 2001). The petition claims

that in the United States, the decline in availability of habitat used

by golden-winged warblers and other early successional habitat-

dependent species (such as grassland birds) is increasingly becoming a

concern (Petition, p. 13; Motzkin and Foster 2004). Although the

petition (Petition, p. 14) states that habitat modification or loss is

the primary obstacle for golden-winged warbler stabilization, Confer et

al. (2003) state that other factors must be involved in population

declines, because in areas where ample suitable habitat exists, such as

in Massachusetts, the warblers have become extirpated;.

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

Information provided by the petitioner and readily available in our

files indicates the golden-winged warbler may be declining rangewide

due to loss, degradation, and modification of early successional

habitat. Forest maturation, land development, wetland destruction and

loss, and lack of natural events that create viable breeding sites

contribute to the reduction of available nesting habitat (Buehler et

al. 2006, p. 1; Buehler et al. 2010, p. 118).

In the north-central breeding range, long-term trends (1966-2007)

estimate populations to be decreasing by 1.4 percent per year (Sauer et

al. 2008, not paginated). In this breeding region, Minnesota,

Wisconsin, and Michigan together hold approximately 69 percent of the

global breeding population of golden-winged warblers (Buehler et al.

2010, p. 31). Long-term trends (1966-2007) for Michigan estimate a

population decline of 8.1 percent per year, with numbers relatively

stable in Minnesota and Wisconsin. In the north-central breeding range,

nests are found in wetland and upland shrub habitats consisting of old

fields and pastures, clearcuts, and regenerating aspen tracts. The

major threats to populations in the north-central breeding range

include habitat loss, wetland drainage, and habitat succession (Buehler

et al. 2010, p. 35).

In Canada (Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and Saskatchewan), long-term

Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data from 1966-2007 (Buehler et al. 2007, p.

144; Sauer et al. 2008, not paginated) indicate a relatively stable

breeding population. This region supports approximately 18.2 percent of

the global breeding population. Limited, short-term data collected over

the last 10 years suggest a 4 percent per year population decline

(Sauer et al. 2008, p. 1). More data are needed to accurately predict

population trends for this region.

The Northeast supports 11 percent of the total global breeding

population (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 74). In this breeding range, long-

term trend information (1966-2007) from BBS data indicates an 8.8

percent per year decline in populations. More recent data from the past

25 years (1980-2007) estimate the same negative trend, at a loss of 6.2

percent per year (Sauer et al. 2008, p.1). Loss of early successional

habitat and fragmentation of existing habitat contribute to the decline

of populations in the Northeast region. Tens of millions of hectares of

habitat has been lost as abandoned farmland passes through early

successional to late successional stages (Confer et al. 2003, p. 142).

This advancement in forest succession is taking place in many areas of

the Northeast. Forest regeneration without regular natural disturbance,

such as fire, results in dense canopy lacking open patches and low

shrub layers. Landscapes with these characteristics are structurally

different than forests that are regularly undergoing natural

disturbance (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 118), and these dense forest

habitats do not support golden-winged warblers. In the Northeast

breeding range specifically, close associations with the blue-winged

warbler (Vermivora cyanoptera) could also be contributing to the

decline of golden-winged warblers. Breeding golden-winged warbler pairs

in the Northeast overlap with blue-winged warbler breeding pairs, and

these interactions can lead to golden-winged warblers either being

pushed out of territories or to hybridization between the two species.

More research is needed to understand if these interspecific

interactions may be a threat to the golden-winged warbler (golden-

winged and blue-winged warbler hybridization is discussed under factor

E (Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence).

In the southeastern breeding range, populations are too low to

estimate decade-long trends; however, long-term trend information

(1966-2007) from BBS data indicate a 7.3 percent decline per year

(Sauer et al. 2008, p. 1). This region only supports 1.4 percent of the

global breeding population (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 58). Research

indicates that the decline of early successional habitat has led to the

extirpation of golden-winged warblers in the southern districts of

Cherokee National Forest, Tennessee (Klaus et al. 2005, p. 232). In

areas of hardwood forests previously occupied by breeding pairs, early

successional habitat has declined because of the occurrence of natural

forest succession without the intervention of forest harvest or natural

disturbance (Klaus et al. 2005, p. 232). Habitat loss may be the cause

of population declines in the southeastern breeding range, because

other potential threats such as blue-winged warbler interactions are

not as common in this region.

Deforestation events have increased in golden-winged warbler

wintering grounds, specifically the montane oak forests in Central and

South America (Buehler et al. 2007, p. 4). The population dynamics of

golden- and blue-winged warblers on wintering grounds lends support to

the assertion that interspecific competition does not appear to be

occurring in this region. Golden-winged warblers occupy areas that are

further south and mostly separated from those of blue-winged warblers,

with limited overlap occurring in northern Panama, Costa Rica,

Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala (Confer 1992, not paginated; Buehler

et al. 2010, p. 120). Although it is unclear if the loss of

overwintering habitat affects survival, overall golden-winged warbler

population declines may be related. Potential threats to the species on

wintering grounds need to be examined to determine if changes in

wintering habitat are limiting to golden-winged warbler population

viability.

The degradation of migratory stopover sites could impact fitness of

individuals, or more directly cause mortality

[[Page 31924]]

(Buehler et al. 2010, p. 120). Other anthropogenic factors could impact

individuals along migratory routes or at stopover sites. One report

compiled data from 47 studies that monitored bird strikes at

communication towers and found that golden-winged warbler mortality was

identified at 15 towers, which accounted for 542 individuals (Shire et

al. 2000, p.8).

BBS data indicate that the golden-winged warblers' breeding range

has been shifting for the last 150 years and population numbers have

declined (Confer et al. 2003, p. 142; Sauer et al. 2008, p. 1; Buehler

et al. 2010, p. 24). Breeding populations in other States may become

extirpated (Connecticut, South Carolina, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois,

and Rhode Island) (Confer 1992, not paginated; Buehler et al. 2010, p.

25) and, already, the golden-winged warbler has not been verified to be

breeding in Massachusetts (USGS North American Breeding Bird Atlas

Explorer).

Golden-winged warblers require specific habitat characteristics

found in early successional landscapes for nesting, and loss of this

habitat may continue to reduce populations by limiting fecundity and,

therefore, reproductive success, leading to population declines. In

general, we expect golden-winged warbler populations to continue to

decline, as a response to the reduction in breeding areas due to

destruction, modification, and curtailment of early successional

habitats. Loss of overwintering habitat and degradation of migratory

stopover sites may also contribute to continuing population declines by

reducing survival or reducing overall fitness, which can translate to

reduced fecundity.

Summary of Factor A

In summary, the petition and information in our files identifies

the loss of early successional habitat by changes in agricultural

practices, forest maturation, land development, wetland destruction and

loss, and lack of natural disturbance events as potential threats to

the golden-winged warbler. Furthermore, winter habitat is affected by

increasing deforestation and migrating individuals are impacted by the

increasing number of communication towers. Therefore, we find that the

information provided in the petition, as well as other information

readily available in our files, presents substantial scientific or

commercial information to indicate that the golden-winged warbler may

warrant listing due to the present or threatened destruction,

modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat or range.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes.

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition did not present any information with respect to Factor

B.

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

The information in our files does not indicate any threat to

golden-winged warbler due to overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational purposes. Therefore, we find

that the petition and information readily available in our files does

not provide substantial scientific or commercial information to

indicate that the overutilization for commercial, recreational,

scientific, or educational purposes may present a threat to the golden-

winged warbler such that the petitioned action may be warranted.

However, we will further investigate the potential threat of

overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or

educational purposes in our status review for this species.

C. Disease or Predation

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition did not present any information with respect to Factor

C.

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

Our files indicate that, although nest predation may be a leading

cause of nest loss for golden-winged warblers, there is not enough data

indicating that nest predation rates are limiting factors in population

declines (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 125). Therefore, the information in

our files does not indicate any threat to golden-winged warblers due to

disease or predation. We find that the petition and information readily

available in our files do not provide substantial scientific or

commercial information to indicate that disease or predation may

present a threat to the golden-winged warbler such that the petitioned

action may be warranted. However, we will further investigate the

potential threat of disease or predation in our status review for this

species.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition claims that the only way to ensure protection for the

golden-winged warbler is to mandate Federal protection across the

species' entire North and South America range (Petition, pp. 22-23).

The petition suggests that existing regulatory mechanisms do not

adequately protect the golden-winged warbler. State regulations provide

the species protection from only the sale or take of individuals; in

addition, State regulations are insignificant because they protect the

species at localized areas only, versus the entire range, and do not

address habitat protection or conservation (Petition, pp. 16-23).

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

In Canada, golden-winged warblers are protected under the Migratory

Bird Convention Act of 1916 and by the Schedule One of Canada's Species

at Risk Act. The Committee of the Status of Endangered Wildlife in

Canada (COSEWIC) lists the bird as threatened in Quebec, Ontario, and

Manitoba. In the United States, under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of

1918, as amended, it is unlawful to take, capture, kill, or possess

migratory birds, their nests, eggs, and young. These protections extend

to the golden-winged warbler. The Service has identified the golden-

winged warbler nationally as a Bird of Conservation Concern, which is a

designation assigned to the species by the Division of Migratory Bird

Management. This designation indicates that the species is one which,

without additional conservation actions, is likely to become a

candidate for listing under the Act.

The Service also identifies the species as a bird of management

concern at the Bird Conservation Region (BCR) scale (developed by the

North American Bird Conservation Initiative) in regions 12 (Boreal

Hardwood Transition Zones), 13 (Lower Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Plain),

23 (Prairie Hardwood Transitions Zones), and 28 (Appalachian Mountains)

(Service 2008, pp. 28, 29, 39, 44). Partners in Flight ranks the

golden-winged warbler as a Watch List Species in need of immediate

management action (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 127 cited from Rich et al.

2004). The golden-winged warbler is listed as a Species of Global

Concern on the Audubon Society's species watch list (The National

Audubon Society, not paginated). The International Union for

Conservation of Nature (IUCN) lists golden-winged warblers as Near

Threatened on their Global Continental Conservation Status list

(BirdLife International 2008). These various classifications, however,

are not regulatory in nature.

[[Page 31925]]

The golden-winged warbler is State-listed as threatened,

endangered, or of special concern in some areas of its range.

Regulatory protections for State-listed species vary by individual

States, but in general, State-listed species do not receive the same

level of protection, especially with regard to habitat loss, afforded

to Federally listed species. The Service is leading a cooperative

effort with Federal and State agencies, researchers, universities and

other nongovernment organizations to determine the extent of threats to

the golden-winged warbler population. Developed in 2003, the Golden

Winged Warbler Working Group consists of Federal, State, and nonprofit

entities. The Working Group prioritizes research and monitoring

activities, investigates hybridization range and species genetics,

develops habitat classification measures and management priorities, and

works with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS, U.S.

Department of Agriculture) to integrate species-specific management

into legislation such as the Farm Bill (Buehler et al. 2007, p. 1442).

The working group conducts a variety of conservation efforts and

research throughout the species' range. These collaborative efforts

were initiated separately from the petition for listing this species

under the Act, and solely because of the interest of the cooperating

organizations in improving the status of this species, which is widely

recognized as a species of conservation concern.

Summary of Factor D

The petition and information in our files suggest that individual

State-level protections are not adequately protecting the warbler, as

evidenced by declining population trends in all breeding areas and

declining habitat trends on the wintering grounds. In addition, the

existing regulatory mechanisms do not provide habitat conservation or

protection measures, nor do they directly address management incentives

for the golden-winged warbler. The formation of the Golden Winged

Warbler Working Group is leading the development of conservation

initiatives; however, this group does not have authority to implement

wide-scale population-level protection. Declining population trends in

all breeding areas, as well as declining habitat trends on the

wintering grounds of golden-winged warbler, continue, and existing

legislation does not protect the golden-winged warbler or its habitat

throughout the species' range. Therefore, we find that the information

provided in the petition, as well as other information readily

available in our files, presents substantial scientific or commercial

information to indicate that the golden-winged warbler may warrant

listing due to the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence.

Interactions With Blue-Winged Warbler

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition claims that golden-winged warblers are being displaced

by the expansion of blue-winged warblers, resulting in golden-winged

warblers being pushed north into Ontario and west into Minnesota

(Petition, p. 15; Hamel et al. 2005). The expansion of blue-winged

warblers into golden-winged warblers' habitat may be correlated with

loss of early successional habitat (Petition, p. 15; NatureServe 2010).

The range of the golden-winged and blue-winged warblers overlap

considerably, and data from one study found that golden-winged warblers

nesting near blue-winged warblers laid fewer eggs (Petition, p. 15;

Confer et al. 2003, p. 141).

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

Data from the last 150 years document the replacement of golden-

winged warblers with blue-winged warblers in areas of the Northeast

(Buehler et al. 2010, p. 75). The expansion of blue-winged warblers may

result in the displacement of golden-winged warblers, a decrease in

productivity, or an increase in hybridization events (Confer et al.

2003, p. 141; Buehler et al. 2010, p. 121).

The golden-winged warbler is closely related to the blue-winged

warbler, and interbreeding between the two species occurs, producing

fertile young (Confer 1992, not paginated; Buehler et al. 2010, p. 5).

The two hybrids that can result from the cross-mating of the two

species are Brewster's warbler and Lawrence's warbler. The Brewster's

warbler is a first-generation hybrid, meaning a cross between golden-

winged and blue-winged parents. It holds the dominate traits of both

parents (white ventral plumage of the golden-winged warbler but overall

coloration of the blue-winged warbler). Brewster's hybrids can back-

cross with golden-winged or blue-winged warblers to produce viable

offspring (Gough and Sauer 1997, not paginated). The Lawrence's warbler

is a cross between a Brewster's warbler and a golden-winged warbler, or

a Brewster's warbler and a blue-winged warbler. The Lawrence's warbler

displays the recessive traits (feather coloration of the golden-winged,

with yellow plumage of the blue-winged) (Gough and Sauer 1997, not

paginated; Buehler et al. 2010, p. 5).

The population-level impacts of interactions between golden-winged

and blue-winged warblers, and variables contributing to hybridization

events, are unclear. In two hybridization zones, nest success rates for

the golden-winged warbler were lower in New York at sites that had

documentation of species hybridization compared to sites in North

Carolina that had no evidence of hybridization (Klaus and Buehler 2001,

p. 300). This suggests that in areas where the two species occur

together, reproductive efforts of golden-winged warblers may be

suppressed due to hybridization. However, in New York there are areas

of overlap where the two species are sympatric and co-exist without

detected impacts to golden-winged warbler productivity (Confer and

Larkin 1998, p. 213).

The degree of hybridization may vary within different geographic

locations. For example, interspecific interactions between blue-winged

and golden-winged warblers may be more pronounced in the northeastern

United States, where populations overlap considerably (Buheler et al.

2010, p. 118). In upland areas of New York and Pennsylvania, golden-

winged warblers might be limited by habitat loss in addition to blue-

winged warbler hybridization, while populations in North Carolina may

be limited only by habitat loss (Buehler et al. 2007, p. 1440). In some

areas of the southeastern United States, the golden-winged warbler

population has declined in the absence of blue-winged warblers (Buheler

et al. 2010, p. 121). Therefore, other factors likely contribute to

declines of golden-winged warbler populations in the southeastern

breeding range.

More research is needed to fully understand the possible effects of

hybridization on the golden-winged warbler. The information in the

petition and in Service files provides limited data on golden-winged

and blue-winged warbler interactions. We find the information provided

in the petition discusses one possible threat, the possible reduction

of golden-winged warbler productivity due to blue-winged warblers

occupying golden-winged warbler breeding sites. Information in Service

files indicates that interspecific interactions, such as species

hybridization, may be a threat to the golden-winged warbler, especially

in

[[Page 31926]]

specific geographic locations. Both the petition and Service files

recognize that blue-winged warblers are expanding into golden-winged

warblers' range and that this expansion could be correlated with the

loss of early successional habitat. Although the effects of

interspecific interactions (reduced breeding productivity or

hybridization) between the blue-winged and golden-winged warbler remain

unclear, we find that the information provided in the petition, as well

as other information readily available in our files, presents

substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the

golden-winged warbler may warrant listing due to other natural or

manmade factors affecting the species' continued existence due to these

factors.

Brown-headed Cowbird Nest Parasitism

Information Provided in the Petition

The petition states that brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) are

parasitizing golden-winged warbler nests, with evidence suggesting that

the rate of parasitism reduces fledgling success (Petition, p. 15). The

study cited in the petition was conducted in New York and found a 50

percent loss in fledgling success in nests with brown-headed cowbird

eggs. However, the small sample size of nests (34 nonparasitized nests

and 7 parasitized nests) may lead to statistical error (Confer et al.

2003, p. 141). This study found that fledgling rate in nonparasitized

nests was high (68 percent), while fledgling rate in parasitized nests

was low (32 percent), and that this difference is enough to warrant

concern about brown-headed cowbird parasitism limiting golden-winged

warbler fledgling success (Confer et al. 2003, p. 141). The petition

concludes that nest parasitism, coupled with other factors, leads to

reduced fledgling success (Petition, p. 15).

Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in

Service Files

The rate of cowbird parasitism varies within the range of golden-

winged warblers. Golden-winged warbler nests, especially in

agricultural landscapes, experience moderate rates of parasitism

(Confer 1992, not paginated). In a sample size of nests found in the

eastern United States, central Michigan, central New York, and eastern

New Jersey, 11 of 113 nests were parasitized (Coker and Confer 1990, p.

551). In nests found in New York, from 1988 to 1994, 30 percent had at

least one cowbird egg or chick, which reduced fledgling success by 17

percent (Confer et al. 2003, p. 138). Although brown-headed cowbirds

were present, cowbird parasitism was not recorded in nests of golden-

winged warblers in areas of Tennessee and North Carolina (Klaus and

Buehler 2001, p. 29) and was not apparently impacting golden-winged

populations in West Virginia or Ontario (Buehler et al. 2010, p. 23).

At breeding sites in north central New York, cowbird parasitism was

correlated with a reduction in incubated eggs and a reduction in the

proportion of incubated eggs that hatched; however, parasitism did not

significantly affect nestling success rate (Confer et al. 2003, p.

138).

Although there is evidence indicating golden-winged warblers are

susceptible to brown-headed cowbird parasitism, it has not yet been

determined if brown-headed cowbird parasitism has a substantial impact

on golden-winged warbler nest success rates throughout the species'

breeding range. Brown-headed cowbird parasitism may be a greater

concern for warblers nesting in the northeast United States, compared

to warblers in the north central breeding range.

We find that, based on information in the petition, as well as

other information readily available in our files, we are unsure of the

impact cowbird parasitism may have on the golden-winged warbler.

However, we will further investigate the potential impacts of cowbird

parasitism in our 12-month status review.

Finding

On the basis of our analysis under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act,

we determine that the petition presents substantial scientific or

commercial information indicating that listing the golden-winged

warbler throughout its entire range may be warranted. This finding is

based on information provided under Factors A (present or threatened

destruction, modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat or

range), D (the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms), and E

(other natural or manmade factors affecting the species' continued

existence). Specifically, we find that the following may pose threats

to the golden-winged warbler throughout all or a significant portion of

its range, such that the petitioned action may be warranted: Habitat

modification and loss of early successional habitat (Factor A);

inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (because existing

regulations only provide protection from the sale or take of

individuals at localized areas, rather than the entire range, and do

not address habitat protection or conservation) (Factor D); and

interactions with blue-winged warblers (Factor E). We determine that

the information provided under Factors B (overutilization for

commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes) and C

(disease or predation) is not substantial.

Because we have found that the petition presents substantial

information indicating that listing the golden-winged warbler may be

warranted, we are initiating a status review to determine whether

listing the golden-winged warbler under the Act is warranted.

The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding

differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard

that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned

action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status

review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether

a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough

status review of the species, which is conducted following a

substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and

12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-

day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a

warranted finding.

References Cited

A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at

http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Wisconsin

Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Author

The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the

Wisconsin Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT).

Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: May 4, 2011.

Rowan W. Gould,

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 2011-13731 Filed 6-1-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

The beauty of migration

2011-05-29T13:18:00.000-07:00

Below is an account from the lighthouse keeper from Machias Island, which is situated 12 miles off the northeast coast of Maine. Its famous for its puffins. His account deals with a major fallout of warblers dropping in like flies in dense fog May 24th. To get the whole incredible story, read on and click on the picture link to the keeper's blog (after clicking on the link , go to the bottom files "MAY 24th" )

The lighthouse keeper is describing the warblers landing on him:

"The wind drop and shift overnight seems to have encouraged heavy migrant movement. The movement through here was easily the largest this year and one of the largest that I've ever seen. The fog and rain showers prompted lots of fall-outs. There was a good mix of species including shorebirds and Gr. Blue Herons. Thrushes and Catbirds were noted but the mass was warblers. At one point, while on the light taking a few photos, I counted 15 warblers perched on me comprising 11 species. They feel odd when they cling to your beard or cozy down to sleep in your hair. A Blackburnian Warbler and Yellow Warbler squabbled for several minutes to see which would perch on my right index finger, both oblivious to the finger's movements as I took photos and made camera adjustments. Evenyually, both the warblers lost the apparent prime perch to a male Common Yellowthroat. That fellow kept his position for nearly a half hour, interrupted only briefly when I had to reach into my pocket a coup0le times. I bet that White Head is dripping warblers this morning." 15 Warblers perched on him????

Here's a link to a brief photo essay http://www.surfbirds.com/mb/Features/MSI2007/MSI2007.html

Wonder what the job pays - may get a little lonely out there but great birding :) Brian Hansen Milwaukee On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Mike McDowell wrote: > > >

http://www.pbase.com/lightrae/naturenb

The ugly side of Wind Energy ( Windmills)

2011-04-28T21:06:00.001-07:00

http://tinyurl.com/Windmillskillsbirds

Check out this video regarding Windmills

http://www.youtube.com/abcbirds#p/u/33/QRSAvD8VAbI

From ABC Birds Conservancy media press release:

Dramatic Video Shows Bird Strike at Wind Turbine: One Bird Currently Killed Every Minute by Wind Power in the U.S.

Footage available for editorial use - click here to preview
Experts available for interview

(Washington, D.C., April 5, 2011) American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization, today distributed dramatic footage showing a wind turbine striking a bird—a poignant illustration of the dangers posed to birds by the burgeoning wind industry. The footage will also appear as part of a wind TV commercial to be run on major networks later this week. The commercial encourages viewers to sign a petition asking that wind power be made bird-smart.

Estimates by the federal government say that currently, about 440,000 birds are killed annually by wind farms in the U.S., nearly one bird every minute.

“While the present bird impacts from wind farms are unacceptable, we are doubly concerned about what will happen as the U.S. increases its wind capacity approximately 12-fold by 2030 to meet federal targets. At the present rate of wind development, we expect to see bird kills in the millions from wind farms in coming years,” said Michael Parr, Vice President of ABC.

“ABC supports wind power when it is bird-smart, and believes that birds and wind power can co-exist if the wind industry is held to mandatory standards that protect birds,” said Parr.

Bird-smart wind power implements siting considerations, operational and construction mitigation, bird monitoring, and compensation to redress any unavoidable bird mortality and habitat loss.

The dramatic video, which was provided to ABC courtesy of instantlyviral.com, was filmed in Crete by an American tourist in the area. It shows a Griffon Vulture striking a large, modern wind turbine similar to those commonly in use in the United States. The bird suffered a broken wing and has been in rehab for over one year, still unable to fly.

“Many people mistakenly think that birds will routinely avoid wind turbine blades, but in reality, turbines kill more than 40,000 birds each month. One encounter with a wind turbine is typically fatal, so there is no learning curve for the birds. Eagles, vultures, and hawks tend to be looking for prey as they soar, so they often fail to see the blades until it is too late,” Parr said.

ABC has scheduled a Congressional briefing on April 8th on the issue. More than 40 bird groups from 25 states have already signed on in support of the bird-smart wind campaign and the list of supporters is growing rapidly.

American Bird Conservancy (www.abcbirds.org) conserves native birds and their habitats throughout the Americas by safeguarding the rarest species, conserving and restoring habitats, and reducing threats while building capacity in the bird conservation movement. ABC is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit membership organization.

=

NYCDEP buys more land to protect NYC reservoirs

2011-04-15T21:21:00.000-07:00

It may not seem like a big thing but the NYC Department of Environmental Protection which safeguards and manages NYC's drinking water bought 1775 acres of additional watershed recently. For birds, this means a good thing.....

see the link : http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/press_releases/11-28pr.shtml

NY Times : Multitude of Species face Climate Threat

2011-04-04T16:47:00.001-07:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/science/earth/05climate.html?_r=1&hp

JBWR task force meeting April 7th

2011-04-03T04:43:00.000-07:00

URGENT NOTICE, CHANGE IN MEETING LOCATION

JAMAICA BAY TASK FORCE MEETING

APRIL 7, 2011 @ 6:30 pm

NEW LOCATION--

AMERICAN LEGION HALL ¼ MILE SOUTH OF WILDLIFE REFUGE CENTER ON WEST SIDE OF Cross Bay Blvd.Broad Channel, NY

-209 Crossbay Blvd Broad Channel NY 11693 1-718-474-5029

MAP----http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

AGENDA

6:30 - 6:45 Sign in, Introductions, Acknowledgement of Elected/Agency

Officials

6:45 - 7:05 Overview of Regional plan Association Proposed Plan for

Expansion of JFK Airport- Environmental Response

Dan Mundy Jr. Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers

7:05 - 7:15 Potential impacts of JFK Expansion

Brad Sewell, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense

Council

7:15 - 7:35 JFK Airport Expansion and Bird Hazard issues

Don Riepe, Jamaica Bay Guardian

7:35 - 7:55 Marine Life in the targeted areas; A commercial/recreational

perspective from the local Fishing Industry

Captain Vincent Calibri

7;55- 8:30 Discussion, Q & A

Co-Chairs: Dan Mundy, Don Riepe

Jamaica Bay Task Force meeting on JFK airport expansion issue

2011-03-29T18:32:00.001-07:00

JAMAICA BAY TASK FORCE MEETING

APRIL 7, 2011 @ 6:30 pm

NPS Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge Visitor Center

Cross Bay Blvd. Broad Channel, NY 11693

AGENDA

6:30 - 6:45 Sign in, Introductions, Acknowledgment of Elected/Agency

Officials

6:45 - 7:05 Overview of Regional Plan Association Proposed Plan for

Expansion of JFK Airport- Environmental Response

Dan Mundy Jr. Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers

7:05 - 7:15 Potential impacts of JFK Expansion

Brad Sewell, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense

Council

7:15 - 7:35 JFK Airport Expansion and Bird Hazard issues

Don Riepe, Jamaica Bay Guardian

7:35 - 7:55 Marine Life in the targeted areas; A

commercial/recreational

Perspective from the local Fishing Industry

Captain Vincent Calabro

7:55- 8:30 Discussion, Q & A

Dan Mundy, Don Riepe

Co-Chairs

For more information and directions, please call 718-318-9344

Floyd Bennett Regional Planning Assn request for photos

2011-03-25T16:52:00.000-07:00

Hello,

As an invested community member of Floyd Bennett Field, we invite you to submit your own photographs of your activities at Floyd Bennett Field for our consideration for use in our report. We are looking to represent the great diversity of uses and users at the Field and your contribution is important in this effort. Please click here to upload pictures and submit credit information. Thank you in advance for helping us capture and advocate for public enjoyment of our park. We would appreciate the submission of photos by Wednesday March 30.

We invite you to continue to check www.rpa.org/floydbennett for further updates regarding the Panel’s recommendations and for the final report in the coming months.

Sincerely

Marian S. Heiskell Deborah Shanley
Panel Co-Chair Panel Co-Chair

Maya Borgenicht
Research Associate - Regional Plan Association
Director of Public Programs - Governors Island Alliance
4 Irving Place, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10003

maya@rpa.org

Phone: 917.652.6359

Fax: 212.253.5666

http://www.rpa.org/

www.governorsislandalliance.org

twitter @govisalliance

April 15, 2011: RPA's Regional Assembly "Innovation and the Global City" www.regionalassembly.org

4 Sparrow marsh development threat: the latest

2011-03-15T09:41:00.000-07:00

Continuing on the issue of this out in Brooklyn's King Plaza area, the latest news broke that the review process proposing development of 4 Sparrow may be --at least-- tainted with scandal and alleged corruption charges involving State Senator Carl Krueger who represents that district 4 Sparrow Marsh lies in.. For the story, click on this link below and you can form your own opinions.

The story--->

http://awalkintheparknyc.blogspot.com/2011/03/four-sparrow-and-prospect-parks-caught.html

NY Times reports and other paper reports are on the link above.

original topic (click on link)

http://awalkintheparknyc.blogspot.com/2011/02/opponents-of-edcs-four-sparrow-plan-up.html

House Continuing Resolution Slashes Funding for Wildlife Protection, Key Programs Eliminated

2011-03-03T16:34:00.000-08:00

http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/releases/110225.html

TAKE ACTION -->

http://tinyurl.com/6gmv225

4 Sparrow Marsh Cornell Ebird records and the NYSDEC threatened specis list

2011-02-25T17:43:00.000-08:00

Below is the cross check of species on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation list of Species of Greatest Conservation (SGCN)need ( Endangered, or Threatened, or Special Concern ) with Cornell's Ebird records entered by Brooklyn birders from the last several years. I counted at least 9 SGCN species. Follow the color code.

(Note: the Ebird records is only the first sighting, not possible to list here what has been seen again afterwards , therefore there are more records )

Here's what been seen the last several years//Those species in RED BOLD are Endangered species; Orange are threatened ; or Bright Blue are special concern under the NYSDEC listing ( source : http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7494.html

Red= Endangered

Orange = Threatened

Bright Blue= Special Concern

Sightings, 2000-2011 Species # Observer Location Date

1 Brant 33 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

2 Canada Goose 10 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

3 Mute Swan 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

4 Gadwall 5 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Feb 21, 2009

5 American Black Duck 2 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

6 Mallard 2 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

7 Green-winged Teal 2 Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 28, 2010

8 Bufflehead 12 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Nov 22, 2008

9 Hooded Merganser 2 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

10 Red-breasted Merganser 7 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Feb 21, 2009

11 Double-crested Cormorant 1 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

12 Great Cormorant 1 Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 28, 2010

13 Great Blue Heron 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

14 Great Egret 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

15 Snowy Egret 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

16 Little Blue Heron 1 Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 20, 2009

17 Tricolored Heron 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

18 Green Heron X Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 13, 2006

19 Black-crowned Night-Heron X Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 13, 2006

20 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

21 Glossy Ibis 6 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Aug 9, 2008

22 Osprey 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

23 Northern Harrier 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 31, 2010

24 Sharp-shinned Hawk 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

25 Cooper's Hawk 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Nov 16, 2009

26 Red-tailed Hawk 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 8, 2009

27 Peregrine Falcon 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Nov 16, 2009

28 Clapper Rail 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

29 Semipalmated Plover 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Aug 9, 2008

30 Killdeer 7 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

31 American Oystercatcher X Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 18, 2009

32 Spotted Sandpiper 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

33 Greater Yellowlegs 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

34 Willet X Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 13, 2006

35 Least Sandpiper 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

36 Wilson's Snipe 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

37 American Woodcock 2 Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Dec 3, 2008

38 Laughing Gull 5 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

39 Ring-billed Gull 2 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

40 Herring Gull 5 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

41 Great Black-backed Gull 1 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

gull sp. X Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 18, 2009

42 Least Tern X Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 13, 2006

43 Common Tern 4 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

44 Forster's Tern 1 Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 20, 2009

45 Black Skimmer 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

46 Rock Pigeon X D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

47 Mourning Dove 4 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

48 Monk Parakeet 7 Shane Blodgett Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jan 17, 2011

49 Yellow-billed Cuckoo 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

50 Chimney Swift 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

51 Belted Kingfisher 1 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

52 Downy Woodpecker 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

53 Northern Flicker 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

54 Willow Flycatcher 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

55 Eastern Phoebe 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

56 Eastern Kingbird 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Aug 9, 2008

57 Warbling Vireo 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 23, 2010

58 Blue Jay 8 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

59 American Crow 3 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

60 Fish Crow 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

61 Tree Swallow 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

62 Barn Swallow 10 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

63 Black-capped Chickadee 1 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

64 Carolina Wren 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

65 Marsh Wren 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

66 Golden-crowned Kinglet 9 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

67 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

68 American Robin 4 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

69 Gray Catbird 9 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

70 Northern Mockingbird 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

71 Brown Thrasher 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

72 European Starling X D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

73 Cedar Waxwing 4 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

74 Northern Parula 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

75 Yellow Warbler 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

76 Yellow-rumped Warbler 100 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

77 Palm Warbler 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Sep 21, 2008

78 Northern Waterthrush 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Aug 9, 2008

79 Common Yellowthroat 5 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

80 Eastern Towhee 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

81 American Tree Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Nov 22, 2008

82 Savannah Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

83 Saltmarsh Sparrow 2 Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 13, 2006

84 Seaside Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

85 Song Sparrow 5 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

86 Swamp Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

87 White-throated Sparrow 8 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 7, 2008

88 White-crowned Sparrow 1 Keith Michael Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jan 8, 2010

89 Dark-eyed Junco 2 Doug Gochfeld Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Dec 3, 2008

90 Northern Cardinal 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

91 Bobolink 8 Heydi Lopes Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 18, 2009

92 Red-winged Blackbird 14 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

93 Common Grackle 3 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

94 Brown-headed Cowbird 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

95 Orchard Oriole 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) May 23, 2010

96 Baltimore Oriole 1 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Aug 9, 2008

97 Purple Finch 5 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Oct 31, 2010

98 House Finch 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 27, 2008

99 American Goldfinch 2 Tom Preston Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Jul 6, 2008

100 House Sparrow 4 D. Edward Davis Four Sparrow Marsh (map) Mar 25, 2008

©2010 Audubon and Cornell Lab of Ornithology

House Budget Bill Threatens Bird Conservation Funding and Programs

2011-02-17T14:29:00.000-08:00

ABC Conservancy bulletin

To: Bird Conservation Alliance

From: Anne Law, American Bird Conservancy
Date: February 17, 2011

House Budget Bill Threatens Bird Conservation Funding and Programs

The House of Representatives is now debating H.R. 1, the Full Year Continuing Resolution for 2011, with votes taking place throughout last week. The bill includes destructive funding cuts and policy provisions that would severely harm our wildlife and other natural resources.

Your Representative needs to hear from you that you support our nation’s effort to conserve birds. Please call your Representative by calling the Capitol Switchboard at 202/224-3121. Urge them to vote no on H.R. 1 and to vote against the amendments harmful to bird conservation listed below.

State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program

H.R. 1 zeroes out funding for the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program which was funded previously at $90 million. The program was created by Congress in 2000 to assist states with their voluntary efforts to protect the more than 12,000 at-risk wildlife species around the United States from becoming endangered. The program leverages more than $100 million per year in state, tribal, local, and private dollars that directly support jobs in virtually all states. Eliminating this program also undermines the federal government’s ten year investment in State Wildlife Action Plans.

North American Wetlands Conservation Fund

H.R. 1 zeroes out funding for the North American Conservation Fund which was funded previously at $47.6 million. Half of the original wetlands in the United States have already been lost. Eliminating funding for this program will exacerbate declines of migratory birds and other fish and wildlife dependent on wetlands. This program has levered over $2 billion in matching funds affecting 20 million acres through the work of more than 4,000 partners and fostered public and private sector cooperation for migratory bird conservation, flood control, erosion control, and water quality. For every dollar of money invested in the program, an average of 3.2 dollars is raised to match the federal share by non-federal entities.

Clean Water Act

H.R. 1 would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from implementing, administering, or enforcing a change to a rule or guidance document pertaining to the definitions of waters under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Recent court decisions have created confusion in the implementation of the CWA, which protects the nation’s waters and wetlands. The proposed language protects the recent loopholes and jeopardizes the EPA’s authority to protect some 20 million acres of wetlands and wildlife habitat from development and degradation.

Other Programs Impacted by H.R. 1:

· Zeroes out the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund authorized under Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act which is the federal government’s primary means to help the states and territories carry out conservation projects to benefit threatened and endangered species.

· Cuts $65 million from the Operations Budget of the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) which had been previously funded at $1.204 billion. This would drastically impact FWS staff from being able to monitor and protect endangered species, and to keep birds and other wildlife populations healthy.

· Cuts funding requested for the Land and Water Conservation Fund to $59 million, an 86 percent from Fiscal Year 2010 enacted levels and the lowest level in its 45 year history. This program provides protection for lands in our national wildlife refuges, parks, forests, and other public lands and also for state conservation of open space and wildlife habitat through a small percentage of oil and drilling receipts. These are not taxpayer dollars.

· Cuts $12 million from the National Wildlife Refuge System which is currently funded at $491 million. This will likely mean the Refuge system will have to cut staff and neglect important restoration and management projects as well as basic facility maintenance.

· A permanent cut of almost 50,000 acres to the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)

· A cut of over $350 million from the Environmental Quality Assistance Program (EQUIP)

· A cut of $170 million from the USDA National Resource Conservation Service

Amendments to be offered on the House Floor by Members

In addition to the cuts already in H.R. 1, Representatives can also offer amendments on the House floor. Currently there are 583 amendments that have been filed for consideration. Of particular interest to ABC are:

· Amendment 85 offered by Rep. Pompeo would have zeroed out the remaining $7.4 million for the USDA Forest Service International Program which supports an array of effective bird conservation projects;

· Amendment 293 offered by Rep. McClintock that would zero out funding for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act grant program, which protects declining bird species found throughout the United States. H.R. 1 funded the program at $4.430 million;

· Amendment 557 by Rep. Gardner would prohibit EPA from regulating any use of any chemical present in hunting or fishing equipment, not just those limited uses. This amendment would take away EPA’s authority to regulate lead bullets and fishing gear.

Currently out of the three amendments listed above the only one that has been considered was Amendment 85 which fortunately was defeated. The House is scheduled to be in session late into tonight and for the rest of this week and are aiming to pass H.R. 1 by the end of this week. Attached is a community sign on letter that ABC signed onto urging House members to oppose all anti-environmental amendments. (Unfortunately due to the sheer number of amendments offer it is not comprehensive.) In addition, also attached is a more detailed spreadsheet description of the anti-environmental riders.

The Senate has already signaled that they will not take up the House bill and have begun work on a Senate version. President Obama has also publicly stated that he will veto the House bill so there will most likely be another short term Continuing Resolution.

If anyone has any additional questions and or concerns please contact me at alaw@abcbirds.org or call 202/234-7181. We will send another update once the bill has passed.

Steve Holmer

Director of the Bird Conservation Alliance &

Senior Policy Advisor
American Bird Conservancy

202/234-7181 ext. 216

sholmer@abcbirds.org

The Bird Conservation Alliance (BCA - www.birdconservationalliance.org) is a network of organizations working together to conserve America's wild birds. BCA is facilitated by American Bird Conservancy (www.abcbirds.org) which conserves native birds and their habitats throughout the Americas by safeguarding the rarest species, conserving and restoring habitats, and reducing threats while building capacity in the bird conservation movement.

Monarch Butterflies on the rebound

2011-02-16T14:40:00.001-08:00

A report on Monarch Butterflies numbers rising after past Mexican winter freeze.

http://tinyurl.com/5tht7an

NY Post :Gowanus Canal a carcinogenic cesspool

2011-02-08T18:41:00.000-08:00

From the Brooklyn Blog

http://tinyurl.com/4bxtnbq

the postmortem on Arkansas RW Blackbirds

2011-02-03T09:51:00.000-08:00

You may have recalled over a month ago, 1000's of Red-winged Blackbirds dropping dead out of the sky in Arkansas. I just happened to see this news item about the cause of death.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/27/scientists-say-blunt-force-trauma-killed-arksanas-blackbirds/

EPCAL destruction delayed for a another few years

2011-02-03T04:38:00.000-08:00

This listserve posting from Newsday courtesy of Long Island native and photographer regarding Environmental Park at Calverton (EPCAL) , likely the largest tract of remaining LI grassland is under threat for development by the town of Riverhead should help and hope galvanize conservation forces in trying to save EPCAL.It is an amazing beautiful spot .

http://birdsoflongisland.blogspot.com/2011/02/epcal-grasslands-safe-for.html

Why coastal waterfront areas like 4 Sparrow Marsh get overdeveloped.

2011-02-02T07:52:00.000-08:00

When waterfront areas get overdeveloped ( like 4 Sparrow Marsh) , surface runoff of pollutants (like oil spills) spill into Jamaica Bay watershed exacerbating the already bad nitrogen sewage flow that has been killing off the Jamaica Bay marshes... see this link about rumors regarding a Walmart store that may affect the 4 Sparrow property.Think about it.. all those 10,000's of cars overwhelming Flatbush Ave and the surrounding green habitats..How much can the area take? With the previous mention of airport expansion and so on, it all adds up to degradation of the bay.

click on

http://action.foodandwaterwatch.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/content?content_item_KEY=8407

JFK Airport future runway expansion into Jamaica Bay ?

2011-02-01T15:00:00.000-08:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/nyregion/27airports.html?_r=2

This article from the NY Times ( I hope u can open it ) hypothetically says filling in part of Jamaica Bay to extend a new runway into the Jamaica bay. If not able to open link -- search this article "To Expand, Airports May Need Radical Alterations, Report Says by Patrick Macgeegan

Published: January 26, 2011 "

see excerpt:

Among the alternatives, he said, would be to fill in part of Jamaica Bay and construct a new runway parallel to the existing runway used by the giant trans-Atlantic passenger jets. Getting approval for that option would entail not only overcoming opposition from environmental groups but also changing the federal law that created the Gateway National Recreation Area, which explicitly prohibits expanding the airport into the bay.

The deterioration and slow death of Jamaica Bay marshes by nitrogen sewage and runoff is cumulatively impacted by more coastal development ( like 4 sparrow proposal) with surface runoff of pollutants and oils ,etc ( and I am sure airport runways add in as well...) It all adds up...

Let's just hope the environmentalists coalition is still strong then if this JFK battle looms large.

New nominee for State Office parks and recreation

2011-01-28T12:07:00.000-08:00

Bio---> http://tinyurl.com/68ssxaw

Governor Cuomo Nominates New State Park Head

State-Wide

Governor Cuomo Nominates Rose Harvey as Commissioner of Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced the nomination of Rose H. Harvey as commissioner of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation.

"Rose Harvey's experience and knowledge as well as her expertise creating countless cost-effective parks, playgrounds and open spaces in underserved communities with efficiency makes her the person we need to lead this agency," Governor Cuomo said. "I thank her for her public service and look forward to working with her."

Currently, Ms. Harvey is a senior fellow at the Jonathan Rose Companies, where she acts as an advisor and researcher on parks and open space issues, and launched a non-profit organization to fund, design and develop safe, well-managed parks in urban neighborhoods. She was also recently a McCluskey Fellow and Lecturer at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.

For 27 years, Ms. Harvey held multiple leadership positions with The Trust for Public Land, most recently as Senior Vice President and National Director of Urban Programs. There, she oversaw all real estate acquisitions, urban park design and developments, managed the finances of a $20 million annual operating budget, and closed between $50 and $75 million worth of land and parks transactions each year across 8 states – a total of nearly $1 billion and more than a thousand new and enhanced parks, gardens and playgrounds in underserved neighborhoods in New York City, Newark, N.J. and Baltimore. She has also established large landscape woodlands and natural areas throughout New York State and the Mid-Atlantic region.

Ms. Harvey began her tenure in the parks and open space arena as the Assistant Director for Conservation Easement at the Maryland Environmental Trust, where she negotiated protections of private lands holding environmental significance.

Ms. Harvey received her B.A. from Colorado College in 1977 and M.E.S. at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies in 1984. She currently serves on the Board of the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation and the Yale Leadership Advisory Council. In the past she has served on many conservation organizations, including the Appalachian Mountain Club, the Hudson River Institute and Walsh Park Low Income Housing. In addition to multiple state and national awards for her environmental stewardship and advocacy for open space and parks, Ms. Harvey has written multiple articles and op/eds in numerous national media outlets and industry trade journals.

Lucy Rockefeller Waletzky, M.D., Chair of the New York State Council of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, said, "Ms. Harvey has been key to many of the great additions to state parks of the past 20 years. I look forward to working with her to foster strong private-public partnerships that protect and enhance New York's parks, open spaces and heritage. I am also deeply committed to working with Governor Cuomo's administration in preserving our state's recreational landscapes and natural resources."

Frances Beinecke, President of Natural Resource Defense Council, said, "Ms. Harvey's decades of experience in creating hundreds of parks and thousands of acres of open space makes her the perfect choice to lead New York's agency tasked with protecting and preserving public land. I applaud Governor Cuomo for selecting such a dedicated professional.

Ned Sullivan, President of Scenic Hudson, said, "Rose Harvey brings to this critical job sterling credentials and experience in land conservation and in creating and managing urban gardens and parks. Governor Cuomo has selected an outstanding candidate to help him implement his broad reform agenda and to meet the state's responsibilities as steward of our unparalleled parkland."

Kim Elliman, CEO of the Open Space Institute, said, "Rose brings an unparalleled passion for providing all New Yorkers with access to parks and open space. Throughout her 30 year career, she has built an incredible track record of creating and protecting parks, from vest-pocket parks in cities to landscape parks like Sterling Forest. She is singularly qualified for the job and I commend Governor Cuomo for his selection."

Leslie Wright, New York State Director for The Trust for Public Land, said, "Governor Cuomo's selection of Ms. Harvey as Commissioner for the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation shows that he is serious about maintaining open space and making it accessible to as many New Yorkers as possible. Ms. Harvey's storied career in establishing parks, playgrounds and gardens in urban areas, combined with her ongoing advocacy for open space makes her the ideal candidate to lead this agency."

###

New York State Office of The Governor Press Release - January 27, 2010

Cuomo Taps Parks Commish From Private Sector

Capital Tonight - January 27, 2010 - Liz Benjamin

NYC Audubon link to Four Sparrow Marsh habitat loss threat

2011-01-11T18:17:00.001-08:00

http://www.nycaudubon.org/home/FourSparrow/

Floyd Bennett comments reminder

2011-01-07T07:23:00.000-08:00

From Regional Planning Assn Maya Borgenicht :

Hello,

Thank you for your interest in Floyd Bennett Field. The Blue Ribbon Panel is currently preparing recommendations for their final report. Public input continues to be vital to our process and we would welcome your comments on these preliminary draft recommendations.

Please go to the Panel's website, http://www.rpa.org/floydbennett/ to download the draft recommendations. If you would like to comment, please respond before January 21st, 2011.

Sincerely,

Marian S. Heiskell Deborah Shanley

Panel Co-Chair Panel Co-Chair

Maya Borgenicht

Research Associate - Regional Plan Association

Director of Public Programs - Governors Island Alliance

4 Irving Place, 7th Floor

New York, NY 10003

maya@rpa.org

Phone: 917.652.6359

Fax: 212.253.5666

www.rpa.org
http://www.governorsislandalliance.org/
twitter @govisalliance

Again: Four Sparrow Marsh under developement habitat threat

2010-12-30T17:57:00.000-08:00

4 Sparrow Marsh is at the north border of Floyd Bennett Field, separated by Mill Basin , very near Kings Plaza Mall, and adjacent to the TOYS R US store.

For info on 4 Sparrow Marsh, see this link , look for the "hotspot"

http://brooklynbirdclub.org/coastal.htm

and http://tinyurl.com/2vv2y57 (includes a PDF map)

I previously wrote a letter about 8 years ago against development the first time. Apparently , the threat is back again. Well, it looks like the city wants to make more $ on open green tracts..Brooklyn possesses a big bulls eye... : (

from the NYC Economic Development Council website

http://tinyurl.com/25pcb4k

The issue :

Positive Declaration and Public Scoping

Kings County (Brooklyn) - The New York City Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed Four Sparrows Retail Center at Mill Basin may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared. A public scoping session will be held on January 1, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Kings Plaza Community Room, 5100 Kings Plaza at the intersection of Flatbush Avenue and Avenue U. The action involves the proposed development of an approximately 15 acre retail center that would contain a 110,000 square foot of retail automotive sales and service center, a 45,000 square foot existing Toys 'R' Us toy store and up to approximately 138,000 square foot of commercial retail development which would be known as the Four Sparrow Retail Center at Mill Basin. The project which would include approximately 820 accessory parking spaces would be located on currently under utilized City-owned land fronting on Flatbush Avenue between the Belt Parkway interchange and about 0.5 miles south of Avenue U. The project would also include the mapping of the 46 acre Four Sparrows Marsh as City parkland and the creation of an approximately 400 foot public trail. This would protect natural features and connect the natural area with a high quality retail center. The project requires approvals from the New York City Planning Commission including: rezoning of the development site from C3 to C8-1; demapping and disposition of an unbuilt segment of Flatbush Avenue and Marginal Street, Wharf or Place that crosses the site; disposition of the proposed site to three private entities and Mayoral approval of the business terms pursuant to Section 385(b)(4) of the City Charter; Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 62-836 to modify height and setback regulations on a waterfront block; certification of the site plan on a waterfront block pursuant to ZR Section 62-811; certification of a zoning lot subdivision pursuant to ZR Section 62-812; and mapping of the Four Sparrows Marsh as City parkland.

Related actions include approvals from New York City Department of Transportation, New York City Department of Environmental Protection, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers related to traffic signals, site storm water and sewer drainage, tidal wetlands and construction in navigable waters, respectively.

The project is located at 2875 Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, New York.

Contact: Douglas Rice, New York City Economic Development Corporation, 110 William Street, New York, NY 10038, Phone: (212) 312-3750, E-mail: drice@nycedc.com.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Floyd Bennett Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations doc release

2010-12-22T12:26:00.000-08:00

The Blue Ribbon panel on Floyd Bennett's future has been publicized today 12/22. See the link

Blue_Ribbon_Panel_-_FBF-Task-Force-Recommendations_2010.pdf

OR

http://www.rpa.org/floydbennett/

And the posting to the list serves of the RPA email received ( Comments welcomed)
Dear birders and environmentalists:

The Floyd Bennett Field issue has resurfaced with draft recommendations put forward by the Blue Ribbon Panel.

I received this latest email today if you wished to submit comments. The primary issue for us birders is to protect the grassland habitats, particularly the core interior and the runways within those grasslands. Any "developement " should be kept to the buildings themselves and the outer perimeter. ( and I prefer all interior runways blocked off as a tradeoff; Last weekend, I found a convoy of 30 NYC Sanitation Trucks roaring up and down on the restricted closed off runway along the North Forty tract which likely they had no permission on Federal property.)

Based on research I have done, out of 216 species recorded on Cornell's ebird since 2003 , 68 Floyd Bennett species recorded are deemed "Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation out of the 118 SGCN species list for NYS.So all the urgency to protect this fragile Floyd Bennett grassland habitat.

this is an excerpt from my letter to the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in October

"Further evidence of Floyd Bennett’s rich diversity and as a critical refuge for birds is found on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) “Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) “ table (http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/9406.html).

Of 118 NYSDEC SGCN bird species, 68 were recorded at Floyd Bennett (correlated with the Cornell Ebird data since 2003). Interestingly, among SGCN is Buff-breasted Sandpiper I mentioned in my last paragraph. This means 58% of NYSDEC SGCN species are found here, on the old runways, grasslands, bordering pine forest and maritime forest in the “North Forty section”, which makes Floyd Bennett a very exceptional bird sanctuary it is."

Regards,

Peter Dorosh

President

Brooklyn Bird Club

-----Original Message-----

From: Maya Borgenicht

To: Maya Borgenicht

Sent: Wed, Dec 22, 2010 12:21 pm

Subject: Floyd Bennett Field Blue Ribbon Panel Draft Recommendations Available

Hello,

Thank you for your interest in Floyd Bennett Field. The Blue Ribbon Panel is

currently preparing recommendations for their final report. Public input

continues to be vital to our process and we would welcome your comments on these

preliminary draft recommendations.

Please go to the Panel's website, www.rpa.org/FloydBennett to download the draft

recommendations. If you would like to comment, please respond before January

21st, 2011. We will also be sending a reminder in early January for those who

miss this notification over the holidays.

Sincerely,

Marian S. Heiskell Deborah Shanley

Panel Co-Chair Panel Co-Chair

Maya Borgenicht

Research Associate - Regional Plan Association

Director of Public Programs - Governors Island Alliance

4 Irving Place, 7th Floor

New York, NY 10003

maya@rpa.org

Phone: 917.652.6359

Fax: 212.253.5666

www.rpa.org

www.governorsislandalliance.org

twitter @govisalliance=

Preserve Plum Island

2010-12-16T20:13:00.000-08:00

See the attached link regarding the wild island off the north fork tip ( Orient Point) and sign the petition.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/preserve-plum-island/

Bald Eagles on the rise..good news

2010-12-16T12:19:00.000-08:00

Associated Press report issued 12/15

Record number of eagles counted at Pa. sanctuary

KEMPTON, Pa. (AP) — Bird-watchers at a ridgetop preserve in eastern Pennsylvania counted a record number of migrating bald eagles this fall, another sign of the species' remarkable comeback following a century of decline.

The huge flight of 404 eagles smashed the old record of 245 set two years ago at Hawk Mountain Sanctuary, which has kept an annual tally of migrating hawks, eagles and falcons since its founding 76 years ago as the world's first refuge for birds of prey.

As the autumn raptor count at Hawk Mountain drew to a close Wednesday, sanctuary biologists and birding enthusiasts alike cheered what Keith Bildstein, the sanctuary's director of conservation science, recently called "possibly the greatest wildlife success story of our time."

The U.S. population of bald eagles suffered a steep decline between the 1870s and 1970s, first due to habitat destruction and hunting, and later because of the widespread use of DDT. The pesticide accumulated in fish, a major food source for eagles, and resulted in eagles laying eggs with weakened shells that broke during incubation.

By 1963, there were only 417 breeding pairs left in the lower 48 states.

They also were an extreme rarity at Hawk Mountain, which is situated along a major Appalachian flyway for migratory birds known as the Kittatinny Ridge. The low point came in 1975, when counters spotted only 13 bald eagles the entire fall.

"One of our members always used to bring champagne in hopes we would see one," said veteran bird-watcher Catherine Elwell, who has been visiting Hawk Mountain since the early 1970s. She said "great cheers would rise up" on North Lookout — an outcropping where the official count takes place — whenever an eagle was overhead.

The bald eagle began a gradual recovery after it was listed on the federal Endangered Species list in 1967, and DDT was banned in the U.S. five years later. There are now more than 10,000 pairs, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The eagle was removed from the list in 2007.

"This has been just the most remarkable recovery, and I don't think many of us thought it would happen," said Elwell, 68, of Alburtis.

Bald eagle numbers have risen steadily at Hawk Mountain, with a 10-year average of 235.

This year's count included one superlative day in late August, when research biologist David Barber tallied 36 eagles — 31 of them after 3 p.m., and 14 of those in a single hour. It was the second-highest single-day flight in Hawk Mountain's history.

"We just kept looking at each other, like, where are all these eagles coming from?" he recalled Wednesday.

Where indeed. While 2010 might turn out to be a statistical anomaly, senior monitoring biologist Laurie Goodrich, who coordinates the annual count at Hawk Mountain, speculates that a number of factors came together to make this year like no other.

The weather cooperated, with plenty of days of northwesterly winds that helped push migrants closer to the ridgetop. An increase in the number of breeding pairs in the Northeastern United States may also have contributed: Local eagles are territorial, pushing migrants from Canada farther south.

The record flight might simply reflect that there are more eagles than ever before.

Whatever the reason, Goodrich said, "It's something we can celebrate, as bird-watchers and as scientists."

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Governor Paterson sign Executive Order on Hydrofracking

2010-12-11T19:49:00.000-08:00

Catskill Mountainkeeper BREAKING NEWS

December 11, 2010

HISTORIC VICTORY FOR THE CITIZENS OF NEW YORK STATE

In an amazing victory for the citizens of New York State, Governor David A. Paterson has issued an Executive Order directing the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to conduct further comprehensive review and analysis of high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus Shale. The Executive Order requires that, if approved, high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing would not be permitted until July 1, 2011, at the earliest. New York State becomes the first state to have a formal prohibition on high volume horizontal hydrofacking because of concerns about environmental impacts. Regretablly instead of signing the "Moratorium Bill" legislation sent to him that included a prohibition on vertical hyrdofracking that was passed by on overwhelming bi partisan majority in both houses of the State government he decided instead to succumb to industry pressure and issue the Executive Order that eliminates vertical wells from the prohibition. While the Executive Order is historic and proves that our concerns over hydrofracking are legitimate it is also a disappointment because vertical wells are also dangerous.

The gas and oil industry lobby deliberately misinterpreted a section of the Moratorium Bill claiming it would bring all gas drilling in New York State to a halt. The bill only specified a moratorium on drilling for wells using hydrofracking, whether they are vertically or horizontally drilled.

A moratorium banning the fracking of vertical wells is very important for several reasons:

1. Gas companies have been clear that they plan to drill vertical wells in the Utica and Marcellus shale with the intention of converting them to horizontal wells.

2. While the State Senate was considering a two-year moratorium on horizontal wells the gas industry threatened to drill and frack 16 vertical wells every square mile in retribution if a moratorium on fracked horizontal wells was passed.

3. Some of the worst water contamination problems, such as in Dimock, PA came from vertical wells drilled and fractured in the Marcellus Shale.

We now look to Governor Elect Andrew Cuomo to protect the Citizens of New York from the dangers of hydro fracking by any method including vertical drilling and horizontal drilling and including all shale formations.

BELOW IS THE GOVERNORS PRESS RELEASE

To embed this news release, copy the code below and paste it into your website or blog. Preview

Governor Paterson Issues Executive Order on Hydraulic Fracturing

by New York State Office of the Governor

ALBANY, NY (12/11/2010)(readMedia)-- Governor David A. Paterson has issued an Executive Order directing the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to conduct further comprehensive review and analysis of high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus Shale. The Executive Order requires that, if approved, high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing would not be permitted until July 1, 2011, at the earliest. This should allay any fears that high-volume hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling under study by DEC will commence without assurances of safety.

"We in government must always focus on protecting the well-being of those whom we represent and serve, but we also have an obligation to look to the future and protect the long-term interests for our State and its residents," Governor Paterson said. "Therefore, I am proud to issue this Executive Order, which will guarantee that before any high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing is permitted, the Department of Environmental Conversation will complete its studies and certify that such operations are safe."

Permits for high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing can not be issued until the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) completes a Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS), which is currently being developed. As a result, there is already in place a de-facto moratorium on such permits.

The Governor issued the Executive Order contemporaneously with his veto of S.8129-B/A.11443-B, which would have suspended the issuance of new oil and gas drilling permits through May 15, 2011, including all conventional, low-volume, vertical oil and gas wells.

"This legislation, which was well intentioned, would have a serious impact on our State if signed into law. Enacting this legislation would put people out of work - work that is permitted by the Department of Environmental Conservation and causes no demonstrated environmental harm, in order to effectuate a moratorium that is principally symbolic," Governor Paterson said. "Symbols can have great importance, but particularly in our current terrible economic straits, I cannot agree to put individuals out of work for a symbolic act."

"I am sympathetic to the sponsors' desire to protect the environment and public health, and I respect the concerns that produced this legislation," the Governor continued. "But this legislation does not accomplish this purpose, since the activities at the heart of the moratorium are not currently taking place, and would not take place until well after the legislation's proposed moratorium."

The bill goes well beyond high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing and effectively would result in a moratorium on all new oil and gas well drilling in this State. The cessation of such new activity, even for a limited period, would have substantial negative financial consequences for the State, local governments, landowners and small businesses involved in conventional oil and gas production.

The Division of the Budget estimates that the bill would cause a substantial reduction in State revenues from the loss of permit fees and tax revenue. With a $315 million budget gap in the current fiscal year, and a projected gap of over $9 billion in the 2011-12 State fiscal year, New York simply cannot afford to send hundreds and perhaps thousands of jobs, and millions of dollars in capital investment to Pennsylvania and other states to our south.

###

Additional news available at www.ny.gov/governor
High resolution images available at www.ny.gov/governor/mediaimages
password: paterson
New York State
Executive Chamber
press.office@chamber.state.ny.us
212.681.4640
518.474.8418
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

Support Mountainkeeper

This is a complex and extended battle requiring tremendous resources. Catskill Mountainkeeper needs your financial support to continue to represent you in this fight.

About Catskill Mountainkeeper

Catskill Mountainkeeper is an independent, not for profit, 501c3 community based environmental advocacy organization, dedicated to creating a flourishing sustainable economy in the Catskills and preserving and protecting the area's long term health. We address issues of water integrity for the Delaware and Susquehanna River Systems, the defense of the vast woodlands that encompass the Catskill Forest Preserve and the New York City Watershed as well as farmland protection. We promote "smart" development that balances the economic needs and concerns of the Catskill regions' citizens and the protection of our abundant but exceedingly vulnerable natural resources.

Forward email

This email was sent to amlazarus@earthlink.net by info@catskillmountainkeeper.org.

Update Profile/Email Address
Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™
Privacy Policy.

Catskill Mountainkeeper
PO Box 381
Youngsville
NY
12791

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3309 - Release Date: 12/11/10 07:34:00

Biodiversity planning in NYC and PLANYC Plan

2010-12-09T14:34:00.001-08:00

From: Marielle Anzelone

To: Marielle Anzelone

Sent: Wed, Dec 8, 2010 10:13 pm

Subject: Biodiversity & PlaNYC thru 12/31 only!

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

Biodiversity is now on the radar of both City Council and the Mayor’s Office. Our collective input can shape how biodiversity is addressed by New York City government in future.

Last month, I was privileged to give testimony before NYC Council regarding 4 bills on invasive species and sustainable landscapes: http://bit.ly/geOSAb

I also had the pleasure of meeting with the Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability (responsible for PlaNYC). Biodiversity is a priority, but its inclusion is not a guarantee. They are open to suggestions only through December. *Revisions for PlaNYC 2.0 start in January!*

Please consider letting them know that NYC's nature is a crucial consideration by:

Attending one of the last 2 community meetings:

Eastern Queens:

Thursday, December 9th, 2010** tomorrow!

7:00 PM – 9:00 PM

Bayside High School

32-24 Corporal Kennedy Street

South Brooklyn:

Thursday, December 16th, 2010

6:00 PM – 8:00 PM

St. Michael’s RC Church, 352 42nd Street

Enter through auditorium on 43rd Street

2. Sign the petition and share your stories and photos about NYC nature here:

http://nycbiodiversity.tumblr.com

3. Text your idea to 917-791-3064 (the PLANYC mobile input unit) and fill in the blank “One idea to create a greener, greater New York City is to ____”

4. Share your comments and suggestions on my Huffington Post op-ed, “More Than Million Trees, Where is the Nature in PlaNYC?” Let me know what more we could be doing. What are biodiversity policy initiatives that you believe are working?

This is such an exciting opportunity! I hope we can make our voices heard.

Happy Holidays,

Marielle

--

Mariellé Anzelone

Botanist & Native Plant Landscape Designer

T 646.244.9397

E marielle@drosera-x.com

W http://www.drosera-x.com

Executive Director & Founder

NYC Wildflower Week

4th annual - May 1-9, 2011

http://nycwildflowerweek.org

Facebook: http://bit.ly/60Igic

Twitter: http://twitter.com/NYCWW

NYTIMES 11/26 article on Floyd Bennett

2010-11-27T13:17:00.000-08:00

November 26, 2010

On an Edge of Brooklyn, New Hopes for a Park in Neglect

By TIM STELLOH

The hangar on the edge of Floyd Bennett Field has the familiar, post-apocalyptic look of urban decay, with “Danger Keep Out” spray painted in red across one of the building’s doors.

Many of the door panels have disappeared; so has most of the hangar’s roof. Inside, a forest of weeds has sprouted through the floor. Sections of guardrail lie on the ground beside large drain pipes, rotted pallets and discarded road signs.

This building — just steps from Flatbush Avenue and part of what maps identify as the “Hangar Row Historic District”— is an example of what Theresa Scavo, who grew up in the area and is chairwoman of Brooklyn Community Board 15, often refers to as the “total neglect” of this historic site, home to New York City’s first municipal airport and for almost four decades part of the Gateway National Recreation Area.

“It’s always been like this,” Ms. Scavo said. “It’s just, every time you pass, it looks a little worse.”

But if Floyd Bennett’s many users, boosters and officials can agree on a vision of the field’s future, better years may be ahead.

A blue-ribbon panel organized last April by Representative Anthony D. Weiner and Senator Charles E. Schumer has been asked to make recommendations for the park’s future. It will focus on the “overall vision” for the field, along with practical fixes, said Robert Pirani, a senior planner with Regional Plan Association, which is working with the panel.

The recommendations will be just that — ideas that could be incorporated into a larger National Park Service plan with the intention of making Floyd Bennett “worthy of being a national park,” as Mr. Pirani put it. Financing for the proposals is unclear.

The panel, which has two chairwomen, Marian S. Heiskell, a longtime conservationist, and Deborah Shanley, dean of the School of Education at Brooklyn College, is expected to release its report this winter.

Some panel members, park users and advocates have pressed for big and ambitious plans — building a drive-in movie theater or an Olympic-size swimming pool, for instance — while others have argued for more low-key, pragmatic repairs: erecting clearer signs, improving transportation to the field and within its more than 1,000 acres, and fixing a boat launch with potholes so large you can see the rebar below.

The park already has an archery range, a campground, protected grasslands, a private sports complex and a community garden. It is also used by fishermen, cyclists, kayakers, a large model airplane club and a historic aircraft renovation project.

There is “broad unanimity” among panel members that the park can be improved while keeping these multiple uses, Mr. Pirani said. The challenge is making sure that the recommendations can be addressed in a realistic way, he said.

Linda Canzanelli, the acting superintendent of Gateway National Recreation Area, said the process of improving Floyd Bennett Field has already begun with the restoration of the Ryan Visitor Center — once the airport’s grand terminal and administration building — which a Park Service spokesman described as “the heart” of the park. Work began this year, and the building is expected to reopen in 2012.

Pointing to the success of Aviator, a private sports and recreation complex that opened in 2006 in several run-down hangars, Ms. Canzanelli said the key to fixing the still-crumbling hangars was in public-private partnerships and leases to schools or nonprofit organizations.

“We inherited a bunch of older military buildings, but we don’t have a Department of Defense budget,” she said. “We need to do a better job of reaching out to the public, because the days of big government coming in and solving all the problems are over.”

At a well-attended public hearing in September, the Brooklyn borough president, Marty Markowitz, who is also a panel member, suggested bringing major trade shows to Floyd Bennett, starting a high-end antique fair — similar to the Brimfield Antique Show and Flea Market in Massachusetts — and building a drive-in movie theater.

The last idea drew jeers from Jill Weingarten, a longtime member of the Floyd Bennett Gardens Association and the editor of its newsletter.

“Everyone turned to each other,” Ms. Weingarten recalled, “and I went, ‘Boo.’ ”

One afternoon, Ms. Weingarten tended the tomatoes, jalapeños and water irises in her garden, which is close to nearly 500 other plots. She has had her garden since 1997, and has transformed it into a kind of sanctuary, with a pond, grapevine, barbecue and sunshade. She hesitated at a suggestion to expand the garden, which has a two-year waiting list, to accommodate more plots and urban gardeners.

“I see people who want this place to remain secret and quiet — and in a way you can’t blame them,” she said. “In another way, why not? Why not make it bigger and give people more opportunity?”

Ms. Weingarten said the association had pushed to make solar energy central to the park’s future.

“A lot of the buildings are closed because they can’t pay electricity,” she said. “Then they get vandalized.”

Ms. Scavo had a more modest request for the panel. “Fix what we have,” she said.

Ms. Scavo is just one interested party among many. There is New York City Audubon, which has run a grassland restoration project at the park since the mid-1980s, and has argued for more protections for sparrows, larks and other ground nesting birds that use the property. There is the Pennsylvania Avenue Radio Control Society, a 200-member model airplane flying club that has requested that development projects be kept modest; it has also asked for electrical hook-ups and wireless Internet.

There is the archery range and the Historic Aircraft Restoration Project. There are visitors like Jimmy Reco, 68, and David Davidson, 75, who have spent many mornings over the last 20 years on the park’s eastern shore, fishing, drinking coffee and reading the paper.

The men said the surrounding beaches are no longer plastered with garbage the way they once were — “It was a like a city dump,” Mr. Reco said — but that afternoon there was still plenty of trash around: beer bottles, wine bottles, soda bottles and, eerily, an empty urn from St. Michael’s Cemetery in East Elmhurst.

The scene was sufficiently disturbing to Mr. Reco, who had a simple message for the field’s overseers.

“We need help here,” he said. “S.O.S.”

Update Ridgewood Reservoir

2010-11-07T14:53:00.000-08:00

Agency Is Still Weighing Wetland Ruling For Reservoir

Designation Could Alter Park Plans

by Robert Pozarycki

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) remains no closer to making a decision regarding the potential declaration of the Ridgewood Reservoir on the Brooklyn/Queens border as a wetland, according to an agency spokesperson.

“At this time, DEC has not made any determination to map the ponded or vegetated areas within the Ridgewood Reservoir as regulated freshwater wetlands,” said Thomas Panzone in an e-mail to the Times Newsweekly in response to a statement made during Community Board 5’s Oct. 13 meeting that the agency was “90 percent certain” that it would classify the 55-acre site as a wetland.

The co-chairperson of Board 5’s Parks Committee, Steven Fiedler, told board members on Oct. 13 that the statement was made by a DEC representative during a recent meeting convened by State Sen. Joseph Addabbo and community residents regarding the fate of the reservoir.

According to Panzone, “DEC is in communication with New York City Parks and DEP, which have committed to conduct hydrological studies of the reservoir district to determine the current sources of water entering and leaving the reservoir basins.”

“Once these studies are concluded, the [DEC] will determine whether to conduct further studies of the vegetation and make a decision regarding whether to map this area as freshwater wetlands,” Panzone said.

Should the agency declare the reservoir as a wetland, the spokesperson said, the city’s Parks Department would then be required to submit permits to the state agency for any potential improvements it wishes to make in any or all of the basins. All applications would be restricted to “certain regulated future activities in the freshwater wetland or 100-foot freshwater wetland adjacent area.”

“The designation would mean that the city would have to demonstrate, through a permit application, that future uses of the area would be consistent with protection and preser- vation of the wetland resources,” Panzone added. He noted that the Parks Department would maintain responsibility for the management and maintenance of the reservoir if the wetland designation is administered.

Formerly used as the source of drinking water for Brooklyn and Queens, the Ridgewood Reservoir was taken completely out of the city’s water system in the late 1980s. Since being shuttered and left inactive, the site has evolved into a natural habitat filled with a wide assortment of plant and wildlife.

In 2004, the city’s Department of Environmental Protection transferred ownership of the reservoir to the Parks Department. The agency later declared its intention of developing the site—along with the adjacent Highland Park—into one of eight regional parks as part of the PlaNYC 2030 master plan launched by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2007.

Community and environmental activists fought plans initially put forth by the Parks Department to develop athletic fields in one of the reservoir’s three basins as part of a $50 million overhaul. Funds for the project were eventually scaled back due to the fiscal crisis that gripped the city and country in 2008.

Currently, the Parks Department is in the midst of the first phase of improvements to the reservoir, which includes installing new fencing and lighting around the perimeter of the site. The project would not be affected in any way by any potential wetland declaration, it was noted.

Posted By Rob Jett to Save Ridgewood Reservoir at 11/05/2010 09:38:00 AM

Pine Barren Society action on Carmans River

2010-11-05T15:18:00.001-07:00

Long Island Pine Barrens Society – November Update

Carmans River Plan Faces Calmer Waters

On October 20, the Society joined Brookhaven Town Supervisor Mark Lesko and other government officials to announce an agreement to protect the Carmans River from intrusive development. The initiative calls for a 90 day time out on all final development decisions surrounding the river. In the interim, a scientific based study will be conducted to analyze cumulative impacts associated with existing and proposed development in the watershed area and define a defensible watershed boundary. A formal Carmans River Study group led by Lee Koppelman, joined by several members of Brookhaven Town, the Central Pine Barrens Commission, the Department of Environmental Conservation and non-governmental stakeholders will draw upon the expertise of an appointed Technical Advisory Group to develop an official Carmans River Watershed Comprehensive Preservation and Management Plan. A final plan is set to be presented to Brookhaven Town Board for consideration of approval in January.

The Carmans River stretches 10 miles from North of Middle Country Road to the Great South Bay. It is designated by New York State as a “Recreational River” and is home to many species of endangered wildlife and native plants.

Society Sues Legislature for Making a Gift of Public Assets for Private Benefit

The Society has filed suit against the Suffolk County Legislature to prevent farmers from building on land where development rights have been sold and purchased by the County with taxpayer’s money. The suit asks that Suffolk prevent farm owners who have sold their development rights from developing on the land nonetheless.

The Society is challenging recent changes to the County’s Agricultural Regulations, which for the first time, explicitly authorizes development on land from which the public has purchased the development rights. It is unconstitutional for government to make a gift of public assets for private benefit, the suit says.

You are subscribed to the Pine Barrens Society email-list. The Pine Barrens Society is a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization in the State of New York. To unsubscribe or invite a friend, please call (631) 369-3300 or email info@pinebarrens.org. As a subscriber, your contact information will be kept private.

EPCAL latest bad bews

2010-10-27T16:07:00.000-07:00

The story: http://calvertongrasslands.org/

Please see link to Newsday story below.

http://tinyurl.com/3a6fsu9

Newsday -

Saying it could not develop at Riverhead's Enterprise
Park at Calverton without making substantial changes
to its use, Rechler Equity Partners has pulled out
of its $18-million deal to purchase 300 acres of vacant
land at the town-owned industrial complex. The firm faced
a Friday deadline to sign its contract or pay for an extension.

Town officials said that, with Rechler dropping out, they are
now free to subdivide the property and sell it off in 10- or
15-acre blocks.

articles on extinction

2010-10-13T18:04:00.000-07:00

Birds Could Signal Mass Extinction

ScienceDaily (Oct. 12, 2010) — The first detailed measurements of current extinction rates for a specific region have shown that birds are the best group to use to track the losses. The study also reveals Britain may be losing species over ten times faster than records suggest, and the speed of loss is probably increasing: the losses from England alone may exceed one species every two weeks.

The study, by Oxford University researchers, shows that many types of obscure organism in Britain are going extinct at the same rate as the birds -- evidence supporting fears of a global mass extinction. A report of the research is published in an upcoming issue of the journal Biological Conservation as countries prepare to meet in Japan 18-29 October to discuss biodiversity conservation targets.

'Biodiversity loss is arguably much more serious and more permanent than climate change,' said Clive Hambler of Oxford University's Department of Zoology, lead author of the research.

But it's impossible to know if policy targets to reduce the loss are being met without accurate measures of extinction rates. Until now, we had only crude estimates for a very few types of organism. Now we've got evidence that many groups of living things -- lichens, bugs, moths, fish, plants and so on -- are going extinct at a very similar rate to the birds.'

Using Britain's uniquely detailed natural history records, the researchers found that 1-5% of the region's species in many groups were lost since 1800, with higher losses in the Twentieth Century compared to the Nineteenth. Using further data from the USA and across the whole globe, the researchers show that the patterns of extinction in Britain are likely to be typical of those found on land and freshwater elsewhere.

Mr Hambler said: 'The birds are beautiful creatures, but they are also diverse, and many of them are specialised to particular habitats. This makes them sensitive to changes in their environment -- such as loss of mature trees, or the drying out of swampy ground, or coastal development. And what makes them really special for monitoring extinction is that they are also exceptionally easy to study, anywhere in the world -- so we can detect declines in their populations long before we notice losses of the more obscure things like slime moulds or mosses. It's no coincidence they can signal environmental change.'

'The underlying reason for the similarity of extinction rates in birds and the other living things is that habitat loss affects them in the same way. Our work supports the use of birds to indicate extinction rates in Britain, the USA and globally, and they should now be tried in places such as tropical forests where the bulk of other species will never be recorded.'

'The recorded extinctions in any region are just the tip of the iceberg, because there are not enough observers,' said Mr Hambler. For example, in March this year the British government's advisory body, Natural England, reported about 500 species lost from England since 1800. 'The losses reported by Natural England are under 0.5% per century, from England's 55,000 species,' notes Mr Hambler. 'Our research suggests that the actual losses could be over ten times this number, with about one species going extinct in England every fortnight.'

Natural England also reported species losses in England had apparently declined in recent decades, but the Oxford study suggests that this is not the case. Hambler and colleagues found there are about 1000 endangered species on the brink of extinction in Britain -- indeed many of these may already be extinct.

'People tend to be hesitant in declaring extinction, which leads to problems assessing the current rate,' said Mr Hambler. 'Many ancient and important habitats in Britain are threatened today because of human activity and population growth -- whether it's an increase in water use, growing use of wood fuel, or the growth of urban sprawl. Despite conservationists' efforts it's very likely extinction rates will continue to rise in Britain and globally for many years. These losses will impact on human welfare, and I'd say conservation needs a profile and resources even bigger than climate change.'

Alongside studies of birds, the researchers believe that recording rates of habitat loss will provide a good, simple measure of some elements of biodiversity loss.

Mr Hambler said: 'This work strengthens the claim that the world is suffering a mass extinction. We can now be much more confident that across the planet the less conspicuous and less well-known species are going extinct at a similar high rate to that already witnessed in birds, fish and amphibians.'

Journal Reference:

1. Clive Hambler, Peter A. Henderson, Martin R. Speight. Extinction rates, extinction-prone habitats, and indicator groups in Britain and at larger scales. Biological Conservation, 2010; DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.09.004

***********************************

An 'Unprecedented' Bat Die-Off Could Devastate U.S. Agriculture

By BRUCE KENNEDY

Posted 9:45 AM 10/12/10 Technology, Economy

Comments Print Text Size A A A

Print this page
EmailShare on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on DiggShare on LifestreamMost people don't love bats, but like good health, you'll realize that you miss them after they're gone. Experts believe many species of bats may vanish pretty soon, and their disappearance could bring profound and long-term changes not only to the environment but also to agriculture, landscaping and gardening across North America.

For several years now, scientists have been sounding alarms about a devastating fungus, White-Nose Syndrome (WNS), that has literally decimated bat populations in the Northeastern U.S. The fungus leaves a white substance on the bat's nose, wings and body, and disrupts the bat's hibernation patterns, forcing it to burn through its fat reserves, which quickly leads to starvation. Earlier this year, a survey of the bat population in New Jersey estimated that 90% of that state's bats had been killed off.

"This is on a level unprecedented, certainly in mammals," says Rick Adams, a biology professor at the University of Northern Colorado and a renowned bat expert. "A mass extinction event, a thousand times higher than anything we've seen. It's going through [bat colonies] like wildfire, with 80% to 100% mortality."

"The disease is absolutely devastating, it's unprecedented," says Mylea Bayless, a biologist with Austin, Texas-based Bat Conservation International. "It's causing population declines in wildlife that we haven't seen since the passenger pigeon."

Bayless notes that bats have slow reproductive rates, usually giving birth to just one pup a year. So bat populations, she says, are going to be very slow to recover, "if they ever do recover." The disease, adds Bayless, "is moving at a pace that's astonishing, about 450 miles per year. In four short years, it's now closer to the Pacific Ocean than it is to its point of origination in Albany, N.Y."

Your Billion-Dollar Bug Eaters

You might be saying good riddance, but think again. Bats are the primary predator of night-flying insects. That not only includes pests like mosquitoes but also insects like corn earworm moths and cotton bollworms. In their caterpillar forms, those insects can destroy crops. A 2006 study of several counties in South-Central Texas concluded that the local bat population had an annual value of over $740,000 a year as a pest control -- or up to 29% of the value of the local cotton crop.

A bat eats 60% to 100% of its body-weight in insects every day. Adams says one colony of Mexican free-tailed bats in Colorado's San Luis Valley, an important agricultural region, "pulls about 100 metric tons of insects out of the air in a year." And having bats in agricultural areas, he says, tends to move insects out of those areas, creating less need for dangerous and expensive pesticides.

And like honey bee colonies -- which have also been facing massive die-offs in recent years -- some bats are important pollinators and seed-distributors. Adams says bats are crucial to the reproduction of tropical fruits like mangos, papayas, figs and wild bananas. And in Arizona, bats are the primary pollinators for three large cactus species that support much of the region's ecosystem.

Government and Researchers Fight Back

The fungus associated with WNS is widespread in Europe, but it doesn't affect bats there. No one is sure yet how it became so lethal to North America's bat population -- but there's a possible human element. Scientists says WNS spores have been found on the clothing and gear of people exploring caves containing bat colonies. The pattern of its spread is also inconsistent with bat migration. "It went from Tennessee to Missouri and then to Western Oklahoma," says Adams, "and it doesn't seem like it would be moving like that if it was just bats."

In the meantime, humans are fighting back. Adams is hosting a conference on the crisis later this month in Denver. The event is expected to draw hundreds of bat experts from around the world. The Forest Service is banning visitors to the thousands of caves and abandoned mines that dot the landscape in at least five Rocky Mountain and Great Plains states. And the Fish and Wildlife Service has awarded $1.6 million in grants for WNS research and control.

"But we all know that's a drop in the bucket for a disease that's sweeping the country and killing 95% of an entire group of animals," says Bayless. "For some people, that may seem like money. . .not well-spent, but [what are] the economic and ecological consequences of losing an entire species? A little bit of money spent now will save us in the long term."

Tagged: agribusiness, agriculture, bat, bat colony, bat die-off, bat disappearance, bat fungus, bats, bees, colony collapse disorder, conservation

See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/ajcpbF

Floyd Bennett grasslands in jeopardy if Brooklyn Borough President Markowitz has his way....

2010-09-25T10:25:00.000-07:00

Peter's posting to the NYC/NYS internet listserves:

Dear Birders of Brooklyn,NYC and NYS:

I am bringing you this critical issue to your attention over Brooklyn's Floyd Bennett Fields grasslands ( formerly an decommissioned airport) now threatened by potential development discussions ( info also based from the recent Blue Ribbon Panel set up by US Senator Charles Schumer and Congressman Anthony Weiner, which last Tuesday eve I attended a listening session/public hearing at Floyd and Mr Markowitz spoke as well) ). Brooklyn Borough President, Marty Markowitz a NYC elective city official is trying to tell the Federal Gateway National Parks Service to turn it into more recreation amusement emphasis. Floyd Bennett is located on the southeastern part of Brooklyn , NYC, a critical bird migration hotspot where for the few past weeks Buff-breasted Sandpipers were feeding right next to the Aviator Sports complex ( which itself opened the Pandora's box for more potential commercial development ). Mr Markowitz's zeal obviously has no idea of the potential habitat loss and impact to threatened and fragile grass birds that use Floyd Bennett , especially rare birds including RED KNOT(seen on the runway in 2007) and Upland Sandpiper recorded on the Ebird Cornell database ( Check out the list http://ebird.org/content/ebird/ and see "View and Explore Data"). Since 2003, over 215 species have touched down or used Floyd for breeding or migration purposes.The grasslands have been impacted over the years and it needs a buffer perimeter which currently is impacted by overabundance of speeding cars and motorcycles ( the main old airport runway ) using Aviator Sports purposes.

I am hoping you will be deeply concerned and act on Brooklyn Birds' behalf to stop this nonsense and save the last grassland spot in Brooklyn and which grasslands of this size is rare for NYC. This preserve , though it is not pretty in some spots, is a rich bird spot where in recent days also saw Bairds Sandpiper and numerous raptors ( frequent Peregrine Falcon) as well as some wintering owls ( Saw-whet, Long-eared, Snowy sometimes, Barn and on occasions Short-eared) . I hope you will act on behalf of New York City birders. You can contact Mr Markowitz's office or further, contact Gateway NPS administrator ( google Gateway National Park or NYC Harbors Parks ) or the Director of the Interior Ken Salazar. A city official should not delve into Federal natural habitat ( but they do).

Regards,

Peter Dorosh

President

Brooklyn Bird Club

If you want to contact Mr Markowitz's office , go to this website http://www.brooklyn-usa.org/

Check out the following articles from the NEW YORK POST of 9/20 and 9/23

From the NEW YORK POST

Updated: Mon., Sep. 20, 2010, 5:07 PM

Floyd Bennett 'next hot spot'

By RICH CALDER

Last Updated: 5:07 PM, September 20, 2010

Posted: 5:36 AM, September 20, 2010

Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz wants the feds to turn Floyd Bennett Field into the next hot green space.

The city made Governors Island and Brooklyn Bridge Park overnight hot spots this summer by boosting transit services there -- especially ferries.

Markowitz said that bringing ferry, water taxi and jitney service to the 1,400-acre former Navy airfield in Mill Basin that's now an underused federal park must be considered. Increasing its limited bus service and creating bike lanes leading to and from it are other options, he said.

He plans to make his pitch tomorrow night during a public hearing on the future of Floyd Bennett Field, the borough's biggest open space and one of the nation's lowest ranked federal parks. It begin 6 pm at Aviator Sports Center on Flatbush Avenue.

The pitch, Markowitz says, will also focus on how Floyd Bennett Field is perfect for hosting “cultural celebrations” and other big events, such as "antique shows" similar to a famous three-week show held annually in Brimfield, Mass. that attracts 6,000 vendors and hundreds of thousands of visitors.

The meeting will be run by a Blue Ribbon Panel created by Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Anthony Weiner to guide the National Park Service draft a plan on how to boost services and cleanup Floyd Bennett Field. Improving transit options and educational opportunities at the park are among the ideas the panel says it plans to review.

Since the park is on the Queens border, a similar meeting will be held in that borough on Sept. 27.

Floyd Bennett Field was the city’s first commercial airport. In 1972, it became part of the federal Gateway National Recreation Area system.

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.

nypost.com , nypostonline.com , and newyorkpost.com are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.

Copyright 2010 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy
Terms of Use

Markowitz wants large antiques show, drive-in movies at Floyd Bennett Field

More Print

6:40 PM, September 23, 2010 ι By RICH CALDER

Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz wants the feds to turn Brooklyn’s biggest open space into a massive antiques road show.

During a meeting Monday night on the future of Floyd Bennett Field in Mill Basin, Markowitz said the 1,358-acre former Navy airfield is perfect for hosting antique shows similar to a famous three-week show held annually in Brimfield, Mass. that attracts 6,000 vendors and hundreds of thousands of visitors.

“I’m not talking about a flea market,” he later told the Post. “This could be huge.”

His other pitches for the underused site include giving the borough its own drive-in movie theater there and also using the parkland for cultural celebrations and even family reunions.

A blue ribbon panel created by Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Anthony Weiner is pushing the National Parks Service for greater cleanup and to boost transit services and programming at Floyd Bennett Field, which is the lowest-rated federal park in the nation.

About 100 community members convened at the Aviator Sports Center to discuss the park’s future and make recommendations on how to improve.

Among the better ideas brought up at a table of local residents that this reporter sat in on was changing the main entrance to a little-used roadway near heavily-used Aviator, instead of the existing entrance further south on Flatbush Avenue by the Marine Parkway Bridge into the Rockaways.

Others include adding ferry service, increasing bike access and opening up access to the entire waterfront.

A second community meeting will be held Monday at the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge in Queens.

Go to www.rpa.org/floydbennett for more information on the meeting and the Blue Ribbon Panel.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I took the liberty of correlating Specis Great Conservation Need ( SGCN) bird species listed by the NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation ( see link above) with the Cornell's EBIRD first sightings list for Floyd Bennett and found that 69 out of 118 SGCN bird species were recorded in Floyd since 2003. Of course this is not counting rare or extralimital bird species like Connecticut Warbler, Ross Goose, etc. not on SGCN. And also what OTHER non bird species on the SGCN seen in Floyd? was there ever a bio blitz done and I think there was one very recent ? hmm, just a thought for more data to present as an logical argument for total PRESERVATION or protection of the core grasslands + a buffer perimeter at least.

That means 58 % of SGCN bird species seen in Floyd Bennett which makes it a avian wonderland. A real treasure we have to fight for before its ruined .It has always been my personal opinion that Floyd ( along with JBWR) should be National Wildlife Refuges , NOT Recreation Area administered by National Parks Service. There is greater protective restrictions as NWR and run by better knowledgeable ecological minded US Fish and Wildlife. Up in Rhode Island, there is a former naval airport called NINIGRET -- like Floyd but administered by USFW and they tore up a runway for grassland restoration !! ( I was there after the tear up during a BBC weekend trip).. Its a question of who is the manager running the place.

Hard to believe some of the more common species we take for granted but check out the SGCN list

http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/9406.html

P.

Here's the list below from NYSDEC 's SGCN list

American Black Duck

American Golden Plover

American Oystercatcher

American Woodcock ( BREEDING)

Atlantic Brant

Bald Eagle

Barn Owl

Bay-breasted Warbler

Black-crowned Night Heron

Black-bellied Plover

Black Skimmer

Black-throated Blue Warbler

Blue-winged Teal

Blue-winged Warbler

Bobolink

Brown Thrasher

Buff-breasted Sandpiper

Canada Warbler

Cattle Egret

Common Goldeneye

Common Nighthawk

Common Loon

Common Tern

Cooper's Hawk

Dickcissel

Dunlin

Eastern Meadowlark

Forster's Tern

Glossy Ibis

Golden-winged Warbler

Grasshopper Sparrow ( used to breed )

Great Egret

Greater Yellowlegs

Greater Scaup

Horned lark

Horned Grebe

Laughing Gull

Least Tern

Lesser Scaup

Little Blue Heron

Long-tailed Duck

Long-eared Owl

Northern Pintail

Northern Harrier ( used to breed)

Osprey

Peregrine Falcon ( formerly ESA species)

Prairie Warbler

RED KNOT ( endangered species)

Red-shouldered Hawk

Red-headed Woodpecker

Red-throated Loon

Ruddy Duck

Sanderling

Scarlet Tanager

Semipalmated Sandpiper

Sharp-shinned Hawk

Short-eared Owl

Short-billed Dowitcher

Snowy Egret

Tennessee Warbler

Upland Sandpiper

Vesper Sparrow

Willet

Willow Flycatcher

Wood Thrush

Worm-eating Warbler

Yellow-breasted Chat

Yellow-crowned Night Heron

**

FROM EBIRD CORNELL First sightings

Floyd Bennett Field
First Sightings

All-time records

First Sightings, 1900-2010

Species # Observer Location Date

1 Snow Goose 2 Roseanne Caleca Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 28, 2005

2 Ross's Goose 3 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 20, 2009

3 Brant 60 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

4 Canada Goose 17 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

5 Mute Swan 5 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

swan sp. 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 18, 2010

6 Wood Duck 2 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 12, 2006

7 Gadwall 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

8 Eurasian Wigeon 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 8, 2006

9 American Wigeon X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

10 American Black Duck 36 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 5, 2006

American Black Duck x Mallard (hybrid) 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 14, 2010

11 Mallard 2 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

12 Blue-winged Teal 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 16, 2006

13 Northern Shoveler X Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 12, 2006

14 Northern Pintail 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 12, 2008

15 Green-winged Teal 2 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

16 Canvasback 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 21, 2008

17 Greater Scaup 1600 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 5, 2006

18 Lesser Scaup 3 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 19, 2009

Greater/Lesser Scaup 20 Scott Whittle Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 25, 2009

19 Long-tailed Duck X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 5, 2006

20 Bufflehead X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

21 Common Goldeneye 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 5, 2006

22 Hooded Merganser 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 20, 2009

23 Red-breasted Merganser X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

24 Ruddy Duck 8 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 8, 2007

25 Ring-necked Pheasant 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

26 Red-throated Loon 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 4, 2006

27 Common Loon X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

28 Horned Grebe X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

29 Red-necked Grebe 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2007

30 Northern Gannet 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 20, 2008

31 Double-crested Cormorant 10 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

32 Great Cormorant X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

cormorant sp. 3 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 8, 2010

33 Great Blue Heron 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

34 Great Egret X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

35 Snowy Egret 2 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 19, 2006

36 Little Blue Heron 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 21, 2008

37 Cattle Egret 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

38 Green Heron 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

39 Black-crowned Night-Heron 5 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

40 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 10, 2007

41 Glossy Ibis 1 Steven Plust Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

42 Turkey Vulture 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 30, 2008

43 Osprey 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

44 Bald Eagle 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 6, 2009

45 Northern Harrier 2 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

46 Sharp-shinned Hawk 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 1, 2006

47 Cooper's Hawk 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 1, 2006

48 Red-shouldered Hawk 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 7, 2009

49 Red-tailed Hawk 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 4, 2006

50 Rough-legged Hawk 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 15, 2007

51 American Kestrel 6 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

52 Merlin 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 4, 2006

53 Peregrine Falcon 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

54 American Coot X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 20, 2009

55 Black-bellied Plover X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

56 American Golden-Plover 1 Heydi Lopes Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 29, 2009

57 Semipalmated Plover 5 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 21, 2006

58 Killdeer 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

59 American Oystercatcher 1 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 12, 2006

60 Spotted Sandpiper 1 Steven Plust Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

61 Solitary Sandpiper 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 23, 2007

62 Greater Yellowlegs 2 Steven Plust Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

63 Willet 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 27, 2007

64 Lesser Yellowlegs 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 19, 2008

Tringa sp. 8 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2010

65 Upland Sandpiper 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2009

66 Ruddy Turnstone X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

67 Red Knot 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 21, 2007

68 Sanderling X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

69 Semipalmated Sandpiper X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

70 Western Sandpiper 2 Joseph O'Sullivan Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2008

71 Least Sandpiper X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

72 White-rumped Sandpiper 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 12, 2009

73 Baird's Sandpiper 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2007

74 Pectoral Sandpiper 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 28, 2008

75 Purple Sandpiper X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 19, 2006

76 Dunlin X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

77 Stilt Sandpiper 1 Joseph O'Sullivan Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2008

78 Buff-breasted Sandpiper 1 Benjamin Van Doren Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2010

79 Short-billed Dowitcher 4 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 21, 2007

80 Wilson's Snipe 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 16, 2006

81 American Woodcock X Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 4, 2006

shorebird sp. 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 23, 2010

82 Black-headed Gull 1 Danielle Gustafson Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 24, 2009

83 Laughing Gull X Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

84 Ring-billed Gull X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 6, 2006

85 Herring Gull 25 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

86 Lesser Black-backed Gull 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 3, 2010

87 Great Black-backed Gull X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

88 Least Tern X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

89 Common Tern X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

90 Forster's Tern X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

91 Black Skimmer X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

92 Rock Pigeon X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

93 Mourning Dove 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

94 Yellow-billed Cuckoo 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 10, 2007

95 Barn Owl 1 Rob Jett Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 21, 2009

96 Snowy Owl 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 14, 2008

97 Long-eared Owl 1 Corey Finger Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 15, 2009

98 Common Nighthawk 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 29, 2009

99 Chimney Swift 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 31, 2006

100 Ruby-throated Hummingbird 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

101 Belted Kingfisher 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

102 Red-headed Woodpecker 1 D. Edward Davis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 9, 2009

103 Red-bellied Woodpecker 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 29, 2008

104 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 13, 2008

105 Downy Woodpecker 1 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 25, 2006

106 Hairy Woodpecker X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2006

107 Northern Flicker 5 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

108 Eastern Wood-Pewee 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2007

109 Willow Flycatcher 10 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 10, 2007

Alder/Willow Flycatcher (Traill's) 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

110 Least Flycatcher 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

Empidonax sp. 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 17, 2008

111 Eastern Phoebe 3 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

112 Great Crested Flycatcher 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

113 Eastern Kingbird 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 19, 2006

114 White-eyed Vireo 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

115 Yellow-throated Vireo 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

116 Blue-headed Vireo 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 4, 2008

117 Warbling Vireo 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

118 Red-eyed Vireo 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

119 Blue Jay 2 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

120 American Crow 20 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

121 Fish Crow 4 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

crow sp. 2 Scott Whittle Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 25, 2009

122 Horned Lark 7 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 11, 1996

123 Tree Swallow 11 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

124 Bank Swallow 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 29, 2008

125 Barn Swallow X Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

126 Black-capped Chickadee 6 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 25, 2006

127 Tufted Titmouse 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 6, 2008

128 Red-breasted Nuthatch 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 2, 2006

129 White-breasted Nuthatch X Heydi Lopes Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 29, 2009

130 Brown Creeper 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 14, 2007

131 Carolina Wren 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 8, 2006

132 House Wren 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

133 Winter Wren 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

134 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 30, 2008

135 Golden-crowned Kinglet X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2006

136 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2006

137 Eastern Bluebird 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 1, 2006

138 Veery 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 14, 2008

139 Swainson's Thrush 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

140 Hermit Thrush 40 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 4, 2006

141 Wood Thrush 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

142 American Robin 3 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

143 Gray Catbird 3 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

144 Northern Mockingbird 3 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

145 Brown Thrasher 1 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

146 European Starling X Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

147 American Pipit 6 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 7, 2008

148 Cedar Waxwing X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

149 Golden-winged Warbler X Leonor Chavez Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2009

150 Tennessee Warbler 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 10, 2008

151 Orange-crowned Warbler 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 11, 2008

152 Nashville Warbler 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 11, 2008

153 Northern Parula 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 11, 2006

154 Yellow Warbler X Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

155 Chestnut-sided Warbler 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

156 Magnolia Warbler X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

157 Black-throated Blue Warbler 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 19, 2006

158 Yellow-rumped Warbler 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

159 Black-throated Green Warbler 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 11, 2006

160 Blackburnian Warbler 3 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2007

161 Pine Warbler 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

162 Prairie Warbler 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

163 Palm Warbler 3 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 16, 2006

164 Bay-breasted Warbler 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2007

165 Blackpoll Warbler 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

166 Black-and-white Warbler 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 11, 2006

167 American Redstart 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 11, 2006

168 Worm-eating Warbler 1 Heydi Lopes Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 7, 2009

169 Ovenbird 3 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

170 Northern Waterthrush 3 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 16, 2006

171 Connecticut Warbler 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 15, 2007

172 Common Yellowthroat 2 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2006

173 Hooded Warbler X Leonor Chavez Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2009

174 Wilson's Warbler 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 15, 2006

175 Canada Warbler 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2007

176 Yellow-breasted Chat 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 10, 2008

177 Eastern Towhee 2 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 24, 2004

178 American Tree Sparrow 6 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Mar 4, 2006

179 Chipping Sparrow 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 11, 2006

180 Clay-colored Sparrow 1 Scott Whittle Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 4, 2008

181 Field Sparrow 4 Coby Klein Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 25, 2006

182 Vesper Sparrow X Scott Whittle Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 21, 2007

183 Lark Sparrow 1 Rob Jett Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 17, 2009

184 Savannah Sparrow 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

185 Grasshopper Sparrow 2 Joseph O'Sullivan Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 22, 2008

186 Fox Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 4, 2006

187 Song Sparrow 2 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

188 Lincoln's Sparrow 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 14, 2007

189 Swamp Sparrow 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 8, 2006

190 White-throated Sparrow X Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2006

191 White-crowned Sparrow 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Sep 23, 2006

192 Dark-eyed Junco 2 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 14, 2006

193 Lapland Longspur 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Dec 7, 2007

194 Snow Bunting 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 21, 2007

195 Scarlet Tanager 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 20, 2007

196 Northern Cardinal 5 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

197 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2007

198 Blue Grosbeak 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 29, 2009

199 Indigo Bunting 2 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2006

200 Dickcissel 2 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

201 Bobolink 100 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Aug 29, 2007

202 Red-winged Blackbird 6 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

203 Eastern Meadowlark X Scott Whittle Floyd Bennett Field (map) Oct 21, 2007

204 Common Grackle X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 13, 2006

205 Boat-tailed Grackle 4 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

206 Brown-headed Cowbird 2 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 20, 2003

207 Orchard Oriole 1 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jun 10, 2007

208 Baltimore Oriole 1 Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2006

209 Purple Finch 1 Ronald Bourque Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 14, 2007

210 House Finch X Avi Lewis Floyd Bennett Field (map) May 12, 2006

211 White-winged Crossbill 1 Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Feb 5, 2009

212 Common Redpoll 1 Michael Mayer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jan 24, 2009

213 Pine Siskin 10 Tom Preston Floyd Bennett Field (map) Nov 2, 2008

214 American Goldfinch 1 Unknown Observer Floyd Bennett Field (map) Apr 1, 2006

215 House Sparrow X Doug Gochfeld Floyd Bennett Field (map) Jul 5, 2005

Floyd Bennett Field's future in your hands --we need public support

2010-08-31T14:37:00.001-07:00

National Park Conservation Association "Action Alert"

NPCA and Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz invite you to attend a public meeting to share your thoughts about the future of Floyd Bennett Field in Brooklyn, the 1,400 acre unit of Gateway National Recreation Area. One of New York City's largest public spaces, Floyd Bennett Field provides many environmental, recreational, and cultural benefits to the people of Brooklyn and beyond, but its full potential has never been realized.

The National Park Service is now drafting a plan to shape Gateway's future, and Senator Charles Schumer and Congressman Anthony Weiner have formed a Blue Ribbon Panel to provide recommendations about Floyd Bennett Field for this plan. NPCA is working with the Regional Plan Association (RPA) and our elected officials to make sure your voice is heard by the people creating the plan for Gateway's future.

Please join this important conversation.

WHAT: Brooklyn public meeting about Floyd Bennett Field

WHEN: Tuesday, September 21, 6 - 8 p.m.

WHERE: Aviator Sports Center, Hangar 5, Floyd Bennett Field, 3159 Flatbush Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11234

WHO: Event is FREE and open to the public. Meeting hosted by Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, NPCA, and RPA.

CONTACT: Questions? Contact Maya Borgenicht with the Regional Plan Association at maya@rpa.org or 917.652.6359.

For more information, go to www.rpa.org/floydbennett

More history

http://www.npca.org/search.jsp?query=floyd%20bennett&x=12&y=9

The National Park Service MISSION STATEMENT

The National Park System
Caring for the American Legacy

"...to promote and regulate the use of the...national parks...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

National Park Service Organic Act, 16 U.S.C.1.

What you can do to save Ridgewood Reservoir.

2010-08-05T09:34:00.000-07:00

http://www.nycaudubon.org/home/ridgewood.shtml

About a month ago , I sent out a note about Ridgewood Reservoir coming under review by the NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation for wetland protection. We have a chance as a concerned birding community to save a critical habitat from destruction for sports fields by the city parks.

NYC Audubon created a form letter ( if letter writing isn't your strong suit) you can use to copy and paste unto a Microsoft word document ( or similar software) and mail. Its that simple. Our appreciation to NYC Audubon for coming up with the form letter.See the link above.

We do need to save this wonderful place on the north Brooklyn border.

Please act today.

---Kinsgboider

NYS Hydrofracking moratorium bill passed

2010-08-04T15:25:00.000-07:00

----- Original Message -----

From: Catskill Mountainkeeper

To: amlazarus@earthlink.net

Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 1:15 PM

Subject: CORRECTED Action Alert: ASSEMBLY BILL # IS A11443-b NYS Drilling Moratorium Passes Senate

Catskill Mountainkeeper Action Alert

August 4, 2010

CORRECTED ASSEMBLY BILL NUMBER BELOW

The New York State Senate Passes Gas Drilling Moratorium Bill

The fight to prevent unsafe gas drilling in New York State received a huge boost last night when at 12:17 AM the New York State Senate passed a bill that would impose a moratorium on granting permits for hydrofracking until May 15, 2011.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Antoine Thompson (D-Buffalo), was passed by a margin of 48-9. The vote had strong bipartisan support and included 15 Republicans.

The next step is for the Assembly version of the bill (A11443-b) to be voted on by the Assembly when they return from their summer break after September 15th.

Many had considered the bill "dead on arrival", but legislators were positively affected by the unrelenting efforts of Catskill Mountainkeeper and a broad coalition of our environmental and grass roots partners. According to Wes Gillingham who managed Mountainkeeper's field efforts to generate public support for the bill, and was on the Senate Floor this morning pushing up to the last minute "this important step is a
tremendous display of what can happen when citizens stand up and take action."

It is very important to note that the passage of this bill by the State Senate does not make this a done deal. We now must make sure the bill is passed by the Assembly and be signed by the Governor as quickly as possible.
Here's how you can help!

Email and call Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and your own Assembly Members (contact your member here) now to tell them to bring the bill (A11443-B in that house) to a vote as soon as possible.

Call Governor Paterson and tell him to heed the call of New Yorkers across the state who are calling for the state to slow new gas drilling down and to make sure it can be done safely before our communities, our drinking water, our air quality and our landscapes are sacrificed.

This has been a long, hard and expensive fight. We weren't given a chance to win two years ago when we picked up the gauntlet on behalf of the citizens of the Catskill region and New York State. Today an important victory is within sight if we can continue to build public pressure. Please help us continue this positive momentum by donating to Catskill Mountainkeeper today.

Support Mountainkeeper

We act as your advocate in protecting the Catskills. Our only funding comes from individual contributions and foundation grants. Help us continue to work for you by making a donation of any size.

About Catskill Mountainkeeper

Catskill Mountainkeeper is a community based environmental advocacy organization, dedicated to creating a flourishing sustainable economy in the Catskills and preserving and protecting the area's long term health. We address issues of water integrity for the Delaware and Susquehanna River Systems, the defense of the vast woodlands that encompass the Catskill Forest Preserve and the New York City Watershed as well as farmland protection. We promote "smart" development that balances the economic needs and concerns of the Catskill regions' citizens and the protection of our abundant but exceedingly vulnerable natural resources. Catskill Mountainkeeper is fiscally sponsored by the Open Space Institute, Inc. as part of its Citizen Action Program.

NYS Smarth Growth bill needs the Governor's signature

2010-07-09T20:15:00.000-07:00

Conservation means the wise use of the earth and its resources for the lasting good of men.

-----Gifford Pinchot , first Chief of the United States Forest Service (1905–1910)

http://tinyurl.com/2eb9egq

Dear Peter,

Last month's action alert worked. Many of you sent letters to your legislators about the Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act, and it passed in both houses! Thank you! But we still need your help now: the Governor only has a couple days to sign this bill into law.

We're close to getting a Smart Growth plan in NY, which means ensuring that planning and land use decisions focus development in downtowns, main streets and community areas with existing infrastructure, helping to eliminate suburban sprawl, and saving open space and habitat for birds and other wildlife. If you took action before, THANK YOU! Now we need to send letter to Governor Paterson urging him to sign this bill today! Click here to send your letter!

Thank you!

Laura McCarthy, Grassroots Coordinator and Sean Mahar, Director of Government Relations and Communications for Audubon New York

Audubon New York
200 Trillium Lane, Albany, New York 12203
(518) 869-9731 | NYaction@audubon.org

The benefits of walking thru native habitat

2010-07-08T04:32:00.001-07:00

July 5, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/health/06real.html

The Claim: Exposure to Plants and Parks Can Boost Immunity By ANAHAD O’CONNOR

THE FACTS

This time of year, allergies and the promise of air-conditioning tend to drive people indoors.

But for those who can take the heat and cope with the pollen, spending more time in nature might have some surprising health benefits. In a series of studies, scientists found that when people swap their concrete confines for a few hours in more natural surroundings — forests, parks and other places with plenty of trees — they experience increased immune function.

Stress reduction is one factor. But scientists also chalk it up to phytoncides, the airborne chemicals that plants emit to protect them from rotting and insects and which also seem to benefit humans.

One study published in January included data on 280 healthy people in Japan, where visiting nature parks for therapeutic effect has become a popular practice called “Shinrin-yoku,” or “forest bathing.” On one day, some people were instructed to walk through a forest or wooded area for a few hours, while others walked through a city area. On the second day, they traded places. The scientists found that being among plants produced “lower concentrations of cortisol, lower pulse rate, and lower blood pressure,” among other things.

A number of other studies have shown that visiting parks and forests seems to raise levels of white blood cells, including one in 2007 in which men who took two-hour walks in a forest over two days had a 50-percent spike in levels of natural killer cells. And another found an increase in white blood cells that lasted a week in women exposed to phytoncides in forest air.

THE BOTTOM LINE

According to studies, exposure to plants and trees seems to benefit health.

ANAHAD O’CONNOR scitimes@nytimes.com

New Federal Duck Stamp out July 1st

2010-07-05T05:42:00.000-07:00

*****************************************************

Every July 1st, the new federal duck stamp comes out for sale.Its

great for collecting but better as an entry pass for the National

Wildlife refuges for the next whole year ( most refuges ask for 4

dollars entrance fee).

Available from www.usps.com ( look for on

menu bar "shop for stamps" ,then search "Duck Stamp")

$15.00 + $ 1 shipping.

The stamp raises funds for wetlands/property purchase and conservation programs.

here's the image on this link

http://www.fws.gov/duckstamps/

Ridgewood Reservoir needs your urgent action !

2010-06-29T14:01:00.000-07:00

Dear Birders and Nature supporters:

http://ridgewoodreservoir.blogspot.com/2010/06/appeal-for-protection.html

(click on link above ,then click on the attached letter to enlarge after reading this urgent post)

There is a required time we as a birding community need to unite in conserving our city's natural resources particularly a birding hotspot like Ridgewood Reservoir on the Brooklyn /Queens border. Silence cannot help unless we act in the best interests of our birds , habitats and natural biodiversity.

For the past few years ever since its fortunate timely discovery, Ridgewood Reservoir has been at the foreground a battleground between the park's conservationist advocates with the supporting communities versus the NYC Parks Department over its future . Ridgewood Reservoir's ecological balance and integrity ( especially as a critical watershed for Jamaica Bay) is under dire threat from development --namely ballfields inside the reservoir's basin--by NYC Parks, potentially impacting wildlife and habitats severely, unless you take action. The only recourse LEFT was to appeal to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) for its preservation as a rich wetland with its supporting rich woodlands.

Attached above at the header is a link to an important announcement letter sent out by the non-profit organization Highland Park/ Ridgewood Reservoir Alliance. Please read and we hope you will write a letter based on its contents. No matter how well versed or whatever its length ( best one page or less is fine) , any concise letter sent to NYSDEC receives attention . It is the number of letters stressing concerns for preservation that makes the greatest impact for NYSDEC to designate Ridgewood Reservoir stringent protective wetland status.

It is our strong belief as birders we each must be a conservationist- in whatever measure- in saving our habitats for birds and wildlife now and for future generations assuring enjoyment for the general public of all ages. You do make a difference ! Please write in saving a viable critically important birding location in support of our birds ,our natural riches and in supporting our friends at Highland Park and Ridgewood Reservoir Alliance. It is hoped someday this wonderful greenspot will be a nature preserve with a visitors center, for exploring nature, particularly for children the primary benefactors .Click on the link above at the heading and act for conservation of an urban treasure.Remember: the more of us replying to NYSDEC, the better.

Regards

Your friends at Brooklyn Bird Club

CBS News on Jamaica Bay ecosystem

2010-06-17T15:09:00.000-07:00

"Jamaica Bay hoped to be cleaned by 2020"

http://wcbstv.com/local/jamaica.bay.pollution.2.1756044.html

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill-keeping tabs; NYS bill on Smart Growth land planning

2010-06-16T14:29:00.000-07:00

Here are some links to the nature of the disastrous oil spill and updates for your information:

http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/oilspill.html

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/06/16/louisiana.trampled.nests/index.html?hpt=T1

From Defenders of Wildlife

http://www.blogger.com/www.gulfoilspillrecovery.org

Please help get the word out about an online resource regarding wildlife impacts from the Gulf Oil Spill by forwarding this message to your members, relevant listservs, etc. Thanks.

Please visit Defenders of Wildlife's Gulf Oil Spill Response and Recovery web site (www.gulfoilspillrecovery.org) to help advance effective responses to save wildlife and keep track of recovery efforts, needs and long term impacts of the spill.

This visual mapping tool allows responders, volunteers and eye witnesses to map and share information on impacts from the gulf oil spill and projects being done to promote recovery. It also provides a way for the general public to understand the environmental affects of the disaster and what is being done to protect wildlife and coastal habitats.

Anyone can search the map for impacts and projects by activity type, species and habitats and view impacts and projects in relation to sea turtle nesting sites, manatee locations, coastal federal lands and other relevant map layers. Users can access the latest news on the spill and recovery efforts.

To report an impact or enter a project, a user must create an account through a simple one step sign-up which requires a name and email address. Users can report sea turtle strandings, boom placements, impacts to birds, wildlife rehabilitation efforts, and other oil spill related impacts and projects. Logged in users can also share photos and highlight volunteer and funding needs.

To help facilitate recovery efforts, anyone visiting the site will be able to easily access information on what projects need volunteers and which need funding.

The Gulf Oil Spill Response and Recovery web site is part of the Conservation Registry, another project initiated by Defenders of Wildlife with the help of many federal, state and local agencies, foundations and non-profit organizations. The Conservation Registry is an easily accessible database and mapping system that allows users to enter, search, map and track conservation and wildlife projects across the landscape. You can access it here: http://www.conservationregistry.org/

***************************************************************************************

NYS Audubon News Alert

https://secure3.convio.net/nasaud/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&cmd=display&page=ActionAlertTakenPage&id=874

Dear Peter,

We are in the home stretch of the 2010 legislative session here in Albany, and the Legislature is only a few hours away from voting on a critical measure to combat suburban sprawl! We need your help NOW to ensure it passes!

Audubon has long been a leading organization working to promote Smart Growth in New York State, and now we’re poised to realize significant progress with passage of the Smart Growth Infrastructure Policy Act!

What is Smart Growth? It means ensuring that planning and land use decisions focus development in downtowns, main streets and community areas with existing infrastructure, helping to eliminate suburban sprawl and save open space and habitat for birds and other wildlife. This bill would promote Smart Growth by ensuring State Agency infrastructure funding decisions follow Smart Growth principles and target funding to already developed areas and not green spaces.

Habitat loss fueled by sprawl development continues to be a leading threat to birds and other wildlife in New York. The American Kestrel, North Americas smallest falcon, is an example of a bird under threat by sprawl, as it's open grassland habitat is quickly being taken away by development. While we are working with Audubon chapters and Centers and the NYS Dept. of Transportation to establish more nest locations for Kestrels, without measures to combat suburban sprawl, birds like the Kestrel face an uncertain future.

You can help us take a big step forward for Smart Growth by sending a letter urging your elected officials to pass the Smart Growth Infrastructure Policy Act today!

Please send a letter today, as the Legislative session is quickly coming to an end!

Photo: Tim Baker

Audubon New York
200 Trillium Lane, Albany, New York 12203
(518) 869-9731 NYaction@audubon.org

Update your profile Modify your communications preferences or unsubscribe

Message from Scenic Hudson: NYS Environmental Fund

2010-05-27T04:37:00.000-07:00

State Environmental Funding in Danger of Extinction

Dear Peter,

I'm writing from Albany, where I've just learned that your legislative leaders and Gov. David Paterson may be hours away from mortgaging the future of the Environmental Protection Fund (EPF). Vital to protecting the Hudson Valley's treasured natural resources-our river, farms, waterfronts and open spaces, the EPF is the heart of New York's environmental capacity and protection.

The environment is our economy and our quality of life

Perhaps only hours away, your leaders in Albany are negotiating a political compromise to deplete the EPF for other purposes than protecting clean drinking water, safeguarding vanishing farmland and supporting the beautiful natural landscapes that help support our $4.7 billion dollar tourist economy and its 80,000 jobs. A clean and beautiful Hudson Valley is a leading attraction for new business and jobs creation. Your leaders in Albany need to hear from you TODAY that these resources remain a priority for all of us in the Hudson Valley and across the state.

Your past calls -- and today's -- matter

When asked to call earlier this month, you spoke and they listened. The EPF suffered a disproportionate cut when compared to other sectors of the budget but it remained dedicated to those precious environmental principles for which it was created -- green infrastructure investment, environmental conservation and public health protection. But political winds in Albany can change quickly and that is why we need you to act again today.

With a gravely misguided deal just hours away from forfeiting those goals, NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT.

Contact your Senator, Assembly and Gov. Paterson: TODAY

Use this link to verify the names of your local lawmakers, then make three calls:

NYS Assembly switchboard: 518 455 4100
NYS Senate switchboard: 518 455 2800
Gov. David Paterson: 518 474 8390
Tell them the EPF and programs like the Hudson River Estuary Program and Open Space protection work for the Hudson Valley's economic and environmental future and should not be sacrificed. Tell them to maintain the integrity of the EPF and use it only for its intended purposes.

Thanks for all that you do.

Andy Bicking
Director of Public Policy

NY Harbor muck to restore Jamaica Bay islands

2010-04-27T15:25:00.001-07:00

From the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/science/earth/26dredge.html

Floyd Bennett Bioblitz call for volunteers

2010-04-26T16:46:00.000-07:00

Brooklyn College is organizing a bioblitz for Gateway National Recreation Area in June (11th-12th, 3:00 PM to 3:00 PM). We are in desperate need for scientists, resource managers and naturalists (amateur or professional) to serve as experts. This entails coming out to Floyd Bennett Field and leading a small team of volunteers into the field to identify as many species as they can in the alloted time. We're covering all taxa (fish, birds, insects, plants, marine inverterbrates, mammals, moths, butterflies, etc.). Can you please forward this request to any lists of contacts you have that may be appropriate?

An informational flyer is attached. Interested people can contact me at bbranco@brooklyn.cuny.edu, or email JBbioblitz@yahoo.com for more information.

Thanks and regards,

Brett F. Branco, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Geology

Associate Director, AREAC

Brooklyn College - CUNY

2900 Bedford Avenue

Brooklyn, NY 11210

BBranco@brooklyn.cuny.edu

718-951-5000, ext. 6441

http://userhome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bbranco

From American Bird Conservancy

2010-04-19T15:20:00.000-07:00

Please help us stop bird kills at government buildings.

As many as one billion birds, both residents and migrants, die annually in the United States after colliding with buildings. You can help prevent these unnecessary deaths.

A new bill, the Federal Bird-Safe Buildings Act of 2010 (H.R. 4797), introduced by Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL), calls for each public building constructed, acquired, or altered by the federal government to incorporate, to the maximum extent possible, bird-safe building materials and design features. The legislation would require the government to take similar actions on existing buildings where practicable. This has already been demonstrated to be attainable, as some newer government buildings are already bird-friendly.

This bill will help prevent the deaths of millions of birds that collide with windows at thousands of federal buildings across the country. Your organization can help by sending an action alert to your supporters.

Photo: Seattle Courthouse; Western District of Washington

You can ask people to take action by sending an email to their Representative asking them to support this bill using American Bird Conservancy's Action Alert System. The link is http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5400/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2696 The system is fully automated however the impact of their action will be greatly increased if they take some extra time to add their personal thoughts and comments.

Sending a letter to your Representative on your organization’s letterhead is also very important. A template letter is below. It would be very helpful if you also send us a copy of your letter to sholmer@abcbirds.org.

Your organization can also help by informing providing resources such as information on how to reduce collisions at home. A new downloadable factsheet “You Can Save Birds From Flying Into Windows” offers homeowners tips on how they can make a difference. Additional information is available at www.abcbirds.org/conservationissues/threats/buildings.html.

Thank you in advance for helping prevent bird deaths at government buildings.

Dr. Christine Sheppard
Collisions Program Director
American Bird Conservancy

Dear Representative ________________:

I am writing to urge you to support H.R. 4797: the Federal Bird-Safe Buildings Act of 2009 which was introduced by Representative Mike Quigley.

Migratory birds are not only beautiful and interesting creatures eagerly welcomed by millions of Americans into their backyards every year; they help generate billions of dollars annually to the U.S. economy through wildlife watching activities. According to the federal government, Americans spend about $36 billion in pursuit of birding activities. One in five Americans - 48 million people - engages in bird watching, and about 42 percent travel away from home to go birding. Birding activities generate about $4.4 billion in federal tax revenues and about $6.2 billion in state tax revenues, support about 670,000 jobs, and provide $28 billion in employment income. Birds also naturally provide billions of dollars worth of pest control which benefit farmers and consumers alike.

Building collisions are arguably the single greatest man-made killer of birds. It is estimated that there are three hundred million to one billion birds or more die each year from collisions with glass on buildings – from skyscrapers to homes.

H.R. 4797: the Federal Bird-Safe Buildings Act of 2010 is a cost neutral bill which will save the lives of millions of birds that mistake objects reflected in window glass, such as habitat and sky. The bill calls for each public building constructed, acquired, or altered by the General Services Administration (GSA) to incorporate, to the maximum extent possible, bird-safe building materials and design features. Many buildings constructed by GSA are already, in fact, bird-friendly. The legislation would require GSA to take similar actions on existing buildings, where practicable. While this legislation is limited to federal buildings, it’s a very good start that perhaps can lead to more widespread applications of bird-friendly designs elsewhere.

Please show your support for H.R. 4794 by signing onto the bill as a cosponsor. To cosponsor H.R. 4797 please contact Lindsey Matese with Representative Quigley’s office at: lindsey.matese@mail.house.gov,

Thank you for your time.

Best Regards,

Steve Holmer

Director of the Bird Conservation Alliance &

Senior Policy Advisor

American Bird Conservancy

202/234-7181 ext. 216

sholmer@abcbirds.org

www.birdconservationalliance.org

www.abcbirds.org

The Bird Conservation Alliance (BCA) is a network of organizations working together to conserve wild birds.

BCA is facilitated by American Bird Conservancy which conserves native wild birds and their habitats throughout the Americas.

To be removed from the list, send any message to:

bcaorgs-unsubscribe@npogroups.org

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
bcaorgs@npogroups.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
bcaorgs-unsubscribe@npogroups.org

For all list information and functions, see:
http://npogroups.org/lists/info/bcaorgs

NY TImes article on Climate Change impact on migratory birds

2010-03-15T18:48:00.001-07:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/science/earth/13birds.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Legislation introduced to modify glass structures on Federal property

2010-03-14T13:31:00.000-07:00

Email received from American Bird Conservancy:

MEDIA RELEASE

Contact: Robert Johns, 202-234-7181 ext.210, bjohns@abcbirds.org

Proposed Legislation Would Prevent Millions of Bird Deaths

(Washington, D.C., March 10, 2010) American Bird Conservancy (ABC) – the nation’s leading bird conservation organization – today applauded legislation introduced by Illinois Congressman Mike Quigley (D-IL) yesterday (March 9, 2010) that will help prevent the deaths of millions of birds that collide with windows at thousands of federal buildings across the country.

The bill, HR 4797 calls for each public building constructed, acquired, or altered by the General Services Administration (GSA) to incorporate, to the maximum extent possible, bird-safe building materials and design features. The legislation would require GSA to take similar actions on existing buildings, where practicable. The terms “bird-safe building materials and design features” are defined through reference to several publications addressing those topics.

“This legislation will absolutely save the lives of millions of birds that mistake objects reflected in window glass, such as habitat and sky, as real. The reflection of a tree limb looks just like a real tree limb to a bird,” said ABC President George Fenwick.

“I am proud to build upon the work we did in Cook County to promote bird-safe building and spearhead an initiative at the national level that will make sure our tall buildings are not safety hazards. This bill will not only save millions of birds’ lives, but it is also completely cost neutral,” said Congressman Quigley.

“Anyone who has ever spotted a cardinal in their backyard or had watched a hummingbird fly backwards understands how beautiful and important our bird species are to the natural world. I’m proud to work with the American Bird Conservancy to do all we can to make sure they continue to be a part of that world,” Quigley added.

“Building collisions are arguably the single greatest man-made killer of birds. From three hundred million to one billion birds or more die each year from collisions with glass on buildings – from skyscrapers to homes. While this legislation is limited to federal buildings, it’s a very good start that perhaps can lead to more widespread applications of bird-friendly designs elsewhere,” Fenwick added.

This bill can also be a source for greater implementation nationwide of “Lights Out” campaigns. Under certain conditions, such as clouds or fog, night migrating birds fly lower and can by “trapped” by light, especially on tall structures. We don’t know why but birds are reluctant to fly from light into darkness. Once caught by lighting, birds either collide with the structure or circle it for hours until they drop from exhaustion – easy prey for cats, raccoons, or other predators or scavengers. “This legislation provides the authority for implementing actions that would reduce the number of lights that are wastefully left on, which will save energy and money, as well as birds,” Fenwick added.

The legislation proposed by Congressman Quigley is very similar to legislation he sponsored in 2008 when he was Illinois Cook County Commissioner. That legislation was approved unanimously by the Cook County Board of Commissioners.

ABC is the only national level organization to develop a program to reduce mortality from collisions and has also been promoting legislative solutions as well as voluntary ones, across the US.

According to ABC, Americans spend about $36 billion in pursuit of birding activities. One in five Americans - 48 million people - engages in bird watching, and about 42 percent travel away from home to go birding. Birding activities generate about $4.4 billion in federal tax revenues and about $6.2 billion in state tax revenues, support about 670,000 jobs, and provide $28 billion in employment income.

American Bird Conservancy (www.abcbirds.org) conserves native birds and their habitats throughout the Americas by safeguarding the rarest species, conserving and restoring habitats, and reducing threats while building capacity of the bird conservation movement. ABC is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit membership organization that is consistently awarded a top, four-star rating by the independent group, Charity Navigator.

To unsubscribe mail:
BCAlist-unsubscribe@lists.abcbirds.org

Red Knot latest news

2010-03-01T09:32:00.000-08:00

a note received from the Jamaica Bay Bay keeper on endangered Red Knot shorebird species:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/nj_scientists_say_red_knots_po.html

Improving Water Quality in Jamaica Bay

2010-02-25T12:01:00.000-08:00

From: NY/NJ Baykeeper [mailto:testa@nynjbaykeeper.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:02 PM
To: Dieneman-Keim, Deb
Subject: New York City Commits to Major Water Quality Improvements in Jamaica Bay

New York City Commits to Major Water Quality Improvements in Jamaica Bay

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Kate Slusark, NRDC, 212-727-4592
Deborah Mans, NY/NJ Baykeeper, 732.888.9870
Dan Mundy, Jamaica Bay Eco Watchers, 718-634-5032
Don Riepe, American Littoral Society, 718-634-6467

New York City Commits to Major Water Quality Improvements in Jamaica Bay

Mayor, City Vow to Make Sewage Plant Upgrades, Marsh Restoration in Response to Calls from Environmental Groups

NEW YORK, N.Y. (February 25, 2010) - Mayor Bloomberg, the City Department of Environmental Protection, the State Department of Environmental Conservation, and four environmental groups today announced an agreement-in-principle to significantly improve the health of Jamaica Bay through major sewage treatment plant upgrades and investments in marsh restoration.

"Today marks a new beginning for Jamaica Bay - an amazing recreational and economic resource for New Yorkers," said Lawrence Levine, staff attorney for the NRDC. "The city has committed to address the biggest source of pollution that has plagued Jamaica Bay for decades. We look forward to continuing to work with Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Holloway to turn today's historic commitments into reality."

This announcement follows months of intensive negotiations among the city, state, and environmental groups represented by the Natural Resources Defense Council as legal counsel-including Jamaica Bay Eco Watchers, American Littoral Society and NY/NJ Baykeeper-over alleged permit violations at four city sewage treatment plants, which currently discharge levels of nitrogen pollution into Jamaica Bay that are among the highest in the world.

Today's announcement is a critical milestone in the effort to restore the Bay. The groups will continue over the next several months to work with the city and state to finalize the agreement, in a way that ensures long-term implementation of a 10-year water quality improvement plan and can help secure federal funding to back up the city's efforts.

Specifically, the agreement-in-principle announced today includes commitments from the city to:

· Upgrade four sewage treatment plants to drastically reduce nitrogen discharges to the bay, on a schedule running through 2020
· Spend at least $15 million on marsh restoration over the next five years, which could leverage nearly $30 million in additional federal funding through the Corps of Engineers
· Resolve a long-running dispute over the city's Clean Water Act permits by agreeing to new, stricter permit terms that will lock in the treatment plant upgrades, and the resulting water quality improvements, into the future
· Improve water quality monitoring in the bay, which may include using new equipment to provide continuous, real-time information on conditions in the bay.

Nitrogen discharges from the sewage treatment plants are the biggest cause of the severe water quality problems in Jamaica Bay. The plants discharge nearly 40,000 pounds of nitrogen into the bay daily, which cause harmful algae blooms that frequently render portions of the bay inhospitable to marine life and unusable for people. There is also mounting evidence that elevated nitrogen levels contribute to the rapid and accelerating loss of the bay's signature marshlands, which provide not only invaluable wildlife habitat but also shoreline erosion control and a protective flood barrier to the neighborhoods ringing the bay.

Jamaica Bay is considered the crown jewel of the city's ecological resources, with more than 25,000 acres of water, marsh, meadowland, beaches, dunes and forests in Brooklyn and Queens, all accessible by subway. It contains a federal wildlife refuge the size of 10 Central Parks, a portion of Gateway National Recreation Area, Bayswater State Park and nearly a dozen city parks. It provides a nursery for the region's marine life, including valuable recreational fisheries like summer flounder, and a critical bird habitat area that is visited by nearly 20 percent of North America's bird species annually. It is also home to various endangered and threatened species - from sea turtles to peregrine falcons. More than a half million New Yorkers live in the Jamaica Bay watershed/sewershed, and the bay is a popular fishing and boating area.

"We applaud Mayor Bloomberg and the new DEP commissioner Holloway for their good faith effort in finding solutions that work for Jamaica Bay," said Deborah Mans, Baykeeper and Executive Director of NY/NJ Baykeeper. "Based on very productive negotiations with both the Mayor's office and the DEP Commissioner, we feel confident that we can finalize our preliminary agreement and secure lasting commitments to measures that will improve and save the precious waterways of New York City and its citizens, especially those affected by pollution in Jamaica Bay."

"The Jamaica Bay Eco Watchers are pleased to support this agreement which will go a long way to assure the future health of the bay. Jamaica Bay is a unique environmental jewel and the largest natural resource of our city," said Dan Mundy of the Jamaica Bay Eco Watchers. "The heavy nitrogen loading from these four plants have long been identified as the primary causes contributing to low dissolved oxygen problems, harmful algae blooms and saltwater marsh loss. The upgrades to the wastewater treatment plants that this agreement will require will ensure significant nitrogen loading reductions are achieved at this critical juncture in the future of Jamaica Bay. In addition the funds allocated to the saltwater marsh restoration will help in recreating critical habitat that has been lost."

"This agreement holds great promise to bring cleaner water to Jamaica Bay," said Don Riepe, Director of American Littoral Society, Northeast Chapter. "We are encouraged by our discussions over the last several months and the work we've been able to do with the city towards cleaning up serious sources of pollution."

###

The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.3 million members and online activists, served from offices in New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Beijing.

The Jamaica Bay Eco Watchers are dedicated to the preservation, protection, enhancement and restoration of the fragile ecosystem in Jamaica bay by identifying issues, reporting violations and hazardous conditions, raising public awareness and serving as an advocacy organization for the environmental concerns of the bay.

The American Littoral Society is a membership-based, coastal conservation group headquartered on Sandy Hook, in Highlands, New Jersey. Since 1961, it has empowered people to care for the coast through advocacy, education, and conservation. The Society promotes the study and conservation of marine life and habitat and defends the coast from those who would do it harm. The name, Littoral, means of or near a shore or coastal region. For more information, visit www.littoralsociety.org

NY/NJ Baykeeper's mission is to protect, preserve, and restore the ecological integrity and productivity of the Hudson-Raritan Estuary - one of the most urban estuaries on the planet. For more information please visit www.nynjbaykeeper.org.

email from the Nature Conservancy

2010-02-09T14:42:00.001-08:00

Tell NYS Legislators to Protect Funding for LI's lands and Waters!

The Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) is the state's dedicated source of funding for protecting open space, clean drinking water, working farms, and other programs that support our economy and improve our quality of life. EPF programs not only protect our natural resources and public health, they also play an important role in our local economy. Our tourism and agriculture industries are closely tied to our local parks and preserved farms, and beautiful waters.

Unfortunately, the Governor's budget disproportionately cuts the EPF by 33%, and completely eliminates open space protection funding! Budget negotiations are happening now. Tell NYS Legislators to Reject Drastic Cuts to Environmental Funding!

for action ----> http://tinyurl.com/yakxxqw

NY Times 1/24 article on Staten Island's Pouch Camp

2010-01-25T04:27:00.000-08:00

The following piece appeared in the NY Times , Pouch Camp, which is under threat of sale and potential developement , which means destruction and fragmentation of the famed "Greenbelt".

January 24, 2010
A Celebrated Scout Camp on Staten Island Is in Jeopardy
By JOSEPH BERGER
IN the wooded heart of Staten Island lies a rugged spread of land, crowned by a rustic lake, that has provided camping grounds for Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts from the New York area for 60 years.

It is called Camp Pouch, and though relatively few New Yorkers know of it, in the subculture of scouting it is celebrated. Many of the 52,000 scouts in the region visit throughout the year to pitch tents; build fires; apply their half hitches, bowlines and other knots; use a compass; apply first aid; and otherwise practice sometimes old-fashioned scouting skills.

“You walk up to a piece of dirt and you have to make a home and a community and live together for a week” is how William S. Kelly, a scouting official, strips the program down to its essentials.

But all that is now in jeopardy. In November, the Greater New York Councils of the Boy Scouts of America, the owner of the camp, announced that financial pressure might force it to put Camp Pouch on the market.

The group, hit hard by the recession, has been operating at a deficit, and corporate and other donations have fallen by $5 million over the past 18 months — a colossal wound for an organization that until recently ran on a $15 million budget.

The staff has already been cut by 40 percent, to 60 employees, and the group’s space in its Empire State Building headquarters has shrunk by 60 percent.

The Boy Scouts hope that a conservation organization like the Trust for Public Land will buy the development rights to most of the 140-acre property, Mr. Kelly said. The sale would provide an infusion of as much as $30 million to the Boy Scouts, and the trust, a preservation group, would see to it that the land is never developed for purposes like housing.

The Boy Scouts, which have had conversations in recent years with the trust, would keep the lodges and cabins and use the rest of the property just as they now do.

Trust officials confirmed that discussions have been held.

“The camp is not currently for sale,” said Mr. Kelly, 30, an Eagle Scout who is the group’s spokesman. In a later interview, however, he bluntly added that if the gambit with the trust fails, the Scouts would have to sell all or part of the property. In that event, the camp might host another sprawl of houses that, at least until the recession, were consuming the borough like Pac-Man.

Staten Islanders are closely watching the fate of Camp Pouch because it lies in the core of the borough’s Greenbelt, 2,800 acres of woodlands and meadows that wind through several neighborhoods. The land includes parks, golf courses, ball fields and Moses Mountain, a 200-foot mound of rock blasted during construction of the Staten Island Expressway, a Robert Moses project.

The camp, which was named after William H. Pouch, a scouting advocate, is not technically part of the Greenbelt, but it helps to create a contiguous scenic expanse and a habitat for deer, owls, snakes, turtles and herons.

“It would fragment the Greenbelt,” said Kathleen Vorwick, president of the Greenbelt Conservancy, referring to any development of Camp Pouch. “It would lose its value to humans but also to animals and flora.” The conservancy oversees the Greenbelt along with the city’s parks department.

The loss of Camp Pouch would be most painful for the scouts. Matthew Brown, 16, a junior at New Dorp High School on Staten Island and a scout since he was 5, told how camping regularly at Pouch had taught him to put up different kinds of tents, to whittle wood with a pocketknife to help build a fire and to tie a clove hitch to drag the heavy wood needed to sustain a fire.

As important, doing such things with 30 members of his troop had taught him how to work cooperatively. Those skills, he said, could not be learned as well in the church hall where his troop — Troop 37 — meets, and he and his troop would be upset to lose a vibrant patch of the natural world like Camp Pouch.

“Camping outdoors is the cornerstone of scouting,” he said. “And at Camp Pouch we can get more in touch with the wilderness and real outdoor scouting.”

Many troops use it not only for camping but also as a base from which to tour New York. Rich Perrone, scoutmaster of Vista Troop 101 from Lewisboro in Westchester County, visited Camp Pouch recently with his troop to see whether they could stage a bicycle tour of the city while camping there.

After surveying the property and the five miles of roads leading to the Staten Island ferry, they decided that they could. And if the camp were sold? “We could go to a hotel,” Mr. Perrone said, “but our objective is to set up our camp and use the scouting skills we stress with the boys.”

The New York Scouts also own two other camps — Ten Mile River in the Catskills town of Narrowsburg, N.Y., and Alpine, north of the George Washington Bridge in Alpine, N.J. But those sites are far from Staten Island, whose scouts are Pouch’s prime consumers.

Camp Pouch features several spots for pitching tents and other sites equipped with cabins or open-front lean-tos. There is also an archery range and a climbing wall on the grounds, as well as Ohrbach Lake (named after the department store family), where thousands of children have learned to swim and row. A store at the camp sells scouting uniforms (about $100), camping equipment and scout insignia.

In the summer, there is a day camp for boys and girls that can handle 500 children.

On the drive into the campground, 12 signs display the 12 qualities of the ideal scout — “trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.”

On Dec. 12, a rally to save Camp Pouch drew 1,500 people, some holding signs with slogans like, “Scouting Without Pouch ... Ouch.”

The city has also been involved in discussions about rescuing the camp, said Adrian Benepe, the parks commissioner. He pointed out, however, that with agencies required to cut their capital budgets by 30 percent this year, it was highly unlikely that the city would buy the property. Instead, he said, the city might encourage a white knight, like the Trust for Public Land, to do so.

As they confront tough fiscal times, camp and Greenbelt officials do have one ace in the hole. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is an Eagle Scout — a lifetime distinction.

Artificial Turf debacle in the Bronx

2010-01-20T14:31:00.000-08:00

This item appeared in the 1/19 NYC Post..One of the pressing issues with turf is that feeding grounds are destroyed for geese and other waterfowl, pressing more geese into tighter flocks during winter, increasing disease potential like avian botulism..( and winter when sports activities are minimal.;and also the exorbitant waste of tax dollars that could have been used wisely for other city parks.....)

http://tinyurl.com/ycxmgcv

Updated: Tue., Jan. 19, 2010, 3:51 PM
Bronx field now city's $14M blunder land
By RICH CALDER

Last Updated: 3:51 PM, January 19, 2010

Posted: 2:31 AM, January 19, 2010

A city plan to rebuild one of The Bronx's biggest sports fields has morphed into a money pit for taxpayers.

Workers renovating Harris Field in Bedford Park recently uncovered contaminated soil under the playing surfaces, helping push the anticipated cost to nearly $14 million, city officials told The Post.

The price tag for the renovation had already gone from the $6.6 million announced in 2007 to $8.7 million, records show.

Now the Parks Department is confirming that it has to add another $5.2 million for cleanup because of the high levels of lead unearthed while workers were preparing to install drainage-system tanks needed to restore the popular park's six playing fields.

Harris Field used to be part of a reservoir before the city acquired the 15-acre site in 1917.

Department spokeswoman Vickie Karp said it is believed that the park was created with "the use of incinerator ash as fill, which would explain the presence of lead."

The original playing fields at the park were grass, but the city plans to cover two with synthetic turf.

A Parks Department official wishing to remain anonymous said that contamination wouldn't be an issue if all the fields were going to be grass but that replacing two with turf requires digging deeper to install the drainage tanks. Karp says this is untrue.

A fiscal 2008 mayoral report showed the Parks Department topped city agencies in cost overruns with projects costing an average of 50 percent more than the original contract price. The city average was 17 percent.

Harris Field is in line to rise by more than 110 percent.

"The project shows just how poorly the city does its due diligence on parks projects," said Geoffrey Croft, of the nonprofit group New York City Park Advocates, when told of the costs.

The project's long delays are crippling a popular Little League that plays there.

"The Parks Department only cares about construction, not children," said Don Bluestone, executive director of the Mosholu Montefiore Community Center.

Bluestone said the nonprofit group's youth baseball league has gone from 1,000 players to 500 since construction began. He ripped the department for closing the entire park and relocating the league miles away to parks filled with drug dealers and plagued by flooding.

The city's Web site says construction will be complete by the spring, but Bluestone was preparing to have his league play elsewhere this season.

rich.calder@nypost.com

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.

nypost.com , nypostonline.com , and newyorkpost.com are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.

Copyright 2009 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Terms of Use

Black Skimmer recovery project

2010-01-19T14:08:00.001-08:00

From: Thomas Panzone
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 16:20:07 -0500
Subject: Black Skimmer Recovery Plan Stakeholder Meeting February 24th

Dear Colleagues:

SAVE THE DATE

Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger) Recovery Plan: Stakeholder Meeting

February 24th, 2010
2 – 4 PM
Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge
Cross Bay Blvd, Queens, NY
718-318-4340

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is pleased to announce a stakeholder meeting for the Black Skimmer Recovery Plan being held at the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge on February 24th, 2010 from 2 – 4 PM.

This meeting will inform concerned stakeholders of the ecological status of black skimmer in New York State and the process for developing the recovery plan. Local and expert stakeholders on black skimmer ecology will be encouraged to additionally participate on the Black Skimmer Recovery Team. The Recovery Team will provide input and guidance for establishing recovery goals, restoration methods, and monitoring protocols during the development of the recovery plan.

There is no cost to attend but participants are asked to register by contacting either Jason Smith (jysmith@gw.dec.state.ny.us 718-482-4919) or Citizen Participation Specialist, Thomas Panzone (tvpanzon@gw.dec.state.ny.us 718-482-4958).

A list of the most important questions and issues to be addressed and answered during the development of the recovery plan will be sent to registered participants. These issues will include regulatory concerns, threats to the species, restoration and creation of beach habitat, and the potential impacts to existing habitat due to climate change. Opportunity for discussion and comments will be provided to stakeholders in attendance.

An agenda is currently being developed and will be circulated prior to the meeting date.

Please feel free to circulate this announcement to any interested staff or colleagues. Thank you and I hope to see you there.

Sincerely,

Thomas V. Panzone
Citizen Participation Specialist
Division of Public Affairs and Education
NYSDEC - Region 2
(718) 482-4958
NOT FOR RELEASE - CONFIDENTIAL

Ridgewood Reservoir

2010-01-06T16:59:00.000-08:00

This greenspace is subject of a NYC Dept Parks capital project , controversial in that there is /will be discussion of razing the natural forest within one of the three reservoir basins for articfial turf ballfields.

For more on this, see this website set up to inform concerned citizens about what Ridgewood Reservoir is facing: http://ridgewoodreservoir.blogspot.com/

And the latest developement , written up in the NYC Daily News.

With some back and forth, Queens park will get upgrade

BY Lisa L. Colangelo
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, January 6th 2010, 4:00 AM

Crumbling staircases, poorly lit pathways and missing fencing will finally get fixed during the first phase of renovations to the Ridgewood Reservoir-Highland Park site, a city official said.
But the devil is in some of those details, according to members of several local community boards who got a chance to comment on the plan at the Queens Borough Board meeting on Monday.
The site, which straddles the Queens-Brooklyn border, has been slated for a multi-year, $26 million upgrade.
However, it's still unclear whether that includes the addition of ballfields and recreational facilities in some areas. Community members and elected officials have lobbied the city to the keep it a natural green space.
The project's first phase, which has not yet gone out to bid, includes infrastructure improvements such as paving, lighting and fencing. It's expected to cost about $7.6 million, a Parks Department official said.
But Steve Fiedler, chairman of Community Board 5's parks committee, said the 4-foot fences planned for certain portions of the reservoir will be inadequate to stop vandals.
"I can step over a 4-foot fence," he said. "At least a 6-foot fence will deter someone."
Local residents would also like to see a wheelchair-accessible ramp near one of the parking lots, he said. In addition, board members asked the Parks Department to keep some of the 19th-century gates that date back to the early days of the now-decommissioned reservoir.
"They don't make this design in heavy wrought-iron gates anymore," Fiedler said.
But Kevin Quinn, a Parks Department representative, said the old fencing isn't up to snuff.
"We fell in love with it also," Quinn told the Borough Board, which cconsists of community board leaders and the borough president. "But the spacing of the pickets no longer meets code as a guardrail."
The fencing will rise as high as 6 feet in some sections, he said, but it will stay lower in other areas to provide better sight lines.
"Why spoil the view?" Quinn asked. "If someone wants to get down there, they will get down there. This size works for Central Park."
The Parks Department is expected to release three preliminary plans in the coming weeks for the second phase. One will focus on using the site for passive recreation, another for active recreation and a third for a combination of the two.

lcolangelo@nydailynews.com
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2010/01/06/2010-01-06_with_some_back_and_forth_queens_park_will_get_upgrade.html?r=ny_local/queens#ixzz0bpj2Mt8J

***********************************

Community boards not happy with Ridgewood Reservoir plans
by Holly Tsang, Queens Ledger
http://queensledger.com/bookmark/5453295

On Monday, members of Queens and Brooklyn Community Boards 5 and Queens Community Board 9 were presented with the Parks Department’s plans for phase one of a new park at the Ridgewood Reservoir, which straddles Queens and Brooklyn, and they were not happy.

CB5Q submitted its recommendations in July consisting of seven points that needed to be addressed, including the construction of a six-foot wrought iron fence with spikes at the top to deter trespassers and the construction of a pedestrian bridge that goes over high-traffic Vermont Place to the reservoir.

Much to the dismay of CB5Q, the Queens Borough [Parks] Commissioner Dorothy Lewandowski wrote back in August that the Parks Department would likely take a different direction on most of the points; to name a few, the wrought iron fence in question would be four feet tall and instead of a “cost-prohibitive” pedestrian bridge over Vermont Place, an ADA-approved ramp would be constructed at Vermont Place, where a stop sign would also be installed.

And while both parties agreed that they wanted as little light as possible spilling into the reservoir basins, which house many species of birds and plants and serve as an East Coast fly-by for birds heading south, they couldn’t agree on where to place the electrical service conduit and lighting fixtures.

The Parks Department’s lighting plan costs an extra $90,000. According to Kevin Quinn, Capitol Projects Team Leader for Queens under the Parks Department, the construction budget for phase one is $7.6 million.

“We always try to give the community what they want, but we need to operate the parks, so there are certain operational concerns we need to look at,” said Quinn.

Steven Fiedler, Co-Chair of CB5Q’s Parks Committee, disagreed. He said the Parks Department rejected CB5Q’s proposal just days after it was submitted, ignoring the suggestions made in the public listening sessions on the Ridgewood Reservoir that have been going on for the last two years.

“My objective here is to make sure the Parks Department realizes, one, they’re not listening to the community and, two, phase one has to enhance phases two and three,” said Fiedler, emphasizing the need for a high fence around the perimeter of the basins to ensure that the reservoir remains wild.

He said that, for example, a higher fence would protect the reservoir’s wildlife for the implementation of phases two and three, which may include something like a boardwalk down in the basins for exploratory and educational purposes.

The master plans for the next phase will be unveiled at the end of the month. Fiedler said the community boards are advocating for a plan that will leave the reservoir natural as it is now. Other options include the construction of on-site sports fields or mixed-use.

CB5Q enlisted the written and voiced support of over a dozen elected officials and community groups including Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez, State Senator Joseph Addabbo, Assemblyman Mike Miller, Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley, Queens Coalition for Parks and Green Spaces.

“They’re not listening to us. They’re designing in a box like they always do and they’re wasting money,” said Fiedler. “It’s a terrible waste of money.”

*******************************

CB 5, city clash over reservoir plans
Board to see proposals for revamp of Ridgewood site this month, Parks Dept. says
By Jeremy Walsh, Times Ledger
Thursday, January 7, 2010 11:13 AM EST

The city Parks Department is planning to unveil three potential plans to revamp Ridgewood Reservoir at a meeting this month.

After a two-month delay, plans for the future of Ridgewood Reservoir will finally be unveiled to Community Board 5 probably later this month, officials told a Borough Board meeting Monday night.

But the selection or implementation of any of these plans could still be years away as CB 5 and the city Parks Department continue to spar over details of the first phase of the plan, which will repair crumbling concrete stairs, widen turns in the perimeter path and build an observation path on a causeway between two of the three reservoir basins.

CB 5 wanted several concessions from the Parks Department, including a pedestrian bridge over Vermont Place between the parking lot and the park, eliminating a ramp for the physically disabled because it would be redundant with the proposed bridge and raising the height of fences from 4 to 6 feet.

“I could step over a 4-foot fence,” CB 5 Parks Committee Chairman Steve Fiedler said. “At least a 6-foot fence is going to deter somebody.”

But Queens Parks Commissioner Dorothy Lewandowski has turned down most of the board’s requests. Kevin Quinn, director of Queens capital projects for the Parks Department, defended the agency’s firm stance at Monday’s meeting.

A pedestrian bridge would cost between $2 million and $3 million, eating up a substantial chunk of the $7.6 million allocated for the first phase of construction, he said.

“We’re really tight on funds here and we want to get this going as soon as possible,” he said.

CB 9 Chairwoman Andrea Crawford also slammed the current state of the crossing.

“If I’m in a wheelchair and I drive my wheelchair-accessible van [to the parking lot] ... then I have to play ‘Frogger’ to get across Vermont,” she said, referring to the classic video game depicting a frog attempting to cross a traffic-choked highway.

The fences will remain 4 feet tall in most locations because the Parks Department does not want to restrict parkgoers’ views of the reservoir basins, Quinn said.

Quinn also said the Parks Department had petitioned the city Department of Transportation for a traffic signal and pedestrian crossing at the parking lot, but the DOT turned them down.

Planners have put forward three possible directions for developing the reservoir as a city park: making it a nature preserve with minimal facilities, turning it into an active recreation site with numerous ballfields and a combination of the first two plans. CB 5 favors the nature preserve course.

The community boards in both Brooklyn and Queens have faced pressure to support the active recreation model because Highland Park’s existing ballfields are overused and in poor condition.

CB 5 Chairman Vincent Arcuri said little money had been spent to maintain the Upper Highland Park athletic fields.

“That’s partly our fault,” he said. We haven’t been paying much attention to it over the years.”

But he and Fiedler also warned that the reservoir project essentially doubles the size of parkland that Forest Park is responsible for maintaining and both questioned where the funds would come from.

Quinn also pointed out that the city Public Design Committee had approved the Phase 1 plan, which made it complicated and time-consuming to alter.

“This is only the beginning of our process trying to get the Parks Department to listen to the community,” Fiedler said.

Reach reporter Jeremy Walsh by e-mail at jewalsh@cnglocal.com or by phone at 718-229-0300, Ext. 154.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park-Ridgewood Reservoir Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to ridgewoodreservoir@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ridgewoodreservoir+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ridgewoodreservoir?hl=en.

NY Times article on property purchases = preservation

2010-01-03T08:02:00.000-08:00

From the New York Times:

Preservation Groups Find Bargains in Housing Bust
By LESLIE KAUFMAN
Conservation organizations have taken advantage of
depressed property prices and foreclosures to protect open
space.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/01/us/01preserve.html?th&emc=th

January 1, 2010
Preservation Groups Find Bargains in Housing Bust
By LESLIE KAUFMAN
From the Florida Everglades to the bluffs overlooking the Deschutes River in Oregon, conservationists are snapping up prime property for preservation, often at a fraction of what the asking price was at the real estate market’s height.

On Wednesday, the threatened bog turtle got a reprieve when conservationists scooped up 166 acres of marshland in Frankford Township in northern New Jersey, where developers had planned to build luxury homes. Hours later, city officials and environmentalists in Boise, Idaho, were rejoicing as they closed a deal to protect 1,300 acres of wooded foothills beloved by local hikers.

The victories reveal a green lining of sorts in a credit crisis that has depressed real estate prices, prompted foreclosures and derailed development projects across the nation.

The purchases by conservationists and state and local governments assure that thousands of acres will be put aside in perpetuity for parks, watershed protection or simply preservation of open space.

“We are getting a second bite at properties that never should have been developed in the first place,” said Will Rogers, president of the Trust for Public Land, a national nonprofit group that buys land for preservation. “We are working on dozens of these deals across the country, and I know other land trusts are as well.”

Although the real estate bubble burst in 2008, it was only in the last 6 to 12 months that many developers and banks became desperate enough to slash prices deeply enough for the trusts, Mr. Rogers and several other conservationists said.

Suki Molina, vice president of the Foothills Conservation Advisory Committee, which joined with the City of Boise in spending $10 million to preserve open space, said her group noticed a change in the way local landowners were approaching the committee early this year.

“The prices were lower,” Ms. Molina said, “but what has really changed is the attitude of the developers — they want to get out. Before this year, they would call, say they had a great piece of land and wanted top dollar. Now, they just want to sell.”

So what seemed like dream property forever out of their reach — including waterfront sites near cities or land bordering untouchable parks — is suddenly attainable.

In Little Egg Harbor, N.J., north of Atlantic City, Mr. Rogers’s group is buying 46 acres covered with pine scrub and marshes for $3.5 million. A year ago, it was priced at $6.2 million after its developer dropped plans for 73 single-family homes as part of a development called the Landings. Now it will become part of the adjacent Edwin Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge.

Similarly, officials in New York City announced on Tuesday that a park would be created on a site in Jamaica Bay, Queens, where 21 two-story attached houses with views of water had been planned only a year ago. The bay is polluted yet nutrient-rich, and buffering wetlands are needed there for bird and wildlife protection.

And in Portland, Ore., 27 acres of grassy and wooded hills at the city’s southeastern end that were to become a residential subdivision are now open for hiking, picnicking and dog walking.

The land has been added to a city park called Clatsop Butte. It sold for $4.4 million when the market collapsed, down from its estimated worth of $5 million a few months earlier.

In many cases, the preservation deals are negotiated with banks that have foreclosed on property and are eager to get bad assets off the books.

Bill Eshenbaugh, a real estate broker in Florida who goes by the promotional moniker the Dirt Dog, said the trusts’ endowments often allowed them to pay cash, which banks now require in such cases.

In 2009, “we did over $60 million in land deals, and not one penny financed,” Mr. Eshenbaugh said. “It was all cash. The trusts can come up with the cash, and cash is what it’s all about.”

Still, while the trusts see more opportunities, they have also been taking in fewer donations since the economic downturn. Local and state governments enlisted to cover part of a purchase or to maintain donated land are usually struggling as well.

Keith Fountain, director of land acquisition for the Florida chapter of the nonprofit Nature Conservancy, which focuses on preserving large swaths of undeveloped land to protect ecosystems, said the past year’s offerings were the best in the 17 years he had pursued properties, among them 500,000 acres that protect rivers feeding the Everglades.

But this year, for the first time in two decades, shortfalls led the State of Florida not to budget its annual $300 million for land conservation. Previously, the conservancy had put together deals and the state put up the cash. As a result, Mr. Fountain said, the conservancy has had to pass up some gems.

When a preservation purchase succeeds, not every municipality is necessarily happy. Towns may mourn the loss of development that could have generated revenue.

Officials in Albemarle County, Va., for example, are frustrated that Forest Lodge L.L.C., a local developer that had permits to build 3,100 houses and apartments on 800 acres of meadows and forest, gave that land and 400 acres more to the state for a park this week in return for tax credits.

Supervisors had anticipated $38 million in commitments for public improvements from Forest Lodge. What is more, said Dennis Rooker, a member of the board of supervisors, the county spent more than $200,000 in staff time to hammer out that plan.

But in the long run, said Mr. Rogers of the Trust for Public Land, even developers recognize that newly protected lands can have a positive effect on real estate prices.

“Developers have long seen that conserved land next to a development adds value,” he said. “There are genuine economic benefits for everyone that will come out of this.”

Brooklyn Bridge Park controversy

2009-12-10T19:00:00.000-08:00

http://www.yournabe.com/articles/2009/12/10/brooklyn/courier_frontpage_bridgefuror.txt

The latest regarding housing units inside a a new park

see the link above

Eagle trips email send to BBC website

2009-12-08T14:13:00.000-08:00

Dr. S. Marie Kuhnen
Memorial Field Trip Series

Search for Eagles
in the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and Upper Delaware Scenic River

Join John (Jack) Padalino, President Emeritus of the Paul F-Brandwein Institute, partner with the National Park Service Delaware Water Gap NRA by caravan to search for eagles.

WEATHER PERMITTING.
Meet 10:00 a.m. at the Historic Callahan House, 101 Route 209 South @ mile marker 21, Milford, PA –
Dress warmly, bring binoculars, field guides, and a lunch.

The search for eagles will conclude along the Lackawaxen River approximately 4:00 p.m.

IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN A SEARCH FOR EAGLES FIELD TRIP
YOU MUST REGISTER via Email: jack@brandwein.org or
PHONE: 570.296.6752
AND INDICATE WHICH FIELD TRIP(s) YOU WILL BE ATTENDING.

THERE IS NO CHARGE

SEARCH FOR EAGLES – SCHEDULED FIELD TRIPS
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Monday, December 21, 2009
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Sunday, February 28, 2010

Eagle observation data that we collect will be shared with the
Eagle Institute and Hawk Migration Association of North America HMANA.
An Eagle identification field guide and a “Search for Eagles” activities hand- out will be provided by the Paul F-Brandwein Institute.

Join us to Search For Eagles, the symbol of our nation.

12/8 NY Times arrticle on Hydro fracturing

2009-12-08T04:39:00.001-08:00

Dark Side of a Natural Gas Boom
By JAD MOUAWAD and CLIFFORD KRAUSS
Some environmentalists are concerned that a technology
called hydraulic fracturing used to produce natural gas
could be leading to pollution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/business/energy-environment/08fracking.html?th&emc=th

3 pieces of news info Re Conservation issues; Internship

2009-12-03T14:03:00.000-08:00

1) Staten Island rally this Saturday to save Pouch Camp (Greenbelt)

http://www.silive.com/westshore/index.ssf/2009/12/thousands_urge_that_pouch_camp.html

*************

*Pouch Camp rally
Supporters looking to preserve the William H. Pouch Scout Camp in Sea View have organized a public rally.

*When
Dec. 12, 5 to 6:30 p.m.

*Where

Meet in front of Susan Wagner High School, 1200 Manor Rd., Sea View.

*What

The group will march down the street to the camp, then proceed to its Memorial Garden, where the annual holiday lighting will take place.

*Of note
As of last night, more 400 Facebook members had confirmed their attendance and the camp’s head ranger, Gil Schweiger, confirmed that another 1,000 to 1,200 individuals had made verbal commitments.

2)

From Jonathan Wells from Prospect Park Audubon Center; searching for a graduate internship

Hello all,

Hope all is well. I am looking for a graduate student for an internship program I’m running here at the center this spring. If you know of anyone who might be appropriate please let them or myself know. See below a brief description and an attached flyer.

Thanks so much for any assistance,

Jonathan

Jonathan P. Wells

Manager of Education Programs

Prospect Park Audubon Center

(718) 287-3400 x114

jwells@audubon.prospectpark.org

To be successful in our conservation efforts, we need your help! Sign up for Audubon Alerts and the Advisory at www.audubonaction.org/newyork

To whom it may concern;

This spring the Prospect Park Audubon Center will be offering a graduate level internship to students interested in entering into environmental education, or an environmental administration field. The Internship will give students entry-level experience at the Audubon Center, while receiving internship credits from their respective schools. Please see below a brief internship description, the same information attached as a document, and a flyer for advertising at your organization. Please have any potential candidates submit the below requirements to job102@prospectpark.org. For additional internal information please contact me at the email address below. Feel free to pass this email along to any interested parties.

Thank you for your assistance,

Jonathan Wells

Jonathan P. Wells

Manager of Education Programs / Internship Coordinator

Prospect Park Audubon Center

(718) 287-3400 x114

jwells@audubon.prospectpark.org

To be successful in our conservation efforts, we need your help! Sign up for Audubon Alerts and the Advisory at www.audubonaction.org/newyork

AD COPY

The Prospect Park Alliance, working in partnership with City of New York and the community, restores, develops, and operates Prospect Park for the enjoyment of all by caring for the natural environment, preserving historic design, and serving the public through facilities and programs. Prospect Park is Brooklyn’s 585-acre historic flagship park, designed by the famed Olmsted and Vaux. It is the home of Brooklyn’s only lake and forest, with nature trails, numerous recreational activities, public and school-based educational programs, volunteer opportunities, and the first urban Audubon Center.

The mission of the Prospect Park Audubon Center is to inspire the people of Brooklyn to appreciate, learn about and protect the birds, other wildlife and their habitats in Prospect Park and beyond.

***

The Prospect Park Audubon Center seeks a graduate student intern. The internship provides school credit and work experience for students interested in the fields of environmental education or environmental institution administration. The internship is designed to prepare graduate students entering into the field through training, education, and work experience in four core career components:

1. Non-formal Teaching Experience

2. Environmental Philosophy, Education, and the Inquiry-based Teaching Method

3. Environmental Institution Administration

4. Special Events Management or Staff Development

Interns will obtain the four components by, but not limited to, the teaching of non-formal education programs, assisting in the development of curriculum, participate in the dynamics of a non-profit environmental organization, gaining customer service experience, interpretation of exhibits, learning the nuances of teaching about the natural world in an urban environment, assistance in the execution of special events, and the completion of one of two projects; running a special event at the center, or a staff development session.

The ultimate goal of the semester long internship is to fill the growing need for environmental educators and administrators in urban settings, while simultaneously alleviating the staffing need of this non-profit institution, and training students to become employees grounded in the communities they serve, while solidifying interns as strong candidates for future job opportunities at the Prospect Park Audubon Center.

Internship Duration & Requirements:

· Students must be registered in a graduate level program in environmental education, environmental science, biology, or a related program.

· Internship participants are required to participate during the spring 2010 semester of their respective schools program.

· This is an unpaid Internship.

· Students must receive credit hour approval from their respective school.

· Internship hours committed is based upon respective graduate program requirements, though students must complete a minimum of twelve hours per week in addition to a minimum of eighteen hours of work during weekend public hours.

· Average intern parameters typically constitute 3-4 credit hours and 160 hours in the internship.

· Typical shifts are based upon the centers normal business hours between 9am and 5pm Tuesday through Friday.

· Students are required to receive a background check.

To apply send a resume, cover letter, two references (one academic, one professional), your graduate program advisor’s contact information, and semester start and end date to job102@prospectpark.org . Items must be submitted no later than four weeks prior to the start of a spring semester.

No phone calls, please. Although we appreciate your interest, we will only contact applicants we are considering for interview. The Prospect Park Alliance is an equal opportunity employer.

3)

Email memo sent by speaker of NY city council , Christine Quinn about Hydro Fracturing near the NYC water reservoirs

December 3, 2009

Dear New Yorker,

We want to alert you about a troubling development for New York City's water.

On September 30, 2009, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation released a document proposing new permitting procedures and regulations for natural gas drilling in our state. In effect, this document has left an open path for an unconventional gas drilling technique, known as hydraulic fracturing, to proceed in the land areas that supply our City with its famously clean drinking water.

We are deeply troubled by this prospect. As much as 90 percent of our City's water comes from the Catskill/Delaware watershed. Natural gas drilling, a heavily industrial activity, risks introducing highly toxic chemicals into the City's drinking water. If the water were to become contaminated, the City would have to spend an estimated $10 billion to build a filtration plant and $100 million annually to operate it - further increasing water bills that have already seen double digit increases over the past three years.

If you care as deeply about the future of our City's water supply as we do, please call or write Governor Paterson and ask him and the State Legislature to explicitly ban drilling for natural gas in the City's watershed. We've gone ahead and drafted a letter that folks can easily sign on to and send to the Governor via our website. To access, click

http://council.nyc.gov/html/action_center/drilling.shtml

http://council.nyc.gov/html/action_center/drilling.shtml

Additionally, the State should extend the public comment period on the proposed regulations, which are found in a voluminous document called the "draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. The public comment period should be extended through February 28, 2010.

Finally, please call or write your U.S. representative and U.S. senators and ask them to support the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009, which would help protect drinking water supplies throughout the country from the serious risks that hydrofracking poses. You can find your representative's contact information by clicking here and your senators' contact information by clicking here. You can also call the Capitol's main switchboard at (202) 224-3121.

Thanks so much for helping us protect our City's water supply.

Sincerely,

Christine C. Quinn

Speaker

New York City Council

James Gennaro

Chair, Committee on Environmental Protection

New York City Council

Plumb Beach erosion concerns

2009-12-02T09:57:00.000-08:00

This article I picked up from the Brooklyn Papers of the Sheepshead Bay locale

Wednesday, December 2, 2009Yournabe.com Home

Residents: Plumb Beach needs more than a band-aid

By Joe Maniscalco
Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:42 PM EST
Comment (No comments posted.) Email To a Friend

Congressman Weiner looks over a section of the bike path that was destroyed by the last storm surge. Photo by Steve Solomonson
Plumb Beach’s latest thrashing at the hands of Mother Nature has left area resdents demanding a long-term solution to what they see as a rapidly deteriorating situation.

The latest strorm track to batter Plumb Beach last month carried away huge amounts of sand and destroyed a 150-foot sectionof the Shore Parkway Greenway running along the Belt Parkway near the Plumb Beach parking lot.

Emergency stabilization efforts - including the introduction of sandbags and rock boulders - are now underway in an effort to limit the damage.

This week, Rep. Anthony Weiner toured the site and assessed the damage along with local residents and representatives from several governmental agencies.

Those all too familiar with Plumb Beach’s history of storm damage say that this time around the area needs more than a “Band-aid” approach.

“They put sandbags in a few years ago and there’s not even any evidence of them,” Community Board 15 Chair Theresa Scavo said. “This weekend they’re predicting a storm. God forbid if the Belt Parkway is flooded, what will we do?”

The NYC Parks Department says its engineers are working with several other invovled agencies including the Department of Environmental Conservation, National Parks Service, Department of Transportation and Army Corps. of Engineers to “evaluate the long term methods of repairing the affected area.”

Sheepshead Bay/Plumb Beach Civic Association President Kathy Flynn called on Weiner to “quarterback” the effort.

“We’ve been many years questioning this situation and it’s always the same thing - [governmental] agencies passing the buck,” she said.

For the last several years, activists like Flynn have also been calling for dredging the mouth of Sheepshead Bay.

ADVERTISEMENTThey maintain that storm surges like the one that occurred last month not only erode Plumb Beach and threaten the Belt Parkway, they also clog navigation lanes.

“There’s colateral damage,” Flynn said. “The whole north shore is eroding away and the south shore keeps building up.”

Money that could be earmarked for that effort has not been forthcoming.

Weiner has asked all interested parties to “go back to the drawing board” to find a solution to Plumb Beach’s problems.

“Something has got to be done,” Scavo said.

One option being suggested is the installation of some sort of off-shore barrier that could theoretically deflect storm surges.

“Yes, something has to be done,” Flynn cautioned. “In the long-term I’d like to see more of a natural type of barrier rather than a cement or steel bulkhead. This is a natural area and it should be preserved that way.”

Sections
- YourNabe.com Homepage

CNG, YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, YOUR NEWS and YOUR NABE.COM are trademarks of News Community Newspapers Holdings, Inc. and its affiliates.
Copyright © 2009 News Community Newspapers Holdings, Inc. .
All rights reserved. View the YourNabe.com's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Powered by Townnews.com

Staten Island Greenbelt habitat in jeopardy

2009-11-30T09:43:00.000-08:00

PETITION (LEFT LOWER SIDEBAR) ---> http://www.savepouch.com/index.html

For a visual of the property on a trail map, look at Boy Scout Pouch Camp to the right of "Bloodroot Valley". The private camp lies in the heart of the Greenbelt

http://www.sigreenbelt.org/Trails/trailmap.pdf

Conjuring environmental battles of decades past, a Scout camp's proposed sale imperils a key piece of the Staten Island Greenbelt

By Karen O'Shea

November 25, 2009,

The Boy Scouts of America is looking to sell Pouch Camp.STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. --

It's the worst time to ask the city and state to pony up $30 million to buy Pouch Camp in the Greenbelt -- a unique Staten Island wilderness that has been used by thousands of Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts for nearly 60 years -- but that's precisely what the Greater New York Councils Boy Scouts of America is doing now. And if the Boy Scouts don't get government to pay for a conservation easement to preserve the campgrounds, the nonprofit will sell the 120-acre William H. Pouch Scout Camp and 20-acre Ohrbach Lake to private developers. Boy Scout executives said yesterday that the Island camp is one of only two key assets that can be leveraged to raise funds for the cash-strapped organization. "It's certainly not a threat. It's absolutely very real," William Kelly, a Boy Scouts spokesman, said of the announcement that the organization would begin marketing the wooded property off Manor Road for sale. "We don't want the outcome to be a sale of the property. We want the outcome to be a conservation easement that preserves the land for children in perpetuity, but if that doesn't happen we have to look at other options and the other options are a full or partial sale," he added. Yesterday's press release, a copy of which was obtained by the Advance hours before it was released by the Greater New York Councils, did not set a price for a potential sale, but several people said a conservation easement would cost government roughly $30 million, or half the $60 million appraised value. An easement would allow the Boy Scouts to continue to operate the camp in exchange for giving up the right to develop the property, which is zoned for housing. Kelly said the Boy Scouts executive committee voted last week to pursue a sale, and the organization is in the final stages of selecting a real estate firm to market the property. The site represents the largest and one of the only privately owned parcels in the Greenbelt, which bisects the Island and includes parks, a golf course and other city and state land. "We are not going to put a for sale sign up outside, but we are just going to quietly market it to people who might be in a position to work with us," Kelly said.

SURPRISED OFFICIALS

The timing of the announcement surprised some public officials, who spent yesterday morning working the phones, trying to drum up dollars for a purchase at a time when the state and city are facing unprecedented budget holes. But those same officials also said they had been talking to Boy Scout executives for some time about a conservation easement. "What this announcement does is it shows the urgency that we need to make sure we preserve this land," said Assemblyman Michael Cusick (D-Mid-Island). Cusick and other Island politicians met with Boy Scout executives last spring, and talks about an easement date to least three years ago. In 1992, the camp was added to the state's open space plan, a land acquisition wish list that makes it possible to purchase and preserve private lands with public money. Charlie Greinsky, vice president of relationships and intergovernmental affairs for the Staten Island Council of the Boy Scouts of America, said he was "blindsided" by yesterday's announcement. The native Islander, an Eagle Scout who earned badges at Pouch Camp and worked there as well, said he had a discussion with Kelly just Saturday -- and the subject of a possible sale never came up. "The lack of camp improvements under legislative grants was discussed and I wanted to know what were the delays," Greinsky said. "I was to have gotten a call on Monday. But I never got one." State Sen. Andrew Lanza (R-Staten Island) said he had an agreement in early 2008 to secure $15 million toward a Pouch Camp easement. But elections in November last year resulted in Republicans losing the majority in the Senate and Lanza's losing the money, he added. A devastating financial collapse on Wall Street was happening at the same time. "I'm not surprised; I am disappointed," Lanza said of the potential sale of Pouch Camp to private developers. "The time has come for us to figure out how to do this. I think it is a good use of taxpayer dollars, even in tough times," he said of an easement. But squeezing any extra dollars from state and city administrations won't be easy. The city must close a $4.1 billion budget gap and the state is facing a $3.2 billion deficit. "These are the tightest financial times we've had in years and years," said Borough President James Molinaro. "But under no conditions can we lose this. It would not be good for the Boy Scouts or for Staten Island."

SLASHED BUDGET

The Boy Scouts, meanwhile, slashed their own budget from $15 million to $10 million but still lost $5 million in charitable donations over the last 18 months. The organization purchased the first piece of Pouch Camp in 1949 from the estate of Ernest Flagg, the Island architect who famously designed the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md. The second parcel was acquired from the city in 1956. The total cost to assemble the camp, which was named for a Scout and benefactor, was $113,300. Over the years, thousands of Scouts have used the summer day camp and weekend camping facilities, where they have learned to fish, build campfires, tie knots and practice other survival skills. The Boy Scouts also pay for low-income campers to attend Pouch, and the YMCA uses the camp. Assemblyman Lou Tobacco (R-South Shore), an Eagle Scout who earned several merit badges at Pouch Camp, was reaching out yesterday to the mayor's office, various state agencies and the Trust for Public Land, which helped broker the $25 million sale of Mount Loretto to the state. '

ANOTHER TODT HILL'

A staffer in Tobacco's office said Pouch Camp could become "another Todt Hill" if sold to a private developer. The site has the same restrictive residential zoning that permits only large, single-family detached houses on 10,000-square-foot lots. That notion doesn't sit well with Kathleen Vorwick, president of the Greenbelt Conservancy, which partners with the Parks Department to care for and raise funds for the Greenbelt. "The heart and soul and lungs of the Greenbelt would be destroyed," she said of a private sale of Pouch Camp. The Boy Scouts also said yesterday that they are considering "cash-producing" options at the 12,000-acre Ten Mile River Scout Reservation in upstate Narrowsburg.---twitter.com/siadvance
© 2009 SILive.com. All rights reserved.

Scenic Hudson urgent request to protest cuts to land conservation

2009-11-25T13:46:00.001-08:00

Trouble viewing this e-mail? You can read it on-line.To ensure receipt of our e-mails, please add our address (takeaction@scenichudson.org) to your address book.
Dear Peter,
We need your help. The word from Albany is that Gov. Paterson and NY State lawmakers are proposing placing a moratorium on all state funding for land protection and acquisition. The portion of the Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) dedicated to direct land protection already is less than 1/1,000th of the overall state budget -- and now they're proposing bringing it all the way down to ZERO.
We understand that NY is facing a budget crisis, but eliminating all state land preservation would be a dreadful mistake. Here are three reasons why:
1. Developers are gearing up for a post-recession wave of buildingBuilders are using their current downtime to plan and seek approvals for the next wave of residential construction. The latest estimates suggest that 100,000 new housing units have already been proposed for the Hudson Valley, many of which will eliminate farmland and mar the iconic views that have made the valley a world-famous attraction.
2. Depressed real estate prices are creating great conservation opportunitiesGiven a choice, many property owners would prefer to see their land conserved than sell it to a developer-especially in this economy, when buyers of any kind are scarce. By placing a moratorium on land purchases now, New York is turning away from some unprecedented land protection bargains.
3. State land protection programs are a proven winnerUnlike many aspects of state government, the program that makes EPF funds available for land protection projects is highly efficient. This small part of the state budget brings big benefits to New Yorkers with very little waste. Let's not mess it up!
As most of you know, the governor and lawmakers have already robbed the EPF of half a billion dollars -- this year's EPF has been reduced by nearly 25 percent from funding levels passed into law in 2007. Don't let our lawmakers cut it further by enacting this wrong-headed moratorium. Please visit this page to send them a letter today.
Sincerely,
Ned Sullivan President
P.S. I know this is a busy time of year, but sending this letter is really important. Thanks for all that you do.

This message was sent to prosbird@aol.com. To stop ALL email from Scenic Hudson, click to remove yourself from our lists.Click here to unsubscribe

Hydrofracking dangers to NYC water reservoirs

2009-11-02T15:44:00.001-08:00

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/NY-Statewide-Ban-On-Natural-Gas-Drilling

BAN NATURAL GAS DRILLING IN NEW YORK STATE
Target:
Governor Paterson, DEC Commissioner Peter Grannis, State Senate, State Assembly, DEC dSGEIS Comments

Don't Frack New York. Geological experts claim that shale beds in New York, particularly the Utica and Marcellus Shale, contain significant amounts of natural gas. Numerous energy and gas drilling companies are now vying with one another to tap these deposits using a method known as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (hydrofracking). The recent release of the fatally flawed draft supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement on horizontal drilling and hydrofracking by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is now bringing this issue to the forefront.

Hydrofracking, a gas extraction process developed by Halliburton, pumps millions of gallons of water and 'fracking fluids' containing mixtures of up to 250 toxic chemicals under high pressure to break apart the rock, forcing the gas to the surface. With operations in 32 states, the gas industry has provided ample evidence that extracting gas from low permeable rock is environmentally unsafe. It is unlikely that this method of drilling could ever be made completely safe, regardless of regulations, and natural gas drilling in New York State has the capacity to jeopardize the health, safety and welfare of millions of New York residents. As global corporations turn our state into a sacrifice zone, reap massive short-term profits, and significantly add to greenhouse gas emissions, the true costs of drilling in terms of environmental impacts, quality of life, and long-term cleanup costs will be passed on to state residents.

Due to the inherent danger of un-natural gas drilling and the potentially massive impact on our local rural communities, we are calling for a complete ban on drilling in low permeable stone deposits in New York State. Join us by adding your signature to the petition!

NYTimes essay on connecting kids to nature

2009-08-02T06:03:00.000-07:00

August 2, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
How to Lick a Slug
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
MOUNT HOOD, Ore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/opinion/02kristof.html?th&emc=th

State of our birds

2009-08-01T05:58:00.001-07:00

The following is a link to the website dictating the state of our birds. IT is a must read,
necessary for every birder to be informed. It should require our attention.

http://www.stateofthebirds.org/

2009-07-30T13:37:00.000-07:00

Proposed new Brooklyn Botanic Garden visitors center:A potential window collision bird deathtrap?

I got this email thru my subscription Brooklyn Papers.One of the links which i am attaching here, is about the Brooklyn Botanic Garden's proposed new visitor's center...Yep...it's all glass from the sketch i see ( they said the design won a green award...wondering if birds were thought of as one of the criteria) .I cant tell how high the building will be or whatever but its going to be 22,000 square feet ( so it says).

That's not good for a birding spot that potentially could see bird collisions.

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/32/29/32_29_jk_botanic.html

if you can't open the link, go to the Brooklyn Botanic Garden's website which i think is http://www.bbg.org/ ( or google it)I will be sending an inquiry to them asking for more details on the glass structure and composite of that glass.For more information about the dangers of reflective glass upon birds, see Project Safe flight or American Bird Conservancy

site:http://www.abcbirds.org/conservationissues/threats/buildings.html

http://www.nycaudubon.org/NYCASBirdWatch/TabDefault.asp

http://www.nycaudubon.org/projects/safeflight/

Birdwatchers No Featherweights in Contributions to Economy

2009-07-28T18:17:00.001-07:00

“This U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service study further reinforces the importance of bird conservation,” said Darin Schroeder, American Bird Conservancy’s Vice President for Conservation Advocacy. “The State of the Birds report released earlier this year found that one-third of all bird species in the U.S. are in decline or facing serious threats. This report confirms that losing these species could have significant economic consequences.”

Contact: Joshua Winchell

703-358-2279

Joshua_winchell@fws.gov

Birdwatchers No Featherweights in Contributions to Economy

A new report released today by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows one

of every five Americans watches birds, and in doing so, birdwatchers

contributed $36 billion to the U.S. economy in 2006, the most recent year

for which economic data are available. The report – Birding in the United

States: A Demographic and Economic Analysis –shows that total participation

in birdwatching is strong at 48 million, and remaining at a steady 20

percent of the U.S. population since 1996.

Participation rates vary, but are generally greater in the northern half of

the country. The five top states with the greatest birding participation

rates include Montana (40 percent), Maine (39 percent), Vermont (38

percent), Minnesota (33 percent) and Iowa (33 percent).

The report identifies who birders are, where they live, how avid they are,

and what kinds of birds they watch. In addition to demographic information,

this report also provides an estimate of how much birders spend on their

hobby and the economic impact of these expenditures.

The report is an addendum to the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,

and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. The 2006 survey is the eleventh in a

series of surveys conducted about every 5 years that began in 1955. The

survey, conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in partnership with

state wildlife agencies and national conservation organizations, has become

the reference for participation and expenditure information on fish and

wildlife recreation in the United States. The survey helps quantify how

enjoyment of the outdoors and wildlife contributes to society and promotes

a healthy economy – and further strengthens the Service’s commitment to

conserve the nation’s wildlife for the enjoyment and benefit of the

American people.

A copy of the Birding in the United States: A Demographic and Economic

Analysis can be downloaded here:

http://library.fws.gov/Pubs/birding_natsurvey06.pdf

In conjunction with the release of the birding report, the Service also

issued another similar addendum to the 2006 Survey entitled, Wildlife

Watching Trends: 1991–2006 A Reference Report. This report shows similar

trends in wildlife-watching, a broader category that includes large and

small-mammal viewing.

An overview of the Survey, and a wealth of other information, can be found

online at:

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/NationalSurvey/National_Survey.htm

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to

conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for

the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and

trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific

excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated

professionals and commitment to public service. For more information on our

work and the people who make it happen, visit www.fws.gov.

Steve Holmer

Director of Public Relations

American Bird Conservancy

202/234-7181 ext. 216 or

202/744-6459 (cell)

sholmer@abcbirds.org

www.abcbirds.org

American Bird Conservancy operates the Bird News Network, which distributes the latest information about birds and bird conservation through videos, press releases, and news stories.
Video releases are available at Bird News Network Videos or view the latest news stories and subscribe to the network's RSS feed at http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/latestnews.html

House Passes Bill to Protect Migratory Birds

2009-07-28T18:12:00.000-07:00

MEDIA RELEASE

Contact: Steve Holmer, American Bird Conservancy, 202-234-7181, ext. 216, sholmer@abcbirds.org, www.abcbirds.org

House Passes Bill to Protect Migratory Birds

Joint Ventures Play Important Role in Restoring Chesapeake Bay

(Washington, D.C., July 14, 2009) Earlier today the United States House of Representatives passed H.R. 2188, the Joint Ventures for Bird Habitat Conservation Act of 2009, which was introduced by Rep. Frank Kratovil, the freshman Democrat representing the 1st district of Maryland. The bill would formally authorize the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Joint Ventures Program, which has been effectively carrying out bird conservation planning and projects since 1987.

“American Bird Conservancy appreciates the effective leadership of Rep. Kratovil to get this bill passed. Joint Ventures are a proven success and have made a huge difference for bird conservation,” said Darin Schroeder, American Bird Conservancy’s Vice President for Conservation Advocacy. “By applying science and bringing people together, Joint Ventures across the U.S. have created a model for solving wildlife management problems and restoring habitats critical to conserving declining species.”

Joint ventures are regional partnerships involving federal, state, and local government agencies, corporations, tribes, individuals, and conservation organizations which advance conservation efforts and help identify local land use priorities. There are currently 21 JVs in the United States that provide coordination for conservation planning, and implementing projects to benefit birds and other species. JVs develop science-based goals and strategies, and a non-regulatory approach for achieving conservation.

Maryland is primarily part of the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) which is focused on the conservation of habitat for native birds in the Atlantic Flyway of the United States from Maine south to Puerto Rico. The ACJV partnership has protected 158,000 acres in Maryland, and restored another 98,000 acres. The ACJV helps direct funding for the restoration of Chesapeake Bay such as land acquisition and supports projects to plant aquatic vegetation in the Bay benefitting birds and other wildlife.

The western end of Maryland is part of the recently-created Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture which is working to conserve species such as the Kentucky, Worm-eating, Prairie, and Golden-winged Warblers, Wood Thrush, American Woodcock, and American Black Duck. Nationally, Joint Ventures have directed $4.5 billion in conservation spending from Federal grants and programs, state conservation dollars, and private donations and have protected, restored, or enhanced more than 13 million acres of important habitat for migratory bird species.

#30#

American Bird Conservancy (ABC) conserves native wild birds and their habitats throughout the Americas. ABC acts to safeguard the rarest bird species, restore habitats, and reduce threats, while building capacity in the conservation movement. ABC is the voice for birds, ensuring that they are adequately protected; that sufficient funding is available for bird conservation; and that land is protected and properly managed to maintain viable habitat. ABC is a 501(c)(3) membership organization that is consistently awarded a top, four-star rating by the independent group, Charity Navigator.

Steve Holmer

Director of Public Relations

American Bird Conservancy

202/234-7181 ext. 216 or

202/744-6459 (cell)

sholmer@abcbirds.org

www.abcbirds.org

American Bird Conservancy operates the Bird News Network, which distributes the latest information about birds and bird conservation through videos, press releases, and news stories.
Video releases are available at Bird News Network Videos or view the latest news stories and subscribe to the network's RSS feed at http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/latestnews.html

A new Staten Island greenspace

2009-06-01T13:14:00.001-07:00

A notice appeared from the Channel thirteen website , an email about "The City Concealed" which profiles Fresh Kills Landfill being converted into a park preserve.

see the video on this link

http://www.thirteen.org/thecityconcealed/2009/06/01/freshkills-park-project/

The benefit of Owls over pesticides

2009-05-26T14:41:00.001-07:00

Owls replace pesticides in Israel
Owls and kestrels are being employed as agricultural pest controllers in the Middle East.
Many farmers are installing nest boxes to encourage the birds, which hunt the crop-damaging rodents.
In Israel, where there is a drive to reduce the use of toxic chemical pesticides, this has been turned into a government-funded national programme.
Jordanian and Palestinian scientists and conservation charities have joined the scheme.
According to the charity BirdLife International, hundreds of birds of prey - including many endangered species - have been killed in the region through eating rodents containing poisonous "rodenticides" sprayed on to crop fields.
But scientists in Israel are now working with farmers to combat this problem - deploying the birds as natural pest controllers.
"There is a real need to reduce the use of chemicals in agriculture here," said Motti Charter, a researcher from Tel Aviv University and team leader of the Global Owl Project in Israel.
No boundaries
"Many farmers think that chemicals are their only option. They use very large amounts of them - spraying them on to their fields from planes," said Mr Charter.
"We have been reaching out to the farmers, to encourage them to reduce their use of rodenticides and install nest boxes instead."
The scheme started in 1983, when a few nesting boxes were erected near a kibbutz, or farming village, in the Bet-She'an Valley, south of the Sea of Galilee.
The project has gradually been expanded to include boxes for nesting kestrels.
"Kestrels hunt during the day and barn owls at night," said Mr Charter.
"This constant 24-hour threat of predation has caused changes in the pests' behaviour, resulting in less crop damage."
According to the World Owl Trust, who have funded some of Mr Charter's research, there are currently about 1,000 barn owl nest boxes in various locations around Israel.
The trust has even installed a webcam in one of those boxes.
Because the sub-species of barn owl in Israel is less territorial than those in Europe, and because the population of rodents is stable throughout the year, the nest boxes can be placed relatively close together.
"Jordan recently came on board to take part in the scheme," said Tony Warburton, honourary president of the World Owl Trust. "So the project is really bringing people together."
Mr Charter added: "The birds will nest wherever there is food and a suitable habitat. They don't know the national boundaries."
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/8004426.stmPublished: 2009/05/20 09:36:13 GMT© BBC MMIX
Print Sponsor
BBC.adverts.write("printableversionsponsorship");
BBC.adverts.show("printableversionsponsorship");

Bird tower kills Audubon Alert

2009-04-22T18:34:00.001-07:00

Acting Commissioner Michael Copps
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW, Room: 8-B115
Washington, DC 20554

Dear Acting Commissioner Copps:

As one of the millions of Americans who cherish our nation's
native wild birds, I support the petition for expedited
rulemaking and other relief filed by American Bird Conservancy,
Defenders of Wildlife and National Audubon Society on April 14,
2009. I urge the FCC to take action to prevent the needless
killing of millions of migratory birds at communications towers.
These bird deaths can be prevented without affecting the
development and operation of telecommunication services and
without compromising on aviation safety.

Scientists have shown that -- especially during bad weather
conditions -- migrating birds become disoriented and trapped by
the halo of light surrounding towers using steady-burning
illumination, circling endlessly until they either collide with
the structure, collide with each other, or fall dead from
exhaustion.

Given the overwhelming scientific evidence that communications
towers kill birds, and the existence of science-based guidelines
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on siting and operation
of these towers, it is appalling that the FCC is failing to
conduct any meaningful environmental review of tower
applications, and continues in its refusal to adopt any
meaningful regulatory changes or mitigation measures to avoid or
minimize the killing of America's birds.

The FCC should act now to take meaningful action and grant the
petition filed on April 14 to significantly reduce the millions
of bird deaths caused by communications towers. Thank you in
advance for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Peter Dorosh
President ,Brooklyn Bird Club

From American Birds Conservancy Enews

2009-03-06T06:21:00.001-08:00

To: The Bird Conservation Alliance
From: Steve Holmer, American Bird Conservancy
Date: March 4, 2009

To ensure that habitat conservation is enhanced by the legislation, American Bird Conservancy has been working with the Forest Climate Working Group, a coalition of 30 forest conservation organizations, forest landowners, and timber companies, to develop consensus on the need to include measures supporting forest conservation and sustainable management. The coalition is seeking to include private forests in the global warming bill by creating incentives for projects that sequester carbon, and providing adaptation funding to mitigate impacts to forests caused by rapidly shifting climate zones. Below is a ClimateWire article that has been reprinted in the NY Times Online edition.

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/02/19/19climatewire-timber-companies-and-environmental-groups-agr-9781.html

Energy & Environment
Search Business
Timber companies and environmental groups agree on the outlines of a climate plan
By JESSICA LEBER, ClimateWireClimateWire
The issue has been a knotty one: Cutting down domestic forests, which every year soak up 10 percent of U.S. fossil fuel emissions, could mean disaster for both climate and wildlife. The flip side of the coin is that managing them well would mean major greenhouse gas benefits.
"We need new markets to make that happen," said Robert Bonnie, vice president for land conservation and wildlife at the Environmental Defense Fund, one of the Forest-Climate Working Group members.
Almost two-thirds of U.S. forest land is owned by about 10 million private owners. The platform discusses how to maximize their climate benefits by allowing forest owners to get paid for offsetting greenhouse gas emissions within future federal cap-and-trade climate legislation, which would require major fossil-fuel burners to either reduce their own emissions or purchase carbon credits.
The 30-member coalition, which also includes timber giant Plum Creek and Defenders of Wildlife, has been discussing its platform with key Senate committees that will have a hand in shaping legislation this year.
"In the end, it was too important not to agree on core principles," said Drue DeBerry, senior vice president of conservation for the American Forest Foundation, who a year ago began working to make the groups come together.
With the forestry industry focused on project economics and conservation groups angling for environmental integrity, "it was definitely a struggle," said DeBerry.
Keeping forests at work
Planting new forests, reforestation and forest management programs could all be fodder for sequestering carbon dioxide and creating carbon offsets, the platform says. But offsets are also a complicated accounting project -- making sure the savings are real and not just a figment of paperwork can be a controversial challenge.
The coalition agreed that forest carbon offsets needed to be established from quantifiable baselines, to make sure they are "additional" and not actions the forest owner would have taken anyway.
Projects would also need to remove or sequester carbon from the atmosphere for 100 years, the platform says. If a tree is planted and then harvested for paper pulp or burned in a wildfire 10 years later, for example, those carbon savings could be lost.
Lastly, the offsets need to be quantifiable, verifiable by third parties, sustainable and have mechanisms to account for carbon "leakage."
"A marketplace wants to have good information," said Dave Tenny, president of the National Alliance of Forest Owners. "Everyone knows what a bushel of corn is. It's important for everybody to know what a unit of carbon is."
With all of these requirements, the transaction and compliance costs could be high.
"There's a dynamic tension between the environmental integrity and being able to go to scale with these projects," said DeBerry, warning against establishing so many burdens that no one participates.
The forestry and landowner community, for its part, wanted to make sure that offset projects would be flexible. A utility could, for example, sign a 10-, 20- or 30-year contract with a landowner to sequester a certain amount of carbon. Once the term is up, the utility would either have to renew it or replace those carbon credits elsewhere.
The platform also advocates for key climate change adaptation funding and incentives outside of the carbon market that would allow small owners to help reduce climate warming without the burdens of an offset project.
The devil will be in the details
The challenge, said Tenny, will be fleshing out the specifics of their proposal.. Defining how much carbon is stored in a forest, and when it is there, is a difficult prospect.
A wooden chair, for example, still stores carbon, even though it's been logged. And when forests are producing solid wood products, the trees are allowed to grow longer and soak up more carbon than they would if they were grown for paper. But, still, at some point, the chair probably goes to the landfill to decay and release its carbon. The offset amount lies somewhere between the seed and the landfill.
Another proposal to award offsets simply for not cutting down forests, or "avoided deforestation," presents other challenges. "We want to structure rules to reward landowners that are going to keep those forests as forests, but you can't just be handing out offsets to all forest landowners," said Bonnie.
Jim Wyerman, vice president for communications at the American Forest Foundation, said that family forest owners are struggling to hold onto their forests as the price of timber drops and competition rises, along with the owners' average age of 59.
The fear among many in the environmental community is that unless something is done to provide incentives to private landowners, many of those acres -- habitat, carbon stores and all -- could be lost unless they continue to be productively managed. "Those of us who are passionate within the conservation community feel like we have to get this right," said DeBerry.
Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

Steve Holmer
Director of Public Relations
American Bird Conservancy
202/234-7181 ext. 216 or
202/744-6459 (cell)
sholmer@abcbirds.org
www.abcbirds.org

American Bird Conservancy operates the Bird News Network, which distributes the latest information about birds and bird conservation through videos, press releases, and news stories. Video releases are available at Bird News Network Videos or view the latest news stories and subscribe to the network's RSS feed at http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/latestnews.html

To unsubscribe mail:BCAlist-unsubscribe@lists.abcbirds.org

The deadly dangers of glass to birds

2009-02-04T15:30:00.000-08:00

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/03/when-birds-collide-with-buildings/

February 3, 2009, 3:45 pm — Updated: 7:44 am -->
When Birds Collide, With Buildings
By Jennifer 8. Lee
Marilynn K. Yee/The New York TimesFor birds, the Javits Convention Center is one of the deadliest buildings in New York.
The three deadliest buildings in New York for bird collisions in New York City are the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center and Bellevue Hospital Center, according to the New York City Audubon Society, which keeps track of the deaths as part of Project Safe Flight in an online database.
“We collect thousands of dead birds every year, and we barely scratch the surface,” said Glenn Phillips, the society’s executive director.The Fish and Wildlife Service gave a grant to the Audubon Society to study bird collision mortality in New York City. The study, which will be released in March, examines landscape and architectural risk factors in bird deaths around the city as a model for other urban areas. Among the areas studied were the Met and the Javits Center.
“These are tragic areas that result in the death of countless areas of birds,” said Daniel Klem Jr., a ornithologist at Muhlenberg College who led the study.
Until 2007, the most lethal building by far used to be the Morgan Processing and Distribution Center, a United States Postal Service site that spans from West 28th to West 30th Street between Ninth and 10th Avenues. The building’s 440 decorative reflective panels on the south side mirrored the trees in Chelsea Park, fooling the birds into believing it was a welcoming hospitable habitat.
In one 10-week period in the fall, the Audubon Society recorded 338 dead birds around the center. And it was generally not just pigeons that bonked themselves (perhaps they are too savvy). Instead, it was dark-eyed juncos, white-throated sparrows and ruby-crowned kinglets.
An architect recommended that black vinyl be placed over each of the panels at the center, and now things are immeasurably improved.
It has not been as easy a problem to remedy with the Met, the Javits Center and Bellevue, because of a combination of aesthetics and technology. Mr. Phillips said they are in discussions with the buildings to reduce bird collision mortality.
But arguably, bird glass hazards in New York City are getting worse, not better. Glass is “in” because it is a common feature of green architecture, which means that more avian-unfriendly structures are popping up. They are particularly a hazard when they are near parks or other areas with foliage.
Or, as Mr. Phillips put it, “Glass and landscape together — bad.”
For example, the new diaphanous glass condominium building designed by Richard Meier in Brookyn’s Grand Army Plaza has raised the concern of the Audubon Society, as The New York Post noted this week.
“We’ve been planning on monitoring that building starting in the spring,” Mr. Phillips said.
In addition, the Apple Cube at the GM Building has raised concerns.
Dr. Klem estimated in a 1991 study that between 100 million and a billion birds die each year in glass collisions — that’s a huge spread, we’d like to point out — which would make the single greatest human-caused reason for bird deaths in the United States [pdf]. He said that his research since then shows that the one billion figure is conservative.
And it’s not only the architecturally tall buildings that cause problems. Rather, the most hazardous areas of all buildings are the ground level and bottom few stories — in part because those reflect the surrounding tree canopies. So birds can hit even short, squat buildings.
“The smallest piece of glass and the biggest piece of glass is an equal killer,” Dr. Klem said. “The birds behave like it’s invisible to them.”
There are some experimental solutions, none of them satisfactory from both an aesthetic and safety standpoint, from the Audubon Society point of view.
CollidEscape is a thin film that is applied to the exterior of windows — somewhat akin to those advertisements seen on buses and now in subways, only without the advertisements. Ornilux, which is made in Germany, is a glass designed to be more visible to birds, but its effectiveness is not clear.
There are other technological approaches. “The big question is, can ultraviolet light can be used? Because we can’t see it but they do,” said Dr. Klem, who added that he had been experimenting with ultraviolet light. A problem with the light, he explained, is that birds can view it as a force of attraction, like for mating and food.
“Danger is on the opposite of electromagnetic spectrum,” he said, in the reds and yellows.
New York City Audubon has just published a collection of bird-safe building guidelines, in a 55-page manual for architects and engineers.
“Honestly, the easiest solution would be for people not to build all-glass buildings,” Mr. Phillips said.
But people really like glass. In Lower Manhattan, 7 World Trade Center’s sometimes transparent-like appearance is beautiful, but that beauty is a hazard for birds. Likewise, 4 World Trade Center is also known for bird collisions.
A number of the architecturally striking buildings that are in the works, especially near the Hudson River, are also soaring and transparent.
Can City Room readers name other buildings in New York City that are not-so-bird friendly?
Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy
NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Good news for birds near airports?

2009-01-23T16:08:00.000-08:00

From the NY Post 1/23/09 edition:

FORCE IS WITH US
By TOM TOPOUSIS

Geese, beware: The US Air Force is on the way. Air Force brass yesterday offered to give New York one of its cutting-edge bird-detecting radar systems in order to prevent another airline collision like the one that forced a US Airways jet to ditch in the Hudson River last week. EXCLUSIVE: Ace Of Grace Gary Andrews, general manager at radar manufacturer DeTect Inc., said he got a call from the Air Force yesterday telling him to take a radar system slated for Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska and send it instead to New York. "That system is sitting here and it's ready to go," said Andrews, adding that the Air Force has offered to ship the system to the Port Authority at no cost. "I'm convinced that if La Guardia Airport had one of these radar systems, it would have detected the geese and alerted the controllers and pilot in time to avoid the collision," Andrews said of last week's US Airways splash-landing. DeTect's radar is already slated for a test program at Kennedy Airport, where technicians arrived yesterday to begin installing it. With a test already set for Kennedy, an aviation source said it's likely the Air Force's equipment would go to La Guardia. Officials at the Port Authority, which runs La Guardia, JFK and Newark airports, said they were unaware of the Air Force offer late yesterday. "We'll work with them to do what we need to do to expedite the program," said PA spokesman Pasquale DiFulco. Earlier yesterday, PA officials said they had asked the Obama administration to expand the federally sponsored test of the bird-detecting radar from Kennedy to La Guardia and Newark. "The request certainly has merit and we will see if the test can be expanded to include the two other airports in New York," said Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Jim Peters. New York's airports will be the first commercial airports in the nation to use the radar systems, designed to detect flying objects as small as birds and calculate potential collision courses with aircraft nearby. Radar now in use is designed only to track other aircraft. "The US is really moving slow on this," Andrews said of installing the bird-detecting radar that can cost from $500,000 up to $2 million for a large airport. He said airports in Germany, Canada and South Africa have already put the system in place. The bird-detecting radar has been used by the Air Force since 2003. NASA installed two DeTect systems after a vulture hit a space shuttle in 2005. Andrews said the radar has completely eliminated bird strikes at a North Carolina Air Force installation since it was installed in 2003. Before that, bird strikes averaged from four to seven each year. "We could have put this technology in place at every major airport for less than the cost of an airline crash like the one last week," he said. tom.topousis @nypost.com
To sign up for Daily Newsletter Alerts, please visit http://www.nypost.com/php/newsletter/classify_newsletter_clicks.php

The urgency to reconnect children to nature.....

2009-01-17T20:49:00.000-08:00

Our youth and children are losing touch with nature...with the rise of the Internet, TV, overexposed media, children have a variety of emotional and health problems affiliated with the lack of exposure to nature.Read this link about why we need to reconnect youth to nature.

http://www.childrenandnature.org/blog/

Conserve EPCAL! Calverton Grasslands threatened

2008-12-23T20:12:00.000-08:00

This battle was a pledged cause of the Brooklyn Bird Club team in last May 's birdathon.The club raised 3800.00 dollars .

http://www.calvertongrasslands.org/

Loon deaths in Long Island

2008-12-12T18:44:00.000-08:00

More on loons, both Common and Red-throated found dead on eastern end of Long Island beaches

see the link

http://www.easthamptonstar.com/dnn/Home/News/DeathofLoons/tabid/7353/Default.aspx