Comments concering Durst Project Impact on Boblinks and Barred Owls
March 1, 2008
Summary of Comments by Jane Waters made at the March 12th hearing about Bobolinks and Barred Owls at the Carvel site:
Jane Waters said she is a birder and gave them some additional sightings
beyond those reported in the bird studies in the DEIS of birds she has seen
on the property (kestrel, red shouldered hawk, more red tailed hawks, etc.).
She told them the pictured Great Horned Owl nest is likely originally the
nest of the red tailed hawks both they and she has seen near that nest and
they have likely built another near by.
She said that when birders are talking about ground nesting birds, they are
often referring to bobolinks, meadowlarks and certain rare sparrow species.
The DEIS reports bobolinks on the site and they have said that ground
nesting birds can use the golf course in the mitigation section. She said
that bobolinks, etc. can not use the golf course and quoted Steve Oresman’s
(Board member of the Connecticut Audubon Society and past president of the
Connecticut Ornithological Association) email to her to that effect, giving
Steve’s credentials and gave them a copy of Steve’s article on conservation
and the article on Bobolinks from Connecticut State of the Birds 2008. She
said the field on Woodward Hill Road is the critical area that should be
preserved and while they are not building on part of the field the houses
they do plan there should be moved off the field. Mowing should not be done
until after the third week in July.
Then she went on to the Barred Owls and said that both Barbara Butler
(co-author of The Birds of Dutchess County) and Steve Oresman thought it
would be very unusual to have more than one pair of Barred Owls on the
property, because they are scarce in the region. She said she wasn’t going
to question their observations, but to have 19 (or 18) areas where they were
heard and a possible 10 home ranges (statements from the DEIS) means they
might actually have the epicenter of the Barred Owl population in this part
of the state on the site. If that is true the area should be preserved as a
Barred Owl Preserve. They say themselves that the numbers are probably
secondary to the amount of unfragmented forest on the site and the planned
development will fragment that forest and destroy the habitat. For that
reason she agrees with the comments of Michael Klemens of Scenic Hudson,
Dutchess County Planning and others who have recommended that the
development be scaled back, much more clustered at the golf course area and
with 75% of the contiguous land truly protected.
Comments
Got something to say?
