It takes real talent to get the Audubon Society mad at you but
the good folks at the City of Morgan Hill have done just that. To
make matters worse, the scuffle is over one of nature
’s cuter birds, the western burrowing owl.
It takes real talent to get the Audubon Society mad at you but the good folks at the City of Morgan Hill have done just that. To make matters worse, the scuffle is over one of nature’s cuter birds, the western burrowing owl.
The city might as well have failed to protect kittens.
In any case, the Society considered that the city had been dragging its feet in preparing and adopting a long-term plan to mitigate the effects of development on the owl habitat. It’s not that the city wasn’t working on the plan or that it allowed developers to range free over nesting areas with bulldozers and earth movers, evicting or squashing mothers and babies.
They weren’t moving fast enough.
“The city has done absolutely nothing unless threatened with a lawsuit …” despite several attempts to work cooperatively, said Craig Breon, the nonprofit Audubon society’s executive director. “To me, you have to wonder whether what the city has been hoping is that the (bird) will go extinct locally, and they won’t have to deal with it.”
City Manager Ed Tewes said that was most definitely not the case and that the city was “faithfully following the interim rules.”
Though few actual owls nest in Morgan Hill, the Society estimates that 100 pairs of remain in south Santa Clara County. One of these is on the grounds of El Toro Elementary School.
Part of the conflict stemmed from an alternative mitigating factor the city allowed developers to pay into a fund rather than to set aside extra habitat. According to City Attorney, Helene Leichter, the city hires a biologist to survey land to be developed.
“They tell us how much to mitigate – the biologist makes the call.” She said the developer then enters into an agreement with Fish and Game and is given a choice of setting aside land for potential owl habitat or to contribute to a fund. Leichter said Fish and Game has approved of the fund alternative, while Audubon contends the mitigation must include setting aside additional habitat.
When the lawsuit between the Society and the city was settled two weeks ago, Leichter admitted the delay.
“We did wait too long,” she said. In the settlement, the city agreed to adopt the burrowing owl mitigation plan – on Wednesday’s City Council agenda – and to require mowing instead of disking.
The city spent $10,000 on the lawsuit and settled, Leichter said, because it would have cost $50,000 – $70,000 more to pursue in the courts. They should have completed the report much earlier and saved everybody time, money and embarrassment.
