Escondido Neighbors United

Here is a link to the  Channel 10 News Report: Environmental Group Says Toxic Plume in Escondido has spread tonight. There are questions about whether access was denied to sites for testing or not. Our letter cites the December 12, 2014 consultants report from Hargis and Associates, which states on page 4 that,


the regional well deJong2
property owner did not grant access to
the Group for scheduled groundwater sampling in October 2014, or for water
level measurement of deJong 2 or 34-E4. (HA, Dec. 12, 2014 report, p. 4, emphasis added)  

We have requested action from the state regulatory agencies.  We will post any responses we receive from them here.

A wonderful article about a compelling and unique project in Escondido was included in the Coast News today.
Straw Bale Eco-Homes Article.  It is so great to have local news outlets covering north county news. Please read and support all independent news sources that cover local stories.  It’s important!

Here is another important opportunity to support clean water in our region.  There are two water quality improvement plans that have recently been submitted to the Regional Water Board.

San Dieguito Watershed Water Quality Improvement Plan and

Carlsbad Watershed Water Quality Improvement Plan


Interested persons wishing to submit comments on the following draft documents must submit them so that they are received no later than 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 29, 2015. Written comments should be submitted electronically to


For San Dieguito
SanDiego@waterboards.ca.govAttention: Christina Arias

For Carlsbad
SanDiego@waterboards.ca.govAttention: Laurie Walsh

While the planning commission meeting didn’t go as we’d hoped, UT San Diego Article on Planning Commission OK, we did receive some good news during the staff presentation.  It sounds like the interior clear glass firewalls have been removed.  Who ever made that decision, we thank you!  This will reduce impacts to the very wildlife we are hoping to support in the area.

Stay tuned.  City Council hearing expected for March 4th.

ENU quoted in the article.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

By John Martin, Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, San Diego National Wildlife Refuge 


On a Saturday morning, as I walk into the kitchen to top off my coffee, an
unmistakable thud takes precedence over all the other little sounds in the
house. I move into the living room, quickly running through and instantly
dismissing a series of alternatives: a log settling in the stove, something on
the radio, a distant car door…. No, that thud was a bird hitting the window,
and I can see the ghostly splayed imprint of feather dust on the glass as I
approach. I look over the sill, and on the ground beneath the window, on its
back, wings quivering, is a splendid splash of black, white and red: a
red-breasted sapsucker. I rush out the door, to either help the bird or recover
the specimen, but in the seconds it takes for me to get there, the bird had
regained its equilibrium enough to see a big, rapidly-approaching person, and
fly across the road to disappear into the oaks and chaparral.
A happy ending? Probably not. How can a body as complex and delicate as a
bird’s hit a solid object hard enough to make that sound, and fly away
unscathed? If the woodpecker sustained any injury, he’d now be in the
unforgiving woods, with his ability to keep warm, find food, and avoid
predators compromised. It’s a grim outlook for this woodpecker, a continued
risk for the rest of the birds in my yard, and a risk around the world wherever
birds and glass share the airspace.
In 2014, scientists from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Smithsonian
Institution analyzed 23 recent studies of bird/window collisions, to better
estimate the magnitude of the problem. They estimated that window collisions
kill 365-988 million birds annually in the United States. Of these, 44 percent
occurred at residences, presumably because windows of homes are within the
range of heights of vegetation that essentially defines habitat for most
songbirds in North America. Only 44 percent? That’s still hundreds of millions
of repetitions of the sapsucker collision at my house, every year, across the
nation.
A depressing statistic, especially when I think of the enjoyment I get out of
birds. When I’m out in the yard, or the oaks and chaparral in the neighborhood,
it’s the birds that are the most conspicuous sparks of life, another song or
flash of motion every few seconds, livening up the landscape.
Is anyone studying the mechanics of bird/window collisions, to better
understand not only the size of the problem, but how windows kill birds, and
what we can do to reduce the problem? Surprisingly few biologists have made
bird/window collisions a focus of their research. But Dr. Daniel Klem Jr.,
Professor of Biology at Muhlenberg College, has built his professional career
on this issue, publishing over a dozen papers elucidating the mechanisms of
injury, the factors that affect the likelihood of collision, and what we can do
to reduce collisions and injuries.
Dr. Klem has taken a closer look at exactly what happens to birds that strike windows,
and found a surprising result. Though it’s commonly assumed that birds that die
striking windows die from a broken neck, this isn’t the case. It makes sense:
breaking a bird’s neck is like trying to break a rope by pushing it into a
solid object. Birds have 13-27 neck vertebrae (compared to 7 in mammals such as
ourselves), and the articulations between them are especially flexible.
Dissection of hundreds of birds killed by window strikes reveals that none of
them had broken necks. But essentially all of them suffered ruptured blood
vessels in the cranium, and died of intracranial bleeding and/or associated
damage to the brain. Most birds that have apparently “recovered” after striking
windows also suffered intracranial bleeding. A bird that regains consciousness
and flies off after hitting a window isn’t necessarily in the clear: it may
have recovered enough to seek shelter, and die later of its injuries.

What can we do to reduce bird mortality at our own windows? One approach is to
reduce the likelihood that birds will fly into the window. Birds presumably
strike windows either because the transparent glass creates the illusion that
they can fly straight to the habitat that they see beyond the invisible
barrier, or because they see habitat reflected in the smooth surface of the
glass. In either case, they don’t perceive the glass as a barrier. To allow
birds to recognize the glass as a barrier, people have tried applying opaque
objects or patterns to windows. Isolated objects or patterns (such as falcon or
owl silhouettes) don’t work: the bird sees the object, but not the window. The
birds attempt to fly around the falcon graphic, and in avoiding the object they
smack into the adjacent glass. Experiments by Dr. Klem and other researchers
indicate that to deter birds in an aviary from flying through an empty window
frame, the critical dimension for visual obstructions (objects or patterns on
the glass) is about 2 inches apart horizontally, and 4 inches apart vertically.
Windows marked with patterns of dots, stripes, or other shapes (at least ¼ inch
wide) effectively show birds that the window is a barrier, and greatly reduce
or eliminate window collisions. There are several brands of commercially
available window films that apply a pattern sufficient to deter birds, or you
can design your own with opaque tape (such as American Bird Conservancy’s
BirdTape). It’s important to apply the pattern to the outside of the glass,
rather than the inside, to allow the pattern to disrupt the reflected image of
an unobstructed flight path, as well as the transparent window.
Unfortunately, obscuring the window sufficiently to eliminate bird strikes
contradicts the whole point of having glass windows: we want to see through
them. Yet it may be possible to make a pattern on the window that birds can see
and we can’t! Generally, birds can see a wider spectrum of light than humans,
including ultravio-let wavelengths. Experiments have been conducted to
determine if glass marked with a pattern of materials that absorb or reflect
ultraviolet light (invisible to us) dissuades birds from flying into the glass.
Results of laboratory experiments are promising, but investigators note that
under natural, outdoor light, the ultraviolet-marked glass may not function as
it does in the laboratory. Until bird mortality at glass windows is more
widely-recognized as a problem, glass manufacturers are unlikely to invest in
the research, development, and marketing of bird-friendly glass. But
ornithologists continue to research this potential solution.
A different approach to reducing bird mortality due to window strikes is to
reduce the force with which birds hit windows. Kinetic energy (say, of a flying
bird) = ½ (mass)(velocity)2. Can’t do much about the mass, but we can help
reduce the velocity at which birds are moving when they hit the window,
reducing their kinetic energy and thus the damage that occurs inside their
skull when it abruptly stops at the glass. If you have a bird feeder, place it
within 3 feet of a window. Birds leaving the feeder will not have built up
sufficient speed to hit the glass hard, so are less likely to get hurt striking
the window. Researchers have also investigated reducing bird mortality by
installing windows at an angle (20-40˚ from vertical), such that birds are
deflected when they hit the window. Under laboratory conditions, birds are
indeed less likely to die when flying into an angled window, but in nature,
where birds can approach the glass from a variety of angles, it’s clear that
fatal collisions still result from birds striking angled windows. Installation of
bird netting (such as that used to protect fruit trees from birds) over the
entire window several inches out from the surface, has the potential to reduce
the force of impact of a bird striking the window. Netting may also reduce the
likelihood of a bird striking the window in the first place, because the birds
may see it.
If you’re looking for more detailed information on reducing bird mortality on
glass in your home, a good place to start is the American Bird Conservancy’s
web page devoted to the issue:www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/collisions/glass.html.
At my house, I believe a pattern of tape on my living room window is in order.
Sapsuckers are back for the winter, and I don’t want to hear that unmistakable
thump again.

Escondido Neighbors United (ENU) filed a comment letter today opposing the Oak Creek gated housing development on farmland next to Felicita Park.  You can see our letter here Jan 15 2015 ENU to Planning Commission.  ENU has also offer a compromise Community Alternative that we are asking the Planning Commission to investigate and support.  Here is the map COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVE to Oak Creek

REMINDER Oak Creek Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, Jan. 27th at 7pm.

As currently planned, Oak Creek is Bad for Oaks, Bad for the Creek, and Bad for the Community!!!

Please attend and share your comments and help protect our community!

We have learned that the Oak Creek project now includes long 5-foot high glass walls next to the sensitive habitat on the site.  This is untenable!  These wall will cause the death of many birds that will collide with the glass walls.  Collisions with windows and glass surfaces cause the death of millions of birds each year.  We have to stand up for wildlife!  Please consider supporting our GoFundMe campaign.  Any amount will help a lot.
Local wildlife brings so much beauty to our lives, it needs our support!  Please check it out!

    

SAVEWILDLIFE Go Fund Me

Escondido Neighbors United (ENU) learned of NUWI’s request to change the Oak Creek plan to  NUWI New Proposal Alt 4 last month. While the new plan removes homes from near the freeway, it merely concentrates those homes into the farmland/open space worsening the impacts we are so concerns about.  We met and discussed this proposal and developed a request for revisions and have communicated it to the city.  ENU Request for Revisions to Oak Creek Plan 
Our ENU Reduced Density Alternative A  is our attempt to find a solution that will address some, but not all, of our concerns.    ENU Plan A significantly reduces loss of Oak Trees, impacts to wildlife habitat, impacts to water quality and quantity of runoff, impacts to community character, and traffic. We appreciate city staff’s willingness to meet with us.  We believe our proposed revisions could form a compromise that would address many community concerns and allow the developers to do a project.

We hope everyone has a Gratitude filled weekend.

Released today READER San Diego Most Polluted Sites and Chatham has the dubious honor of being first on a list of terrible pollution issues. A must read.  Please stay engaged on all of these issues.  They all need an engaged and diligent public voice in the debate if we are ever to secure a change in the status quo.