Loading...
09/17/2008 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER September 17, 2008 Present: Anna Fusari Chair Ron Gregory Vice-Chair Michael Flanery Board Member Absent: Joseph Calio Board Member Richard Packman Board Member Also Present: Ed Chesney Environmental Manager Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Brenda Moses Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:03 p.m. at the Municipal Services Building. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. 1. Minutes of June 18, 2008 and August 20, 2008 Member Gregory moved to approve the minutes of the regular Environmental Advisory Board meetings of June 18, 2008 and August 20, 2008, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. Citizens’ Comments – None. 3. Action Items: 3.1 Council’s Request for Recommendation on Protection of Nesting Shorebirds 4. Discussion Items 4.1 Nancy Douglass, Regional Biologist, Southwest Region, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Nancy Douglass, Regional Biologist, Southwest Region, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, said Board Member Calio invited her to give a presentation to the board regarding protecting beach nesting birds and the impact that dogs have on them. She said her organization networks with individuals and organizations such as Eckerd College, Tampa, Clearwater, and St. Petersburg Audubon societies, etc. to address shore bird protection issues. Ms. Douglass reviewed the types of shore nesting birds that are agitated or take flight if an intruder gets too close. She said the shore bird nesting season is from February through August. Many species of Florida’s water birds, including Snowy Plovers, Oystercatchers, Gulls, Terns, and Skimmers nest on the beach, digging shallow scrapes in wide, open areas. Predators such as herons, raccoons, and crows, and watercraft, including Police watercraft, too close to shore also disturb shore nesting birds. In addition to the beach, mangroves, mud flats, and shallow water provide resting and nesting areas for the birds. She said once the nests are found, volunteers from various organizations identify them and post signs warning people to avoid the area. She said when a nest is in danger, the mother will squawk or perform some Environmental Advisory 2008-09-17 1 type of activity to warn the intruder to leave the area. She said colonial beach nesters are seabirds that nest in colonies, are larger, more visible birds and are easier to find. Solitary nesters do not cluster together, are extremely camouflaged, and will get off their nests to avoid drawing attention to their babies, making nests particularly vulnerable. She said colonial nesters such as Laughing Gulls, Black Skimmers, and Least Terns have been found on Clearwater beach. Solitary nesters include two types of plovers, the American Oystercatcher, and the Willet. She said the Least Tern is a state-threatened nesting species. Their numbers have declined significantly over time. She estimates approximately 10,000 Least Terns are in Florida. She said unfortunately, 8,000 Least Terns nest on gravel rooftops, which are being replaced with other roofing materials. She said it will be a challenge to try to find alternative habitat for rooftop nesters in the next few years. Ms. Douglass said the Snowy Plover is in the top three state-threatened bird species, with only 200 pairs in the State. The Snowy Plover is less tolerant of people than are some other shore nesters. The bulk of the population of Snowy Plovers is in the Florida panhandle as there is less development in that area. Only 45 pairs of Snowy Plovers have been located on the southwest coast of Florida. There are only 400 pairs of American Oystercatchers in the State. Oystercatchers seek bare strand substraight for their nests, and only nest once a year. Black Skimmers and Oystercatchers nest in Florida year- round. She said most birds are monogamists, which also affects the population if nests are disturbed. Shore nesting birds’ eggs are being destroyed at an alarming rate. Nests are abandoned due to humans, dogs, and other animal intrusion. She said the very presence of dogs causes shore nesters to abandon their nests. She said dogs and humans trample eggs, as they are very tiny in size and are the same color as the sand on the beach. The birds are less likely to return to their nests when a four-legged predator threatens their nesting area. Once birds leave their nests, the hot sun also kills the eggs in the unattended nests. Ms. Douglass requested information regarding how Clearwater protects its shore nesting birds. Discussion ensued. A remark was made that in response to a request from a member of the Audubon Society, City Council has requested the board discuss and make recommendations regarding banning dogs on beaches from public land on Somerset Avenue north to the Caladesi State Park border and how to help protect nesting shorebirds. A comment was made that there are State-enacted bird protection laws. Discussion ensued regarding how to protect private property owners’ rights while protecting the shore nesting birds. It was remarked that a series of ordinances could protect the birds. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said the dog leash law could be expanded to include the affected birding areas. It was remarked that as the City has the ability to restrict goats, cows, etc. on private property through ordinances, it also could restrict dogs. Ms. Dougall-Sides said ordinances allow the Police to enforce the law and ticket violators. It was remarked that the Migratory Bird Act provides protection for these birds on public and private property. Ms. Douglass said her agency and all State-sworn officers have the authority to protect the birds, however her agency is not adequately staffed to enforce wildlife laws and to physically protect each and every nest or location where the birds nest. Her agency relies heavily on volunteers to help protect the birds and still needs help from private property owners. She said although natural occurrences are difficult to control, people can be sensitive to the adverse conditions birds are exposed to and be good citizen stewards of the habitat they occupy. One single agency cannot police all the areas where shore nesting birds nest. She said wildlife belongs to everyone and everyone has the responsibility to protect it. It was remarked there are areas of the beach that already have signage that prohibits dogs, alcohol, etc. Ms. Douglass said an ordinance regarding prohibition of dogs in designated shore bird nesting areas would have more teeth to facilitate enforcement. She said although Environmental Advisory 2008-09-17 2 most people adhere to the signage, some people do not, which is why laws and ordinances are written. It was suggested that as enforcement is difficult, that the City utilize its resources to educate the public regarding shore nesting birds and the importance of protecting their dwindling numbers. It was suggested useful educational tools include the City’s environmental web page, C-View, fliers in utility bills, and signage reflecting preservation areas where shore nesters are known to nest. Ms. Douglass said shore birds already face many natural challenges on a daily basis, however citizens have the ability to control the additives they have created with good stewardship. She said shore birds need a disturbance-free zone to ensure their chances of survival. She said some colonial birds can nest on spoil islands, however others have only been seen on barrier islands. It was suggested that the City advertise proudly that Clearwater is the home for these endangered birds. It was felt that larger signs with more information explaining why dogs adversely affect the birds’ nesting habits, and the limited number of pairs of birds that exist in this area should be posted in shorebird nesting areas. It was suggested the City implement a policy to remove wild animals, feral cats, etc. in bird nesting areas. It was felt that if more people were educated about the impact of dogs in sensitive bird nesting areas, they would be respectful of the species. Ms. Douglass said that whatever one city does can affect another’s efforts regarding removal of feral cats, etc., as in some cities people feed them and contribute to the problem. She said dog leash laws do not work. She said people that do not live in coastal areas bring their dogs to the beach to roam. She said establishing dog zones would help protect citizens and wildlife. She said regardless of signage prohibiting dogs on the beach, dog owners continue to allow their dogs to roam the beaches. She said the City has enacted many ordinances that apply to or affect private property rights such as the prohibition of fences in various locations, such as at mean high water, etc. She said there also are many gray areas regarding riparian rights. She felt the law is the best way to address the issue of protecting nesting shore birds. She said the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has always been conservative with respect to property owners’ rights and shore bird nesting areas. It was felt that being more specific with signage such as “Protect our Seabirds, No Dogs Allowed on Beach”, and other educational signage would help the survival of nesting birds. Ms. Douglass said it is crucial that bird nesting areas remain undisturbed and predator free. In response to a question, she said fireworks and crowds of people also are a deadly combination for shore birds. She said colony desertion is common following major holidays. She said even in areas where the beach has increased through natural accretion or beach renourishment, populations of shore birds have not increased, as they require undisturbed areas. She said other communities are interested in working to protect shorebirds. Beth Forys from Eckerd College is looking at determining if educational outreach can make a tangible difference in shorebird protection. She has met with and worked with local beach municipalities regarding this issue and has been very well received. Some municipalities have been proactive in their efforts to ensure that nesting birds have designated areas. She said the practice has worked well for colonial birds, but not for solitary nesters. In response to a question, Environmental Manager Ed Chesney said he has not received any complaints regarding intrusion by Audubon Society members on private properties. Ms. Dougall-Sides said City Council has indicated they also would like to get the Clearwater Beach Association’s input regarding shore bird protection. Their next monthly meeting is scheduled the first week in October. Ms. Douglass said educating people door to door regarding shore birds is a necessity. She said the St. Petersburg Audubon Society’s work has been phenomenal. She said they Environmental Advisory 2008-09-17 3 knock on doors, leave door hangars, and take a proactive approach to education regarding nesting shorebirds. It was remarked that Clearwater Marine Aquarium volunteers actively mark turtle nests to prevent destruction of the species during turtle nesting season, however some people still violate turtle protection laws by turning on lights, etc. Concern was expressed that the City has no ordinance regarding prohibition of beach raking that can destroy wildlife. Ms. Douglass said the State is responsible for issuing permits to rake the beach. She said she recently learned of a beach hotel owner who indicated he did not want to rake the beach in front of his hotel, however hoteliers on either side of him rake the beach in front of their hotels. She said the goal is to change people’s perception of what a beach is and educate people to understand that it provides habitat for wildlife. It was remarked that Police squads on beaches destroy nesting areas. It was felt that enhanced public education regarding the shorebird protection is needed, as it is an ongoing issue. Ms. Douglass said Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s web site has best practice management information regarding operating vehicles on the beach and how to avoid nesting areas that would benefit law enforcement entities, lifeguards, etc. Discussion ensued with comments that a corridor or preservation area to define shore bird nesting areas could be helpful. However, bright orange mesh or other materials that would be even more intrusive to waterfront property owners and shorebirds should be not be considered. It was remarked that the cooperation of private property owners is needed, as most waterfront property owners already have an understanding of ecology. Ms. Douglass said regardless of a property owner’s sense of ecology, unless an area is posted, damage to shorebird nests occurs. It was suggested that educating citizens that eggs are the size of a quarter and cannot be seen in the sand, not banning people from allowing their own animals on the beach, designating specific dog zones, and seeking the cooperation and “buy-in” of homeowners may be more palatable than imposing a ban. It was felt that if people know there is a protected species in their back yard that is being breached, they are more likely to want to get involved in shorebird protection and report violations. It was remarked that if a posted bird nesting area is breached, an ordinance would provide enforcement ability. Ms. Douglass said she could assist the City by identifying shorebird nesting habitat on an annual basis in advance of their nesting seasons. She said she is willing to do whatever she can to help Clearwater address this issue, working in partnership with Audubon chapters and other partners in the area. She said migratory corridors also could be included in protection zones. It was felt that official representation from a regulatory agency would lend credibility to the protection process. Mr. Chesney said staff has a good relationship with professional wildlife biologists that are very interested in the shore bird nesting areas in Clearwater and may be able to provide some assistance. It was requested that Ms. Douglass mark on a map defined shorebird nesting areas and areas where dog zones would be acceptable. The board suggested: 1) A shorebird protection area be established and advertised on the City’s environmental web page and on C-View TV as a highlight or focus of the City; 2) Permanent informational signs be posted from February through August in designated areas, as identified by Ms. Douglass, that are large enough to include an explanation regarding why dogs and other feral animals should not be on the beach. The signs should also highlight the rarity of the birds, and the number of colonies that exist; 3) Solar powered web cams hosted by beachfront property owners if possible be placed in designated areas of the beach to enhance public education of shore nesting birds; 4) The City partner with the State, County, or other entities regarding a feral animal removal program; 5) Beach raking and motorized vehicles be Environmental Advisory 2008-09-17 4 prohibited in designated areas; and 6) Professional wildlife biologists working with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission will be asked to delineate and mark the shore bird nesting protection zone with the cooperation of private property owners. It was remarked that there are grants that might be available for purchase of the solar powered web cams. In response to a question, Ms. Douglass said she would be happy to attend a board meeting that includes various neighborhood associations, private property owners, etc., if the board organizes the event. She said she has a three-minute public service announcement that C- View may be able to use to educate the public regarding shore bird nesting and protection. It was felt that an invitation should be extended to north Clearwater Beach residents and/or the Clearwater Beach Civic Association members regarding shore bird protection. It was remarked that as this is the first meeting the board has had regarding Council's request, that a synopsis of the board's consensus regarding shore bird protection and dogs on the beach could be provided to Council and refined thereafter. Ms. Douglass thanked the board and stated shorebird protection has to be a collaborative effort to achieve measurable results. Member Flanery moved that the Chair prepare a document summarizing the board's discussions today as a draft document to be given to Mr. Chesney who will ensure the information is distributed to the appropriate entities to start the process moving and formalize the document. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. Information Items 5.1 Establish Agenda The agenda for the next meeting will include discussion regarding sustainability management, and the City's and DDB's (Downtown Development Board) potential involvement in the May 2009 Pinellas Living Green Expo regarding a bay to beach run, electric cars, etc. 6. Date of Next Meetinq The next meeting is scheduled for 4:00 p.m. on October 15, 2008. 7. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Attest: ~Ilth 'JtlJlDo oard Reporter Environmental Advisory 2008-09-17 5