Indian Peaks Group Conservation Committee
Draft Minutes
March 2, 2005
THOSE PRESENT: Kirk Cunningham, Deirdre Butler, Billie Gutgsell, and
Justin Reilly
1. WILDLIFE ISSUES - Deirdre Butler and Billie Gutgsell
A. EURASIAN COLLARED DOVES (ECDs), are a non-native species becoming
common in Colorado in urban areas, and appearing more and more in rural
areas where they have somewhat similar habitats to mourning doves, a
native bird. The question before the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW)
is should the agency mount an extermination campaign against ECDs to
protect native birds? Some pros and cons that were mentioned are:
PRO:
* As a matter of policy, just as the Sierra Club advocates the extermination,
or reduction in the populations of weed plants, depending on circumstances,
so should it advocate the same for non-native, and especially invasive
animals. ECDs appear to fit into that category.
CON:
* Since ECDs are found in large numbers in urban areas in Colorado and
can readily in-migrate from neighboring states that do not control them,
an eradication campaign would be practically impossible
* There is very little hard science about how ECDs interact with, compete
with, and displace native birds of any type, especially native doves,
so a biologically-based control strategy is hard to devise at present.
* Eradication and control strategies would be harder to carry out in
urban areas because there are so many other birds. Presumably kill-trapping
would be the preferred method in urban areas.
The CDOW will likely propose that ECDs be assigned a hunting season,
corresponding to that for native doves. Should the Club support that
proposal, or should we state that ECDs fit into the "varmint" category,
i.e. they can be killed in any number throughout the year? Deirdre said
that a big problem with the varmint alternative is that ECDs and mourning
doves are often in the same areas and shooting can result in the extra
loss of mourning doves, for which there is a season and a yearly bag
limit. Tim Snowden, a Chapter wildlife activist, believes that ECDs can
be specifically trapped outside of the shooting season for mourning doves,
and during the common shooting season, the "incidental take" of
mourning doves would not be excessive. This issue remains to be resolved.
B. PRAIRIE DOGS. Prairie dog management has been in the news a lot recently,
especially in the context of a proposal to build an expensive and unnattractive "prairie
dog proof" fence around ball fields in the Wonderland Lake area.
At the same time, it has become clear that prairie dog habitat on both
City and County Open Space are saturated (actually over-saturated), with
associated impacts on native grass species, and urban niche prairie dog
colonies have no natural predators controlling their population, except
sylvatic plague. The Sierra Club has been fairly silent on the larger
issue of prairie dog control and prairie dog impacts to the natural environment,
and we need to start advocating solutions to the problem.
Billie believes that visual barriers other than constructed fences (i.e.
certain types of shrubs and straw bales) can be used more frequently
on open space lands to give prairie dog predators better hiding cover.
This technique has apparently been used with some success on ranches;
it probably would not be useful on urban niche colonies due to a lack
of predators. Deirdre wondered whether falconers and hawkers could be
employed to reduce prairie dog numbers in a more natural way. Kirk inquired
with Clee Sealing, a former Chapter activist on wildlife and a falconer,
about these possibilities. He said that using pet hawks or falconers
to catch prairie dogs would likely injure the birds. He also said that
people elsewhere had used polecat weasels to catch prairie dogs, but
that the CDOW might not favor the use of such an introduced species.
Black-footed ferrets can be reintroduced to prairie dog towns, but they
need to be very large (about 10,000 acres) and free of plague.
Deirdre and Billie promised to look more into these techniques and any
others that may exist other than typical (and probably inhumane) control
methods like aluminum phosphide poisoning.
C. WOLVES. The comment period on Colorado's Draft Wolf Management Plan
ended March 4 (Friday).The Club was pleasantly surprised at the relatively
tolerant tone of the document, but we believe that the state should go
beyond tolerance of wolves that come into Colorado by natural migration,
and go forward with a deliberate reintroduction program, similar to what
it did with lynx. Meanwhile, there is a debate going on between member
groups of the Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance (which includes
the Sierra Club) about the wisdom of deliberate reintroduction. Endangered
species advocate groups within SRCA object to deliberate reintroduction
in part because of the mortality associated with catching and transporting
animals from one place to another.
2. OPEN SPACE VISITOR MANAGEMENT PLAN
THE ISSUE: A few weeks ago, the
City Open Space Dept. staff issued recommendations for visitor management
that we generally supported by our representative
on the stakeholders' group, Justin Reilly, and also represented a
compromise between recreational access and ecosystem protection that
seemed appropriate
to us. More recently, the Open Space Board of Trustees reviewed the
staff's recommendations and voted to recommend some amendments to
the staff's plan. At a meeting of the Board of Trustees, I stated that
I thought the staff's recommendations were adequate and should be
endorsed
because the Department is the sole expert in the City on managing
the whole open space system, consistent with Charter direction (vague
as
it is) and with staff and budget realities. Should the Sierra Club
side with the Board or the staff recommendations, or something in
between? We discussed the OSBOT recommendations and made the following
decisions
about them:
A. RETAIN HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS (HCA)
BOUNDARIES FOUND IN THE APRIL DRAFT VMP.
The proposed boundary changes in the Final Draft Plan shift the eastern
portion of the Eldorado Mountain HCA to the Doudy Draw Natural Area and
incorporate the Tallgrass Prairie West HCA into the Shanahan Natural
Area. OSBOT voted against this change because it would reduce the HCA
acreage and associated protections. The Conservation Committee voted
for the change because city staff had argued that 1) the resources were
not as pristine in these two areas as in other HCAs, and
2)
their downgrading would make management easier in these higher use areas.
B. RETAIN THE DEFINITION OF "CORRIDOR" FOR DOG ON-
CORRIDOR VOICE-AND-SIGHT CONTROL.
This issue refers to two trails in the Habitat Conservation Area along
the ridges north of Green Mountain and north of Bear Peak. On these two
trails, dogs on voice and sight control would be allowed within a 20
foot corridor on either side of the trail. The OSBOT approved this provision
under the condition that the corridor width would be evaluated periodically
and changed through an administrative rule-making process if monitoring
showed that visitors were controlling their pets adequately. We agreed
with the OSBOT on this provision.
C. TIMELY COMPLETION OF STUDIES TO CREATE
ADDITIONAL NO-DOG TRAILS. The OSBOT believes that there is community
support for providing addition no-dog trails on open space lands. The
OSBOT supports the management strategy in the Final Draft Plan to complete
a study (with public input) of which new and existing trails should
provide no-dog opportunities. The Committee supported that decision.
D. CONTINUING PROHIBITION OF COMPETITIVE EVENTS ON
OPEN SPACE. The Final Draft Plan suggested continuing these sorts of
events, but the OSBOT opposed it based on the fact that such events
stretch the definition of "passive recreation", and have
resource impacts from spectators and fiscal impacts on the open space
department budget. The committee agreed with that opinion.
E. AREAS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OSBOT AND THE
STAFF'S PLAN. The Committee agreed with the Board of Trustees on all
of the
following:
* Requiring on-trail travel in Habitat Conservation Areas.
* Development of a commercial use permit program, and a special use permit
program for non-profit groups.
* Statement of the Uncertainty Guiding Principle for open space management.
This is a less strict version than the Precautionary Principle.
* Nighttime closures in Habitat Conservation Areas
* Phase-in of Plan implementation, at a rate determined by available
staffing and budget.
Kirk will work up a position statement on the basis of the above and
subnit it to the Ex-Com for approval and then submission to the City
Council for its April 5th hearing on the Visitor Management Plan.
3. ALERTS ON CURRENT LEGISLATION
See the Colorado Chapter webpage below
for current bill status (http://rockymtn.sierraclub.org/tracker). Note,
that the status of bills can change daily, so if you want to
be sure of that status, go to the website before contacting your
legislator. Also, the website has more info about each bill than is listed
below.
Colorado Sierra Club Legislative Tracker
This session we look forward to working with citizens across the state
to advocate for solutions to the environmental issues facing our
communities: clean water, wetlands protection, addressing sprawl development,
clean air, and environmental justice. In addition, we will monitor important
environmental legislation. Please check back to this page frequently.
We'll provide updates, highlight critical bills and their status, and
let you know what action would make the biggest impact.
Name of the bill and issue covered by the bill, status in the Legislature,
and the Chapter's position, in that order. You can easily find who
your representative is at: www.ProjectVoteSmart.org. Just type in your
ZIP code and look for State House of Representatives.
1. Brownfields Tax Credit, HB1275, 3/3/05 Passed the House, assigned
to Senate Finance, we support. Action needed on HB1275: Please write
to your Senator to ask for support of HB 1275!
2. Rules Affecting Public Health, HB1021, Air 2/4/2005: To House Appropriations,
we support. Action needed on HB1021: Contact your representative and
ask him/her to support HB1021.
3. Energy Efficient Appliances, HB1162, Energy 2/15/2005, Moving to
Senate Business Committee, we support. Action needed on HB1162: Contact
your State Senator and ask him/her to support HB 1070.
4. Surface Owners Rights, HB1219, Oil & Gas 3/3/2005, in House Agriculture
Committee, we support. Action needed on HB1219: Write your representative
to support ASAP!
5. Limiting Recreational Water Rights, SB62 Water 3/3/05 Passed the
Senate, not yet assigned in the House, we. oppose. Action needed on SB62:
Contact your State representative and ask him/her to oppose SB 62!
6. Water Conservation Measures, HB1070, Water 2/15/2005, moving to Senate
Agriculture Committee, we support. Action needed on HB1070: Contact your
State Senator and ask him/her to support HB 1070.
Kirk Cunningham
Back to Top of
Page
|
Rocky
Mountain Chapter 
You
are here
