Hey tweets, I echo the remarks of Marc (with great thanks for all his
effort on this!). The hearing was, except for one speaker,
nonconfrontational. There was great goodwill on the committee, among the
Windermere representatives and in the audience to help protect wildlife. I
think the tone of the speakers was key - the speakers expresssed an
earnest desire to help wildlife, coupled with respect for the past
contributions of Windermere (whose agents, I would like to point out, were
very helpful in controlling purple loosestrife at the Fill) and with
acknowledgement that the committee members of the Parks Dept. also had the
best interests of wildlife at heart.

To me, this realization was very heartening - so much better than an
attitude that people's desire for fun must supercede the needs of the
wildlife in our care.

One of the things that most struck me was the committee's desire for
hard-core factual information. The chair had tried very hard to get anyone
from the federal or state dept. of fish and wildlife to come and testify.
She told me privately afterwards that one of the emails she had received
from a Ph.D. candidate in biology had made a huge impression on her.
Seattle Audubon's contribution of a letter with a map showing the most
up-to-date information on the location of two bald eagle nests was also
extremely influential. Michael Hobbes' notation about fireworks driving
kestrels off a nest in Marymore was also helpful, as was Sheila Clooney's
testimony (Sheila was Virginia's counterpart in Kirkland).

The point I took away from this is that reliable information and
authoritative sources are the most important tools we have to preserve
wildlife. Political pressure (especially respectful political pressure)
also has its place - so thanks to all you tweets who emailed city
councilmembers, the Parks committee, and Windermere.

I think the path to the future (at least from my perspective) is clear: We
need to continue to document our birding observations so that when the
need arises, we have something credible to present. We need to continue
all efforts to educate our fellow citizens about the wonders of nature
(Seattle Audubon's bird notes on radio are a great example of this, as our
the volunteer-led tours by SAS and by WOS, and the FUN program SAS runs in
schools). We need to stay alert when things are proposed that may harm
wildlife - Virginia made a plea for suggestions about how to improve
public notification of the events her committee grants permits for, so if
you have any ideas about this, please forward them.

Windermere, by the way, is rethinking its commitment to fireworks in years
to come. I suspect they may either eliminate them or perhaps move them to
Lake Union. Just a guess.

Anyway, kudos to all involved. - Connie, Seattle

csidles at isomedia.com


> Thanks for the report. Very good news, for all concerned it sounds like.
> The UBNA and the Arboretum are safe for all the early nesters and
> migrants, and Windermere still gets to toss their party. Win/win solutions
> like this need to come about more often.
>
> Brett A. Wolfe
> Seattle, WA
> m_lincolnii at yahoo.com
>
> Marc Hoffman <tweeters at dartfrogmedia.com> wrote:
> The Seattle Special Events Committee held its emergency meeting this
> morning from 10 to noon to reconsider the granting of a permit for
> Windermere to discharge fireworks this Friday night. Present were most
> of the committee, representatives from Windermere, and about fifteen
> others, including several Tweeters contributors.
>
> It was apparent from the start that committee chair Virginia Swanson was
> already feeling negligent in not reviewing the environmental impact of the
> fireworks before the initial/conditional permit was approved. Windermere
> was also very up front about their naivite and their readiness to revise
> plans to reduce the impact on area birds, although clearly they hoped the
> show would go on in some form. They offered to move the fireworks barge
> considerably further into the lake, away from the Fill and Arboretum.
>
> The upshot was that Windermere's proposal was modified by the committee,
> then approved unanimously, to move the barge even farther out, to the
> perimeter of that area over which the city has jurisdiction.
>
> Although the committee was unable to present any DFW speakers (all of them
> being out in the field this week), Virginia Swanson gave a synopsis of
> opinions by several DFW and other area scientists, all of it pretty much
> pointing to the deleterious effects of fireworks on nesting and migrating
> birds. It was also emphasized that there is no hardcore scientific data on
> the subject, but the prevailing opinion is to err on the side of
> protecting the bird populations from disruptions this time of year.
> Virginia also tried to give a synopsis of some of the emails she had
> received on the topic, and all emails were printed and distributed to the
> committee members at the start of the meeting.
>
> There was about 45 minutes available for public comment before the
> decision vote was taken. Six people offered brief testimony, including
> Connie Sidles, Susan Marten, Colleen O'Conner, Sheila Clooney, Ben
> Shroeder, Suzanne Kromm, and myself (my apologies for any misspellings --
> please let me know if I botched your name). I thought all the speakers
> came off as poised, well-informed, and convincing. Opinions ranged from
> moving the fireworks farther from nesting birds, to cancelling the display
> altogether and relocating it to Lake Union or elsewhere if it were to be
> revisited in future years. There was much talk about bird behavior
> (nesting and migrating), Federal regulations about not disturbing eagle
> nesting sites, and the need to adhere to SEPA (State Environmental Policy
> Act) regulations in the future so as not to need this sort of emergency
> meeting again.
>
> A high point for me was testimony by Sheila Clooney, Kirkland's Special
> Projects Coordinator and chair of its Special Events Committee. She
> detailed how Kirkland's fireworks at Yarrow Bay last year resulted in a
> knock on the door by the Feds, a very painful and frightening consequence
> of disturbing eagles into leaving the nest. She cautioned that the pain
> the Seattle committee was now facing was nothing compared to what she and
> the City of Kirkland had gone through last year.
>
> Although some may have left the meeting feeling that the outcome was too
> much a compromise, it seems to me -- and others, I know -- that as
> negligent as the initial planning of the fireworks may have been, the
> responsible parties got a strong education and seem sincere in their
> commitment to do things differently from here on out.
>
> Considering it was only a week ago that this proposed event came to light,
> I think this was a real successful and I'm especially grateful to Susan
> Marten for initiating the review process through her prompt outspokenness.
>
> Marc Hoffman
> Kirkland, WA
> http://www.dartfrogmedia.com
> mailto:tweeters at dartfrogmedia.com
> _______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call
> rates._______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters
>