Not the kind you’d expect. shortened version… Out of state developers buy 75 acres to build 46 homes. Turns out there’s an eagles nest on site. Locals are big fans of the pair and have been for years, they named them Jim and Pam. Developer goes to the appropriate federal authorities where they are allowed to self report the status of the nest. They say it’s a secondary nest (if it is primary they can’t remove it) and that there are no eggs. They get permission based on that to remove it. Locals are furious, demand a meeting which apparently the developers agree to, but they took down the nest before the meeting, and apparently in the dead of night. Birds are now allegedly flying around looking for where their nest was, so it doesn’t seem like it was a secondary one. I mean, the whole 75 acres was only 760k, are they that small a business that they would let that amount of money ruin their name and reputation? Good heavens. MSN
No state should ever be at the mercy of Federal intervention when it comes to building and construction. That has to end, and so does forcing section-8 housing where and when the Fed want it. That and where banks can and cannot be built, how many per square mile etc...etc…etc… I doubt the Feds have the "right" to okay out of state building in Matha's vinyard.
46 homes/75 acres does not leave room for an Eagle's nest? Several bears lived in my son's neighborhood in Boulder. Just last night my daughter told me how she was trying to leave her place in Frisco, Co. & a moose was peering in her door so close that it was fogging the glass.
Different species have different levels of adaptability to disturbance. Bears are extremely adaptable to human presence as humans purposefully or inadvertently provide food. Bears are quick to realize this. The largest bears in FL (600 lbs +) all live in/around human communities. There are neighborhood bears in/around Wekiva in C. FL that actually have natal dens under the azaleas in backyards and under decks. . Eagles are far more sensitive to disturbance around their nests particularly during mating and egg laying seasons. They will abandon eggs or young. Remember too, the area is currently forested, without homes and roads, and construction of 46 homes and roads will be new and that significantly increases the likelihood of abandonment versus eagles selecting to nest in an established neighborhood. Human Activity and Disturbances Near Active Bald Eagle Nests).
We have lived within a 1000 feet of an active nest for 10 years and are enjoying our 11th nesting season. It is located some 100 yards east of a fairly active neighborhood street. Since we’v been here five homes have been built near the nest with no apparent adverse consequences. I know construction of our neighbor’s house could not start until the young fledged. Every September, the local mosquito control district operates a helicopter over the brackish water/swamp between our street and the intracoastal waterway to drop pellets/granules. This helicopter flies quite close to the nest repeatedly during the operation and while the eagles “raise Cain” they don’t leave. IMHO, the at issue nest should not have been removed. It seems like the developers did not want to “forfeit” any land to provide a buffer for the eagles. That’s a shame as it’s really cool to watch the eagles improve their nest, mate, and raise their young. Quite often I see them in the tall pines at the back of our lot overlooking the lake on which we live. They are adept at stealing fish from osprey.
So these good ole boys completely miscalculated. I think they assumed development/money always wins in the deep south because the communities need the revenue, don't have a lot of money to fight, and they could just bully their way to what they want. They didn’t account for the fact that a college town has very different priorities, nor that it’s literally the symbol of the town with War Eagle. The city is now trying to see if federal law was violated. My guess is that if that doesn’t work, they will work on some local remedy. Auburn City explores possible legal action over developer’s destruction of Bald Eagles’ nest | WRBL
they would have to have a biological opinion documenting the second nest to get a permit to remove this one. mating pair will return to second nest anyway. the fact that this nest was across the street from the fisheries building would indicate to me that they used it as a perch to fish the multiple fish raising ponds out back for cheap meals. our second nest was on a golf course, which is a killing field for eagles and hawks as squirrels, rabbits, etc try and cross fairways and the ponds provide lots of food options too. I have been involved in this scenario but we didn't destroy in dead of night. if developer is smart, he funds a remote camera at the site of primary nest so people can still watch them we've had people protest us taking out a tree that hasn't had a nest in it since Ian even though the nesting pair rebuilt elsewhere
we built within 1000' of nests and the birds used to come down and sit on the lake grading stakes as the trackhoe dug out the old lkae so he could grab fish that came out into the mud pile. urbanized eagles just aren't that sensitive to human activity. eagles scour trash dumps and jump out of the way of the packing equipment in Alaska. remote eagles may be noise sensitive but I have seen too many eagles with young that were perfectly content to be around loud banging noises provided they got food out of it.
This isn’t a large development, but pretty sick they would do this having full awareness to the presence of the eagles. Not hard to just leave that area as a small preserve. Like..developments now can’t even have a small stand of trees? That being said the huge scale development in places like Babcock Ranch or Lakewood Ranch are on such a scale that there is a mass slaughter of birds and wildlife and nobody bats an eye. The main crime here is that it was a “locally known” nest, it was being contested, it involves a highly “symbolic” bird, and they tried to do pull an “FU environmentalists” doing it in the dead of night.
Not only that, they lied about it. From the second article I linked: “Mayor Pro Tem Beth Witten, who represents Ward 3 where the development is located, shared her devastation in a social media post. She accused Hughston Homes representative Tyler Findley of intentionally misleading her during a phone call on Friday afternoon. “I specifically asked if the eagles’ nest would be untouched until we could hold our Zoom call Monday morning,” Witten wrote. “He ensured me of such. Then I learn today that he was present while the nest was taken down.”
a 330' radius circle contains 7.85 acres of land. that isn't a small stand of trees. if they decide to make it their primary, bump that to 660'. losing 10 homes or so out of 46 isn't a small impact. it is a second nest, the law says that you are allowed to remove them. Can any of your project sustain a 20% reduction in productivity and still be profitable? fyi, bald eagles are not a threatened or endangered species anymore
This is a bipartisan one for the most part. Sometimes you make a bad investment. Or an investment you that leads to a major shift in outcome. There was no need to take this nest down once these Eagles were found. Go build your mansion in the proper spot and enjoy creation while you find your next 75 acres to develop.
They probably stand to make eight ot nine figures though. Might actually be a big business. 46 hones is a pretty good amount for a small builder. Especially if they are higher end/custom homes.
This. WE have done projects with nesting sites on the property and you can't build within about a 1,000 foot radius to the site. And even then, construction activities have to be done when they are not nesting with eggs. If the development is already there, eagles aren't typically bothered by something that is there when they move in, it's the changing built environment that bothers them.
Most houses these days are built on 1/4 acre lots, meaning they could theoretically (very snuggly) squeeze almost 300 houses in that plot. 1/2 acre lots are pretty big for modern developments, and again, snugly, that comes out to 150 homes (yes I know, you need additional space for roads, utilities n such--just keeping the math real simple). The point is simply that 46 homes to a 75 acre plot, suggests they had some flexibility to build around the nest with a little creativity. I don't think it would have been too big a deal to at least hold off until after the meeting. Not a good look. But then, I'm not sure the community really has much by way of Judicial remedy. Maybe the feds can hammer them with punitive fines n such, but that doesn't bring the eagles back, and it doesn’t do much for the community. Jmho/fwiw
Help me out here if you would. You DL'd 'fanz post at 5, but agreed with archer's at 16--which basically agreed with fanz. Got me scratching my head wondering what am I missing about 'fanz's post that garnered the DL.
