Re: Communications antennae in the parks
Ellen Paul (epaul@dclink.com)
Thu, 04 Mar 1999 08:55:56 -0500
Gail - I have an extensive bibliography on bird kills at communications
towers (in fact, it is also on the FWS server). I'll submit written
comments with that bibliography and also attend the meeting. One of the
best ways to reduce bird kills at communications towers is to require
these companies to co-locate their equipment. There is no reason for
each company to have a separate tower, so co-location will reduce the
number of towers, and therefore, the number of strikes.
However, I agree with you that the organizations that represent
thousands of birders and naturalists should be taking part, if not
taking the lead, on these issues. I realize that they are all
volunteers, but it shouldn't be me calling on them for help. It should
be the other way around. Perhaps they need to expand their conservation
committees and government affairs staffs.
Ellen
mdosprey@ARI.Net wrote:
>
> Balloon tests only show the neighbords how high the tower (tank, etc) will
> be. They did it locally when they built a communications tower in Colesville
> and when a new water tank was constructed in Calverton.
>
> We will go to the hearing and do what we can -- the NPS never contacted
> any of the people who had offered them bird migration data, and since the
> "study" of impacts on migratory birds took place during the period when no
> migratory birds were present, it is a farce.
>
> Gail Mackiernan
> Silver Spring, MD
>
> p.s. I will add that I think it is up to MOS and ANS to help with these
> issues; I know if it were a trout stream that were threatened, TU would be
> right there with help and advice.
--
Ellen Paul
Executive Director
The Ornithological Council
Mailto:epaul@dclink.com
Ornithological Council Website: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/BIRDNET
"Providing Scientific Information about Birds"