Dear Attorney General Brown,

I am formally requesting that an investigation be implemented into the current California Department of Fish & Game’s (CDFG) burrowing owl eviction policies.  As you may be aware, the S.F. Bay Area has become enveloped in an owl eviction controversy because of a CDFG approved eviction plan that is currently underway at the Kiper Homes’ Blue Ridge development in Antioch, CA. 

It has come to my attention that CDFG management in Sacramento, California has been suppressing a report by CDFG biologists and owl experts regarding the conservation of burrowing owls.  The burrowing owl conservation guidleines, dated April 14, 2008:

• Outlines the proper protocol for a passive relocation to minimize “Take”
• Indicates that current mitigation measures will no longer be used because it does not adequately compensate for habitat loss
• Takes advantage of temporary opportunities to conserve burrowing owls while longer-term regional programs and conservation plans are developed
• States that concerted conservation actions are needed to maintain viable burrowing owl populations in California and to help prevent the need to list this species under the state or federal endangered species acts
• Provides guidance that supersedes and augments or clarifies the current Department’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation
• And ubiquitously recognizes that because owls are dependent on burrows for survival and reproduction, excluding them from nesting, roosting, and satellite burrows on a project site may actually lead to direct or indirect take and therefore is a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-711), California Admin. Code, Title. 14, § 251.1, Harassment of Animals, California Fish and Game Code Sections 1801-1802 (2008), CEQA, etc.

Even more disturbing is the likelihood that the CDFG is and has continued to conceal the report over the last two years in an effort to afford developers a free reign in removing burrowing owls from breeding, wintering, and critical California habitat. These actions beg the question as to why CDFG management does not like to ask developers to comply with an agency report designed to conserve an ailing burrowing owl population.  I have also come across information indicating that CDFG management is trying to quickly revise the policy without the input of CDFG burrowing owl experts.  This is a contradiction of the agency’s mission:

The Mission of the Department of Fish and Game is to manage California’s diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public.

Additionally, this information comes on the heels of a 2004 revelation in which documents were made public through a California Public Records Act request.  The August 2003 Petition Evaluation for Western Burrowing Owl revealed that the CDFG covered up a department report recommending that the western burrowing owl be considered for endangered or threatened status under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA).  According to the Center for Biological Diversity:

“The improperly withheld report evaluated a formal petition to list the burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea) submitted by conservation organizations in April of 2003. The California Fish and Game Commission voted 4-0 in December 2003 to reject the burrowing owl petition, based in part on a second contradictory CDFG report blatantly biased against listing and widely criticized by conservationists and owl experts as fraught with inaccuracies and inconsistencies. In contrast, the report CDFG refused to release to the Commission and the public recommended that the owl be immediately protected as a “Candidate” species while a year-long status review was conducted by DFG.”

The CDFG has no authority to authorize the “Take” (defined by CDFG code as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill) of burrowing owls or other raptors except pursuant to a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP).  Because existing practices for excluding owls usually employ only portions of the appropriate methods or employ the methods inadequately, there is a higher likelihood that current policies are resulting in direct take or are the proximate cause of take. Thus, the CDFG is actively approving eviction plans that are responsible for decreasing numbers and are in direct violation of California Fish and Game Code.

On the behest of the people of California, I ask you to intervene to protect the State’s natural resources by stopping CDFG’s policy of evicting burrowing owls, a California species of special concern, and hold the CDFG management accountable for suppressing an agency report designed to protect a declining California burrowing owl population.

Sincerely,

Scott W. Artis

[This letter was sent to CA Attorney General Brown and copied to Governor Schwarzenegger, Asst. to AG Brown, and CDFG Director McCamman.  The letter was accompanied by the Kiper Homes Blue Ridge eviction plan approved by the CDFG, the 2003 recommendation to list under the CESA, and the 2008 report for burrowing owl conservation.]

Tags: Antioch Burrowing Owls, Blue Ridge Development, burrowing owl eviction, Burrowing owl mitigation, Kiper Homes

This entry was posted by Scott on Monday, January 25th, 2010 at 1:35 pm and is filed under Commentary, Human Threats, Wildlife, conservation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.