I've learned a bit in the last two months about politicians. City Councilors are elected to represent the taxpayers. I’ve learned that when elected, they magically become experts in whatever comes their way. Their egos swell as they become all knowing, comfortable, and confident in their every decision. We expect them to responsibly weigh the issues, and seek additional information or advice if an issue is complicated. And if they have little to no knowledge of the subject, they should defer to someone who does.
But when you become so self important that you disregard citizen input without investigating it, you become ineffective to the people who asked you to represent them.
When you give greater credence to sales pitches from developers over legitimate citizen input, you are no longer representing those who elected you.
I oppose the proposed cell tower that was granted a land use variance on East Superior Street. Prior to the vote, I sent a detailed email warning the City Council that Fish and Wildlife expects us to consider migrating birds when siting towers. This site is the probably the greatest migration path in the western Great Lakes.
Did our councilors read the email carefully? Did they contact fish and wildlife for clarification? Did they bring up migration during the meeting? Did they question the AT&T representative about whether they were following the guidelines? Unfortunately, no.
Last week, our City received a letter of warning from US Fish and Wildlife. In a nutshell FWS does not want to see a tower there. If it goes there and birds die, they will enforce the law and levy fines.
Who actually, did our Council listen to? An AT&T salesman who told them that AT&T’s objective for this site is to improve poor coverage. Did any of the Council happen to check the coverage map for this area? I did, guess what it says. GOOD COVERAGE for the entire 2.5 mile area that this tower will cover. Who is AT&T lying to, the customer or the city?
Most of the Council was convinced by the salesman that 911 calls could originate at Brighton Beach and go all the way to Bayfield. Supposedly this would cause a delay because they’d have to be rerouted. I told this to a communications engineer, he laughed. Fish and Wildlife also laughed, and wondered why they didn’t bring up Homeland Security, as this is one of the currently fashionable reasons cell companies use to justify towers. Letters of proof presented from emergency service agencies in Wisconsin are form letters that do not address this specific area. One letter says: “when calls for assistance are received from Minnesota valuable time is lost confirming the callers location and transferring the calls to St. Louis County or other appropriate dispatch center.” The letter says “Minnesota” is this proof that calls regularly originate from the proposed area? Minnesota is a big state. The second letter says “Bayfield County communications center routinely receives wireless emergency calls from the north shore of Minnesota. Our dispatchers expressed the need for Lake County to be on “speed dial” due to the frequency with which they need to relay emergency information” Lake County? This tower will service a site in St. Louis County. Is the problem with Lake County or St Louis County? If you read both letters you can clearly see that they are form letters. Both letters contain exact text in the exact same areas in the body of the letter: “… County also receives wireless 911 calls from neighboring counties in Wisconsin.” And “…is committed to work with cellular providers to increase service to our citizens. Please let me know how I may be of further assistance.” I wonder how many other Cities got these letters as justification for a tower. Did our Council even read the letters? Did they delve into this emergency call issue further? Did they ask for proof or data to back up the claim?
Nope… they swallowed it whole and voted yes.
Perhaps the Politicians should have swallowed their pride and listened to citizens who provided plenty of proof of their claims. Claims that were verified in the warning letter from the Federal Government. Nope, they were duped again by a party who stands to gain quite a bit of income, and the taxpayers will be left holding the bag.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The Email I Might Yet Send
I haven't sent this...yet. I wrote this draft to City Councilor Jeff Anderson:
Councilor Anderson,
Since you have now replied to my email twice, I feel compelled to bring up a few points.
Your second reply:
Thank you for your e-mail. I am always open to reconsideration if I think my decision - or our decision as a council was flawed. In this instance, I do not believe it was.
Respectfully,
Jeff
Jeff Anderson
Duluth City Councilor
Councilor Anderson,
I have made it clear that live just down the road from where this tower will be built. Therefore I felt that elected representatives should take time to consider my objections, and perhaps look into them. I received an interesting phone call from a neighbor right next to where this tower will go. He was mad that he was not informed. When I went back to the planning commission notes where they talk about who was informed, I found that NO ONE except the developer at White Pines (the new development across the freeway and uphill 600 feet from the site) was informed. The justification was that there are no homes within 350 feet of this site (it's rural...duh) so they felt that they didn't need to contact any adjoining landowners EXCEPT the White Pines Development (600 feet away!) as they bought their lots (for their very expensive homes with a view) before this tower was planned. Well, what about the folks next door who bought their homes years before this tower was planned????? Weird huh? Seems like in this town if you're rich and plan to build a fancy home with a view you might get a voice at the table. I think that might explain why no one in the neighborhood objected!
After receiving the warning letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, do you still think your decision was not flawed?
I sent all Councilors an email, prior to the vote, asking that you read the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Siting Towers. It was sent to the Council on 11/3/09 and you replied to me on 11/11/09 after the vote. Just reading your response to that email leads me to believe that you probably didn’t read the entire email or take my objection seriously. It seems to me that the Councilors who voted yes never heard the alarm bell I was ringing! I’d say it was a flawed decision because the Council chose to disregard, ignore, or not pay attention to a valid issue that was raised by someone in the neighborhood. Why didn't any of the Council bring up my concern in the meeting? Why were there NO questions to the Representative from AT&T regarding the (now verified) FACT that this is a major migration path? Why didn’t any of the Council question AT&T about the USFWS Guidelines? Why wasn’t this item tabled until we could verify that it would not be sited in a migration path? It went onto the agenda late on a Friday after being pulled several weeks prior. Jeff Cox stated “Obviously by filing something on Friday, it increases the chances that the council will have questions and may table the resolution at the council meeting.” But no, this item sailed through. I find that a big flaw, that Councilors are given information that should be taken seriously, blow it off, and continue to ignore what may become a major embarrassment and quite possibly a legal issue with Fish and Wildlife.
Not flawed? The AT&T Representative provided this statement: “The objective of this site is to improve coverage at the junction of Hwy 61 and the scenic bypass.” Go to AT&T’s website and type in 78th avenue east and Superior street. You will see that AT&T advertises good coverage in this area. Who is not being told the truth? Are they lying to the City or their customer?
Not flawed? Do you really believe that they gave compelling evidence that emergency calls are going over to Wisconsin? Read the information they gave a second time. You’ll see the flaws. I am not an expert on cell communications, but it is my understanding that a signal goes to the nearest tower. There are three towers, Moose Mountain, 47th avenue east, and Knife River; that are quite a bit closer. The letters provided by the AT&T Representative as testimony are obviously form letters, and if anyone on the Council would PLEASE go back and read them carefully, you will see that they do not address this specific problem. They speak generally about calls from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Lake County. They DO NOT address calls from this area! I’m wondering how many other City Councils will get the exact same letters as justification for more towers in other areas.
Not flawed? The planning commission could not agree to approve this tower, they actually HAD a discussion about Migration. But, the answers to their questions came from the AT&T Representative, who, according to the minutes, named the wrong regulatory agency (DNR), and practically quoted one of the USFSWS guidelines dealing with tower lights and guy wires, which tells me he had knowledge of them. But conveniently, he never addressed the guideline that states: TOWERS SHOULD NOT BE PLACED IN KNOWN MIGRATORY FLYWAYS.
Not flawed? The Environmental Advisory Committee never reviewed this proposal because it was taken off the agenda and then put back on before they had another meeting. But the majority of the Council voted to approve it, seemingly basing their decision on information provided by the AT&T Representative, who stands to make quite a bit of money in the end. I know what AT&T’s motivation is for ignoring USFWS Guidelines. I cannot fathom why the Council and the City continues to ignore this issue.
Not flawed? There was not a lot of convincing or compelling evidence given as to the need for this tower. There were people trotted in to give “technical” information that most councilors could not be expected to understand. A decision is flawed when it is based on information that you cannot understand and debate with knowledge.
Not flawed? If the council had expertise in Communication tower siting they would’ve known that it is always prudent to bring in a 3rd party, at the cell company expense, to evaluate need. And they would’ve been aware of the Federal Government’s Guidelines. I’m sorry, but a decision based on inaccurate, possibly misleading, and incomplete information is flawed.
As long as there is no building permit (and I have verified that there is not) we should do everything to stop this from becoming an embarrassment and a legal problem for the City. I know I am, is anyone at the City willing to?
Councilor Anderson,
Since you have now replied to my email twice, I feel compelled to bring up a few points.
Your second reply:
Thank you for your e-mail. I am always open to reconsideration if I think my decision - or our decision as a council was flawed. In this instance, I do not believe it was.
Respectfully,
Jeff
Jeff Anderson
Duluth City Councilor
Councilor Anderson,
I have made it clear that live just down the road from where this tower will be built. Therefore I felt that elected representatives should take time to consider my objections, and perhaps look into them. I received an interesting phone call from a neighbor right next to where this tower will go. He was mad that he was not informed. When I went back to the planning commission notes where they talk about who was informed, I found that NO ONE except the developer at White Pines (the new development across the freeway and uphill 600 feet from the site) was informed. The justification was that there are no homes within 350 feet of this site (it's rural...duh) so they felt that they didn't need to contact any adjoining landowners EXCEPT the White Pines Development (600 feet away!) as they bought their lots (for their very expensive homes with a view) before this tower was planned. Well, what about the folks next door who bought their homes years before this tower was planned????? Weird huh? Seems like in this town if you're rich and plan to build a fancy home with a view you might get a voice at the table. I think that might explain why no one in the neighborhood objected!
After receiving the warning letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, do you still think your decision was not flawed?
I sent all Councilors an email, prior to the vote, asking that you read the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Siting Towers. It was sent to the Council on 11/3/09 and you replied to me on 11/11/09 after the vote. Just reading your response to that email leads me to believe that you probably didn’t read the entire email or take my objection seriously. It seems to me that the Councilors who voted yes never heard the alarm bell I was ringing! I’d say it was a flawed decision because the Council chose to disregard, ignore, or not pay attention to a valid issue that was raised by someone in the neighborhood. Why didn't any of the Council bring up my concern in the meeting? Why were there NO questions to the Representative from AT&T regarding the (now verified) FACT that this is a major migration path? Why didn’t any of the Council question AT&T about the USFWS Guidelines? Why wasn’t this item tabled until we could verify that it would not be sited in a migration path? It went onto the agenda late on a Friday after being pulled several weeks prior. Jeff Cox stated “Obviously by filing something on Friday, it increases the chances that the council will have questions and may table the resolution at the council meeting.” But no, this item sailed through. I find that a big flaw, that Councilors are given information that should be taken seriously, blow it off, and continue to ignore what may become a major embarrassment and quite possibly a legal issue with Fish and Wildlife.
Not flawed? The AT&T Representative provided this statement: “The objective of this site is to improve coverage at the junction of Hwy 61 and the scenic bypass.” Go to AT&T’s website and type in 78th avenue east and Superior street. You will see that AT&T advertises good coverage in this area. Who is not being told the truth? Are they lying to the City or their customer?
Not flawed? Do you really believe that they gave compelling evidence that emergency calls are going over to Wisconsin? Read the information they gave a second time. You’ll see the flaws. I am not an expert on cell communications, but it is my understanding that a signal goes to the nearest tower. There are three towers, Moose Mountain, 47th avenue east, and Knife River; that are quite a bit closer. The letters provided by the AT&T Representative as testimony are obviously form letters, and if anyone on the Council would PLEASE go back and read them carefully, you will see that they do not address this specific problem. They speak generally about calls from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Lake County. They DO NOT address calls from this area! I’m wondering how many other City Councils will get the exact same letters as justification for more towers in other areas.
Not flawed? The planning commission could not agree to approve this tower, they actually HAD a discussion about Migration. But, the answers to their questions came from the AT&T Representative, who, according to the minutes, named the wrong regulatory agency (DNR), and practically quoted one of the USFSWS guidelines dealing with tower lights and guy wires, which tells me he had knowledge of them. But conveniently, he never addressed the guideline that states: TOWERS SHOULD NOT BE PLACED IN KNOWN MIGRATORY FLYWAYS.
Not flawed? The Environmental Advisory Committee never reviewed this proposal because it was taken off the agenda and then put back on before they had another meeting. But the majority of the Council voted to approve it, seemingly basing their decision on information provided by the AT&T Representative, who stands to make quite a bit of money in the end. I know what AT&T’s motivation is for ignoring USFWS Guidelines. I cannot fathom why the Council and the City continues to ignore this issue.
Not flawed? There was not a lot of convincing or compelling evidence given as to the need for this tower. There were people trotted in to give “technical” information that most councilors could not be expected to understand. A decision is flawed when it is based on information that you cannot understand and debate with knowledge.
Not flawed? If the council had expertise in Communication tower siting they would’ve known that it is always prudent to bring in a 3rd party, at the cell company expense, to evaluate need. And they would’ve been aware of the Federal Government’s Guidelines. I’m sorry, but a decision based on inaccurate, possibly misleading, and incomplete information is flawed.
As long as there is no building permit (and I have verified that there is not) we should do everything to stop this from becoming an embarrassment and a legal problem for the City. I know I am, is anyone at the City willing to?
Something Stinks in the Planning Department Notification Process
I've gotten a couple interesting phone calls due to the story. One from a neighbor very close to where this tower will go. He was mad that he was not informed. When I went back and read the planning commission notes where they talk about who was informed, I found that NO ONE except the developer from White Pines, Eastridge Development (26 high end building sites across the freeway 600 feet from the tower site) was informed. The justification was that there are no homes within 350 feet of this site, (it's rural...duh) so they felt that they didn't need to contact any adjoining landowners EXCEPT the White Pines Development (600 feet away!) Planning felt that they would be affected as they bought their lots before this tower was planned. Well...what about the folks next door who bought their homes years before this tower was planned? Seems like in this town if you're rich and plan to build a fancy home with a lake view you might get a voice at the table. I'm not sure where to go with this, but it really tics me off. I live in this neighborhood too, and there's probably less than 20 homes between me and this tower. But does the City Council listen? Maybe they should, now that I have the Feds after them!
I also got a call from a man in Colorado who's Aunt sent him the story. He does activism for the birds also. It was nice to have someone call and say he's supporting the effort. Keeps me going!
I also got a call from a man in Colorado who's Aunt sent him the story. He does activism for the birds also. It was nice to have someone call and say he's supporting the effort. Keeps me going!
Front Page News!
Yesterday the tower battle hit the front page of the Duluth News Tribune!
Published December 28 2009
Wildlife officials say planned cell phone tower is danger to birds
By: Peter Passi, Duluth News Tribune
Citing concern for migrating birds, representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have weighed in against a recent decision by the Duluth City Council to allow for the construction of a new cell phone tower on the lower side of Highway 61 off 78th Avenue East. But animal advocates may be too late to the dance.
Published December 28 2009
Wildlife officials say planned cell phone tower is danger to birds
By: Peter Passi, Duluth News Tribune
Citing concern for migrating birds, representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have weighed in against a recent decision by the Duluth City Council to allow for the construction of a new cell phone tower on the lower side of Highway 61 off 78th Avenue East. But animal advocates may be too late to the dance.
A letter sent last week said the service “is concerned that the construction ... represents a hazard to migratory birds in the well-documented coastal flyway along the Lake Superior shoreline.”
Fish and Wildlife normally wouldn’t get involved in a tower under 200 feet tall, said Bob Russell, a biologist working for the service’s migratory bird program.
“But there can be issues even with shorter structures where there are large concentrations of birds, especially in bad weather,” he said.
AT&T plans to erect a 180-foot tower about 150 feet east of the Minnesota Highway 61 expressway and about 1,800 feet inland from Congdon Boulevard.
Russell pointed out that more than 25,000 birds per day have been sighted flying over the nearby Lakewood pumping station during the fall migration and noted that count doesn’t include millions of birds that fly through the area at night. Most of the birds that migrate by dark fly at heights of 500 to 3,000 feet, making a collision with the tower unlikely, but Russell said strong headwinds and poor weather can cause the birds to fly at lower altitudes that could put them on a collision course with the proposed tower.
Raptors and other birds that migrate by day should be able to avoid the tower, as long as they can see it; but Russell said foggy and low-light conditions could put these birds at risk, too.
He referred to the western shoreline of Lake Superior as probably the largest migratory flyway for birds in all the upper Midwest.
“Normally, people don’t put these towers in such egregious places,” Russell said.
Nick Rowse, another biologist for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency would prefer to see the tower sited more than a mile away from Lake Superior to avoid the shore and a neighboring ridge that’s also a common migratory route for many hawks.
“We would recommend the tower not be constructed as proposed,” Rowse said, but he acknowledged the Fish and Wildlife Service lacks jurisdiction to block the project.
Even if Duluth city councilors wanted to revisit the issue of the proposed cell tower’s siting, they may have little ability to change course at this time.
The City Council approved a conditional use permit for the cell tower on Nov. 9, and City Attorney Gunnar Johnson said a motion to reconsider the matter would have had to come forward at the council’s next meeting, Nov. 19. The council has since met three more times, likely closing the door on the issue.
“It would be difficult at this time for the city to undo this action,” said Johnson.
AT&T spokesman Tom Hopkins could not be reached for comment before the Christmas holiday to see if the company would reconsider its plans.
In the event that the tower is built nevertheless, Fish and Wildlife requests that the city require AT&T to conduct post-construction surveys for a minimum of one year, watching for evidence of bird mortalities, particularly during the spring and fall migrations and following periods of fog or foul weather.
Russell said if significant bird deaths are documented, it could trigger an enforcement action, as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits the killing of migratory birds except when specifically authorized by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Some species of birds are afforded additional protections under the Endangered Species Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Kelly Boedigheimer, who lives in the 7100 block of E. Superior St., has been concerned about the danger the tower could pose to migrating birds since she heard of the project and repeatedly shared her concerns with city councilors, though with little success.
“I’ve been exceedingly disappointed by their lack of response,” she said.
Only councilors Jay Fosle and Todd Fedora voted against a resolution granting a special use permit for the proposed tower.
Watching birds migrate through the area has been one of the highlights of living up the shore in Duluth for Boedigheimer, who said she looks forward to observing the fall and spring movements of birds with her daughter, a fourth grader. Boedigheimer brought her concerns to Bob Russell and the Fish and Wildlife Service and enlisted his support for stopping the structure.
“I’m doing it for my daughter because it’s the right thing to do,” she said.
Here is the link to the letter sent to the City by the US Fish and Wildlife Service at Reporter Brandon Stahl's Buzz Blog
http://www.areavoices.com/buzz/
You'll have to scroll down to find the headline: Proposed Cell Tower Concerns Feds
I wonder if the City and AT&T will continue with this now that they have been put on notice?
Friday, December 25, 2009
Will the Duluth News Tribune Listen?
I had a conversation with a reporter about my tower battle. He saw my email exchanges with City Councilors and wanted to know more about the issue. Our city has approved at least a half dozen towers recently. My battle has expanded from just talking about bird kills at towers. I am asking my City to create a plan to deal with the pressure from the communication industry for more towers in our area. If we're going to have to have them, at least we can plan for them. Decide where we will allow them, and create an ordinance that requires cell companies to pay a third party to prove they need the tower in the first place! There are also ways that Duluth should be getting revenue from the towers.
I'm learning that the communications industry is not exactly honest when selling a tower to a community, surprised? Not me! I've learned that a single cell site will generate an average income of $800,000 per year. And many cell sites are multiples. BIG business! We should be getting something back for our City, and listening to citizens when there are objections, rather than rolling over like dupes when a Cell salesman uses trumped up reasons to sell his wares.
Go to AT&T and search for coverage at 25 N. 78th avenue east Duluth MN 55804 where this tower will be sited,
or use this link:
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=voice&lat=46.85994780861816&lon=-91.97361017956271&sci=11
You will find that they are advertising that there is good coverage in this entire area. If this is the case, why did they tell our City Council that this is an area of poor or no coverage? Who are they being dishonest to? The customer? The City? We should have required that they pay for a third party assessment of need. But no...we forged on and voted yes. And in defiance of the migratory bird treaty, I find this quote from a Fish and Wildlife manuscript published in 2000 very relevant to the argument of finding a balance:
"The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-104), in fact, mandates that all television stations be digitized by no later than 2003. By some estimates, this mandate could result in the addition of 1,000 new, 1,000-plus-foot "mega-towers" across the landscape in the United States. However, the MBTA of 1918, as amended -- our "marching orders" for DMBM -- is a strict liability law. The Act does not allow the killing or taking of migratory birds, except by permit, and the Service does not issue incidental take permits. Thus, the incidental killing of even one bird is legally considered a taking under MBTA and is technically a violation of the law. Concerning their mandates, the Telecommunications Act and MBTA may, thus, be directly at odds. Taking these issues into consideration, the Service recommends that communication companies do whatever they can to prevent needless bird deaths."
Shame on the salesman, for ignoring or not understanding the guideline that says that we should NOT site towers in known migration paths. He has some knowledge of the guidelines, he loosely quoted them to our planning commission, but left out the part about migration paths. Convenient huh?
I'm learning that the communications industry is not exactly honest when selling a tower to a community, surprised? Not me! I've learned that a single cell site will generate an average income of $800,000 per year. And many cell sites are multiples. BIG business! We should be getting something back for our City, and listening to citizens when there are objections, rather than rolling over like dupes when a Cell salesman uses trumped up reasons to sell his wares.
Go to AT&T and search for coverage at 25 N. 78th avenue east Duluth MN 55804 where this tower will be sited,
or use this link:
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=voice&lat=46.85994780861816&lon=-91.97361017956271&sci=11
You will find that they are advertising that there is good coverage in this entire area. If this is the case, why did they tell our City Council that this is an area of poor or no coverage? Who are they being dishonest to? The customer? The City? We should have required that they pay for a third party assessment of need. But no...we forged on and voted yes. And in defiance of the migratory bird treaty, I find this quote from a Fish and Wildlife manuscript published in 2000 very relevant to the argument of finding a balance:
"The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-104), in fact, mandates that all television stations be digitized by no later than 2003. By some estimates, this mandate could result in the addition of 1,000 new, 1,000-plus-foot "mega-towers" across the landscape in the United States. However, the MBTA of 1918, as amended -- our "marching orders" for DMBM -- is a strict liability law. The Act does not allow the killing or taking of migratory birds, except by permit, and the Service does not issue incidental take permits. Thus, the incidental killing of even one bird is legally considered a taking under MBTA and is technically a violation of the law. Concerning their mandates, the Telecommunications Act and MBTA may, thus, be directly at odds. Taking these issues into consideration, the Service recommends that communication companies do whatever they can to prevent needless bird deaths."
Shame on the salesman, for ignoring or not understanding the guideline that says that we should NOT site towers in known migration paths. He has some knowledge of the guidelines, he loosely quoted them to our planning commission, but left out the part about migration paths. Convenient huh?
Will the Council Listen to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
December 7, 2009.
I received two encouraging phone calls today. The first was from Bob Russell of the US Fish and Wildlife Service. He called me to say that I should keep up the pressure as he has received some phone calls from Duluthians looking for confirmation of the information I have been publishing. Just today, he received a phone call from Councilor Tony Cuneo. Kudos to Councilor Cuneo for taking the initiative to look up the person I have been quoting and actually make a call! Bob says he explained to Tony the USFW reasons that this site is NOT a good choice. He explained that Eagles and Golden Eagles are highly protected by USFW and that this area is a known flyway for those species. If we have a foggy day with low ceilings, raptors could fall prey to this tower. He also explained during bird counts at the Pumping Station (almost within eyesight of this tower site) 250,00 birds were counted in one migration season. Counts are done during daytime, but most birds migrate at night to avoid the raptors who fly during the day. So you could actually estimate that millions of birds fly through the area at night. I'm sure he gave Tony compelling testimony as to why they do not want to see this tower go in that spot.
I asked Bob, "If this tower is built, and I walk down there and find dead birds, should I photograph them and send them to Fish and Wildlife?" He said yes, Fish and Wildlife will prosecute if there are kills at this tower.
My second call was from my new friend Claire, who contacted me after reading my letter to the editor. She likes to call people and volunteered to call anyone that I could direct her to. She called USFWS this weekend and again today, and really put pressure on them to get the letter to the City from US Fish and Wildlife, warning the city that there are laws that protect migrating birds, and putting a tower in that area would put the city at risk if there are documented kills.
She called me late today to say that the representative from the Ecology division of USFW is drafting a letter with the US Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement warning and it should be received by the City this week!
So, I'm wondering what the city will do now? They will have been duly warned that Fish and Wildlife takes it's role as steward of our natural resources seriously, and is willing to prosecute if there are kills at this tower, and that it should not be sited in this migration path.
This is the Federal Government telling the City that this is a bad idea!
I'm hoping that at least one councilor will put this back on the agenda asap, and that councilors who voted for it will wake up and heed the warning.
I received two encouraging phone calls today. The first was from Bob Russell of the US Fish and Wildlife Service. He called me to say that I should keep up the pressure as he has received some phone calls from Duluthians looking for confirmation of the information I have been publishing. Just today, he received a phone call from Councilor Tony Cuneo. Kudos to Councilor Cuneo for taking the initiative to look up the person I have been quoting and actually make a call! Bob says he explained to Tony the USFW reasons that this site is NOT a good choice. He explained that Eagles and Golden Eagles are highly protected by USFW and that this area is a known flyway for those species. If we have a foggy day with low ceilings, raptors could fall prey to this tower. He also explained during bird counts at the Pumping Station (almost within eyesight of this tower site) 250,00 birds were counted in one migration season. Counts are done during daytime, but most birds migrate at night to avoid the raptors who fly during the day. So you could actually estimate that millions of birds fly through the area at night. I'm sure he gave Tony compelling testimony as to why they do not want to see this tower go in that spot.
I asked Bob, "If this tower is built, and I walk down there and find dead birds, should I photograph them and send them to Fish and Wildlife?" He said yes, Fish and Wildlife will prosecute if there are kills at this tower.
My second call was from my new friend Claire, who contacted me after reading my letter to the editor. She likes to call people and volunteered to call anyone that I could direct her to. She called USFWS this weekend and again today, and really put pressure on them to get the letter to the City from US Fish and Wildlife, warning the city that there are laws that protect migrating birds, and putting a tower in that area would put the city at risk if there are documented kills.
She called me late today to say that the representative from the Ecology division of USFW is drafting a letter with the US Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement warning and it should be received by the City this week!
So, I'm wondering what the city will do now? They will have been duly warned that Fish and Wildlife takes it's role as steward of our natural resources seriously, and is willing to prosecute if there are kills at this tower, and that it should not be sited in this migration path.
This is the Federal Government telling the City that this is a bad idea!
I'm hoping that at least one councilor will put this back on the agenda asap, and that councilors who voted for it will wake up and heed the warning.
Duluth City Councilor "Comfortable" with Approving Tower in Migration Path
This another attempt to convince the City Council to change their vote. I sent this on December 3, 2009, thinking that I'd done a pretty good job with the research.
I will not stop even if they build it. I will document kills and send documentation to Fish and Wildlife, who has said they do prosecute. Oh the stupidity. Is a cell phone really worth placing a tower into such a significant flyway?
Dear Coucilors,
I am contacting you on the issue of the communication tower to be built at 78th Avenue East and Superior Street. I am disappointed that the City of Duluth representatives who voted for this may seem to have viewed our annual bird migration as a non-issue. I am begging you to read my entire email, I feel that the letter I sent to the Council on November 3rd was either ignored or forgotten by the time the tower was put back on the agenda on a Friday, November 6th. Perhaps if migration had been taken seriously, some of these issues would have been addressed at the meeting.
This tower is slated to be built in the corridor that is a part of Hawk Ridge. Would the City approve a tower at Hawk Ridge? I would guess that there would be a LOT of discussion about migration in that case. But, what people are not realizing, is that this site is THE CONCENTRATED PATH THAT THE MIGRATING BIRDS FLY ON THE WAY TO HAWK RIDGE BLUFF! The birds move along the shore, and catch the thermals up the hillside toward Hawk Ridge.
This has been documented during the last three years during the Hawk Ridge annual count. The numbers of birds documented to have passed through this area are staggering. In 2007 Karl Brandon did a count of non-raptors (songbirds etc.) at the Lakewood Pumping Station, he determined that "the Lakewood site is considered to be better than Hawk Ridge for documenting the migration of non-raptors along the North Shore." and "the bulk of non-raptor movement was often along the lakeshore a mile from the overlook at Hawk Ridge and probably directly over "Lakewood" (He refers to the Lakewood Pumping Station as "Lakewood" throughout the report)
He and his helpers counted 76,213 non-raptors from August 22 to November 30, 2007 over the Lakewood Pumping Station. For those of you who have not been in my neighborhood, you can practically see the pumping station from the place this tower will be built.
This year Hawk Ridge did a count of non-raptors and tallied 164,991 birds in 75 days. That's just during daylight. Many of the songbirds migrate at night and are not included in this count. That's an average of 2199 birds a day. Three days had spectacular totals, on August 20 they counted 13,180 non-raptors, October 19th saw 14,103 and October 31 tallied 15,873!
When counters work, they use binoculars and scopes, and look out over the ridge towards the lake; the birds are coming directly along the shoreline, over the Lakewood Pumping Station. I have witnessed these migrations for the 14 years that we have lived on 71st Avenue East. I contacted local bird expert Laura Erickson, she said she has not doubt there will be some kills at this tower, merely because of its location. I have a very good friend who tells me that in October there are dead birds littering the ground under the Moose Mountain tower. That tower is only 100 feet tall and is not lighted. It is in this migration path and forebodes the possibility that if you put a tower even closer to the lake, we will see collisions by virtue of the proximity in the migration path and the fact that most songbirds migrate at night.
Literally thousands of birds pass over that area every day in the fall, many are rare and decreasing in numbers. Hawk Ridge documented 102 non-raptor species (songbirds etc) in their counts. Of those 102 there is at least one, the Golden Winged Warbler rated near threatened. The Bay Breasted Warbler, Blue Winged Warbler, Canada Warbler, Rusty Blackbird, and Wood Thrush are all listed as vulnerable, and were counted this year. Also sighted are the Boreal Chickadee, Evening Grosbeak, and Snow Bunting, all are on the top 20 list of birds with the greatest decline since 1967.
I contacted Bob Russell, from the Saint Paul Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and was told that this area is an inappropriate site for a cell tower. He states that this site is "obviously in an area of MAJOR bird migration." and "The most important flyway on the Western Great Lakes."
He encouraged me to fight this. This is an excerpt from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service memo regarding communication towers:
United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Washington, DC 20240
September 14, 2000
To: Regional Directors
From: Director /s/ Jamie Rappaport Clark
Subject: Service Guidance on the Siting, Construction, Operation and Decommissioning of Communications Towers
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712) prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Department of the Interior. While the Act has no provision for allowing unauthorized take, it must be recognized that some birds may be killed at structures such as communications towers even if all reasonable measures to avoid it are implemented. The Service's Division of Law Enforcement carries out its mission to protect migratory birds not only through investigations and enforcement, but also through fostering relationships with individuals and industries that proactively seek to eliminate their impacts on migratory birds. While it is not possible under the Act to absolve individuals or companies from liability if they follow these recommended guidelines, the Division of Law Enforcement and Department of Justice have used enforcement and prosecutorial discretion in the past regarding individuals or companies who have made good faith efforts to avoid the take of migratory birds.
(Emphasis added by me)
The memo is a lead in to the Guidelines that the Fish and Wildlife Service developed for the siting of communication towers.
The entire memo and guidelines can be read at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html
Has the City of Duluth and AT&T made good faith efforts to avoid the take of migratory birds? What will happen when someone calls Fish and Wildlife to report kills at this tower?
This is the from the Fish and Wildlife's guidelines for siting Communication Towers:
4. If at all possible, new towers should be sited within existing "antenna farms" (clusters of towers). Towers should not be sited in or near wetlands, other known bird concentration areas (e.g., state or Federal refuges, staging areas, rookeries), in known migratory or daily movement flyways, or in habitat of threatened or endangered species. Towers should not be sited in areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, and low ceilings.
The question of migration was brought up by the Planning Commission, in the October 13, 2009 Planning Commission minutes: "Vigen asked if there are any special environmental issues like migratory birds. Begley (AT&T representative) said the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) says to stay away from strobe lights and guy towers. Reports show no endangerment to endangered species or fauna.
Please note that there was no real answer to migration specifically and no reference to the published guideline that clearly states that towers SHOULD NOT BE SITED in or near wetlands, other known bird concentration areas (e.g., state or Federal refuges, staging areas, rookeries), IN KNOWN MIGRATORY OR DAILY MOVEMENT FLYWAYS, or in habitat of threatened or endangered species. Towers should not be sited in areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, and low ceilings.
So, conveniently the question of migration was dismissed with one of the other guidelines which, to their credit, AT&T has met:
"If collocation is not feasible and a new tower or towers are to be constructed, communications service providers should be strongly encouraged to construct towers no more than 199 feet above ground level (AGL), using construction techniques which do not require guy wires (e.g., use a lattice structure, monopole, etc.). Such towers should be unlighted if Federal Aviation Administration regulations permit."
If someone from Planning or from the City had contacted Fish and Wildlife themselves, they might have chosen a different path. This is a unique area, and should be considered a major migratory path. A lower tower and possibly no lights are just one of the suggestions made by Fish and Wildlife. Accepting the answer from a salesman seems short sighted to me. This proposal never even went to the environmental advisory committee. Documentation in their minutes shows that they took it off their agenda when AT&T pulled the proposal the first time.
On the issue of lighting this tower, the FAA has final authority, and has not made a determination yet on whether this tower will be lighted. Some towers near major highways are required to be lighted. This tower will be very close to highway 61. Mr. Russell at Fish and Wildlife strongly suggested that this tower might end up having to be lighted. Won't the folks at Eastridge development enjoy a white strobe light just out their beautiful picture windows?
Why do I care so much?
Birds are just as important as bees, if we don't have birds to pollinate, spread seeds, eat weeds, bugs, and vermin, life on earth will become quite grim for our children and children's children. In fact, entire ecosystems will fail.
There are 51.3 million birders in the U.S. alone and the number is constantly climbing. Birding watching has exploded into the No. 1 sport in North America, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Those birders expect a community to be responsible for the treasure we have been provided. How will we be regarded when someone begins to document the kills from this tower? It's disgusting to me, that we tout ourselves as a place to come and watch birds. Go to "Visit Duluth", where we advertise the Hawk Ridge migration. Are we too stupid to stop a tower placed in the most significant migration path in the Western Great Lakes? We are not paying attention to the fact that the southern shoreline of Lake Superior has one of the highest densities of low-altitude bird migration in fall anywhere in North America. But we will use the birds to sell hotel rooms to tourists.
Someone needs to ask hard questions about the justification for this tower. Are "the bars" really this important? Is this the only site available? Does the tower have to be 185 feet tall? How many 911 calls are sent over to Wisconsin, and where is the documentation?
I notice that the objective stated by AT&T says, "In some areas you could actually initiate a call on a site that is located in Wisconsin. This could be a 911 call routing problem. If there were an emergency call placed in these areas." (Emphasis added.) Does this mean that it has not actually happened? Is this really mostly about providing 3G network? Is a cell phone or internet service really worth the sacrifice? Shouldn't we wait for a determination from the FAA that this tower will not actually be lighted? Is this tower really going to only provide clear service to a 2.5 mile area? I've owned a home in this area for 32 years, my cheap tracphone works just great from my home and all along this area.
Please, don't let this be another embarrassment to Duluth. The City Clerk has said that anyone from the Council or Administration can ask that another number be assigned to this issue and that it be put back on the agenda at any time in the future. Please get it on the agenda now.
This is one reply I received today:
Thank you for your e-mail. I am comfortable with the council's decision and will not be advocating for a reconsideration.
Respectfully,
Jeff
Jeff Anderson
Duluth City Councilor
P.O. Box 385
Duluth, MN 55801
218.590.5970 Phone
And my reply to him:
Councilor Anderson
Pardon me for saying this, but when you are given the authority to make a decision for the community you should be open to reconsidering issues when it is possible that your decision was flawed. You are rubber stamping towers in our community without holding the companies accountable to prove, using an outside resource at the communication company's expense, that a tower is necessary in a particular spot, or that a tower needs to be the height they are requesting, or that they actually even need the tower.
I'm glad you feel comfortable with your willful disregard of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Siting Towers, that they "should not be sited in known migratory or daily movement flyways"
And I am glad that you are comfortable with your decision to approve this tower in defiance of the Migratory Bird Act.
I get it.
And I'm sure the U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service will be happy to overlook that, since AT&T and decision makers for my City took such pains to avoid doing so. Not.
Enjoy your cell phone, after all...."it's all about the bars!"
Kelly
His arrogant (in my opinion) reply....
I will not stop even if they build it. I will document kills and send documentation to Fish and Wildlife, who has said they do prosecute. Oh the stupidity. Is a cell phone really worth placing a tower into such a significant flyway?
Dear Coucilors,
I am contacting you on the issue of the communication tower to be built at 78th Avenue East and Superior Street. I am disappointed that the City of Duluth representatives who voted for this may seem to have viewed our annual bird migration as a non-issue. I am begging you to read my entire email, I feel that the letter I sent to the Council on November 3rd was either ignored or forgotten by the time the tower was put back on the agenda on a Friday, November 6th. Perhaps if migration had been taken seriously, some of these issues would have been addressed at the meeting.
This tower is slated to be built in the corridor that is a part of Hawk Ridge. Would the City approve a tower at Hawk Ridge? I would guess that there would be a LOT of discussion about migration in that case. But, what people are not realizing, is that this site is THE CONCENTRATED PATH THAT THE MIGRATING BIRDS FLY ON THE WAY TO HAWK RIDGE BLUFF! The birds move along the shore, and catch the thermals up the hillside toward Hawk Ridge.
This has been documented during the last three years during the Hawk Ridge annual count. The numbers of birds documented to have passed through this area are staggering. In 2007 Karl Brandon did a count of non-raptors (songbirds etc.) at the Lakewood Pumping Station, he determined that "the Lakewood site is considered to be better than Hawk Ridge for documenting the migration of non-raptors along the North Shore." and "the bulk of non-raptor movement was often along the lakeshore a mile from the overlook at Hawk Ridge and probably directly over "Lakewood" (He refers to the Lakewood Pumping Station as "Lakewood" throughout the report)
He and his helpers counted 76,213 non-raptors from August 22 to November 30, 2007 over the Lakewood Pumping Station. For those of you who have not been in my neighborhood, you can practically see the pumping station from the place this tower will be built.
This year Hawk Ridge did a count of non-raptors and tallied 164,991 birds in 75 days. That's just during daylight. Many of the songbirds migrate at night and are not included in this count. That's an average of 2199 birds a day. Three days had spectacular totals, on August 20 they counted 13,180 non-raptors, October 19th saw 14,103 and October 31 tallied 15,873!
When counters work, they use binoculars and scopes, and look out over the ridge towards the lake; the birds are coming directly along the shoreline, over the Lakewood Pumping Station. I have witnessed these migrations for the 14 years that we have lived on 71st Avenue East. I contacted local bird expert Laura Erickson, she said she has not doubt there will be some kills at this tower, merely because of its location. I have a very good friend who tells me that in October there are dead birds littering the ground under the Moose Mountain tower. That tower is only 100 feet tall and is not lighted. It is in this migration path and forebodes the possibility that if you put a tower even closer to the lake, we will see collisions by virtue of the proximity in the migration path and the fact that most songbirds migrate at night.
Literally thousands of birds pass over that area every day in the fall, many are rare and decreasing in numbers. Hawk Ridge documented 102 non-raptor species (songbirds etc) in their counts. Of those 102 there is at least one, the Golden Winged Warbler rated near threatened. The Bay Breasted Warbler, Blue Winged Warbler, Canada Warbler, Rusty Blackbird, and Wood Thrush are all listed as vulnerable, and were counted this year. Also sighted are the Boreal Chickadee, Evening Grosbeak, and Snow Bunting, all are on the top 20 list of birds with the greatest decline since 1967.
I contacted Bob Russell, from the Saint Paul Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and was told that this area is an inappropriate site for a cell tower. He states that this site is "obviously in an area of MAJOR bird migration." and "The most important flyway on the Western Great Lakes."
He encouraged me to fight this. This is an excerpt from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service memo regarding communication towers:
United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Washington, DC 20240
September 14, 2000
To: Regional Directors
From: Director /s/ Jamie Rappaport Clark
Subject: Service Guidance on the Siting, Construction, Operation and Decommissioning of Communications Towers
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712) prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Department of the Interior. While the Act has no provision for allowing unauthorized take, it must be recognized that some birds may be killed at structures such as communications towers even if all reasonable measures to avoid it are implemented. The Service's Division of Law Enforcement carries out its mission to protect migratory birds not only through investigations and enforcement, but also through fostering relationships with individuals and industries that proactively seek to eliminate their impacts on migratory birds. While it is not possible under the Act to absolve individuals or companies from liability if they follow these recommended guidelines, the Division of Law Enforcement and Department of Justice have used enforcement and prosecutorial discretion in the past regarding individuals or companies who have made good faith efforts to avoid the take of migratory birds.
(Emphasis added by me)
The memo is a lead in to the Guidelines that the Fish and Wildlife Service developed for the siting of communication towers.
The entire memo and guidelines can be read at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html
Has the City of Duluth and AT&T made good faith efforts to avoid the take of migratory birds? What will happen when someone calls Fish and Wildlife to report kills at this tower?
This is the from the Fish and Wildlife's guidelines for siting Communication Towers:
4. If at all possible, new towers should be sited within existing "antenna farms" (clusters of towers). Towers should not be sited in or near wetlands, other known bird concentration areas (e.g., state or Federal refuges, staging areas, rookeries), in known migratory or daily movement flyways, or in habitat of threatened or endangered species. Towers should not be sited in areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, and low ceilings.
The question of migration was brought up by the Planning Commission, in the October 13, 2009 Planning Commission minutes: "Vigen asked if there are any special environmental issues like migratory birds. Begley (AT&T representative) said the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) says to stay away from strobe lights and guy towers. Reports show no endangerment to endangered species or fauna.
Please note that there was no real answer to migration specifically and no reference to the published guideline that clearly states that towers SHOULD NOT BE SITED in or near wetlands, other known bird concentration areas (e.g., state or Federal refuges, staging areas, rookeries), IN KNOWN MIGRATORY OR DAILY MOVEMENT FLYWAYS, or in habitat of threatened or endangered species. Towers should not be sited in areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, and low ceilings.
So, conveniently the question of migration was dismissed with one of the other guidelines which, to their credit, AT&T has met:
"If collocation is not feasible and a new tower or towers are to be constructed, communications service providers should be strongly encouraged to construct towers no more than 199 feet above ground level (AGL), using construction techniques which do not require guy wires (e.g., use a lattice structure, monopole, etc.). Such towers should be unlighted if Federal Aviation Administration regulations permit."
If someone from Planning or from the City had contacted Fish and Wildlife themselves, they might have chosen a different path. This is a unique area, and should be considered a major migratory path. A lower tower and possibly no lights are just one of the suggestions made by Fish and Wildlife. Accepting the answer from a salesman seems short sighted to me. This proposal never even went to the environmental advisory committee. Documentation in their minutes shows that they took it off their agenda when AT&T pulled the proposal the first time.
On the issue of lighting this tower, the FAA has final authority, and has not made a determination yet on whether this tower will be lighted. Some towers near major highways are required to be lighted. This tower will be very close to highway 61. Mr. Russell at Fish and Wildlife strongly suggested that this tower might end up having to be lighted. Won't the folks at Eastridge development enjoy a white strobe light just out their beautiful picture windows?
Why do I care so much?
Birds are just as important as bees, if we don't have birds to pollinate, spread seeds, eat weeds, bugs, and vermin, life on earth will become quite grim for our children and children's children. In fact, entire ecosystems will fail.
There are 51.3 million birders in the U.S. alone and the number is constantly climbing. Birding watching has exploded into the No. 1 sport in North America, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Those birders expect a community to be responsible for the treasure we have been provided. How will we be regarded when someone begins to document the kills from this tower? It's disgusting to me, that we tout ourselves as a place to come and watch birds. Go to "Visit Duluth", where we advertise the Hawk Ridge migration. Are we too stupid to stop a tower placed in the most significant migration path in the Western Great Lakes? We are not paying attention to the fact that the southern shoreline of Lake Superior has one of the highest densities of low-altitude bird migration in fall anywhere in North America. But we will use the birds to sell hotel rooms to tourists.
Someone needs to ask hard questions about the justification for this tower. Are "the bars" really this important? Is this the only site available? Does the tower have to be 185 feet tall? How many 911 calls are sent over to Wisconsin, and where is the documentation?
I notice that the objective stated by AT&T says, "In some areas you could actually initiate a call on a site that is located in Wisconsin. This could be a 911 call routing problem. If there were an emergency call placed in these areas." (Emphasis added.) Does this mean that it has not actually happened? Is this really mostly about providing 3G network? Is a cell phone or internet service really worth the sacrifice? Shouldn't we wait for a determination from the FAA that this tower will not actually be lighted? Is this tower really going to only provide clear service to a 2.5 mile area? I've owned a home in this area for 32 years, my cheap tracphone works just great from my home and all along this area.
Please, don't let this be another embarrassment to Duluth. The City Clerk has said that anyone from the Council or Administration can ask that another number be assigned to this issue and that it be put back on the agenda at any time in the future. Please get it on the agenda now.
This is one reply I received today:
Thank you for your e-mail. I am comfortable with the council's decision and will not be advocating for a reconsideration.
Respectfully,
Jeff
Jeff Anderson
Duluth City Councilor
P.O. Box 385
Duluth, MN 55801
218.590.5970 Phone
And my reply to him:
Councilor Anderson
Pardon me for saying this, but when you are given the authority to make a decision for the community you should be open to reconsidering issues when it is possible that your decision was flawed. You are rubber stamping towers in our community without holding the companies accountable to prove, using an outside resource at the communication company's expense, that a tower is necessary in a particular spot, or that a tower needs to be the height they are requesting, or that they actually even need the tower.
I'm glad you feel comfortable with your willful disregard of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Siting Towers, that they "should not be sited in known migratory or daily movement flyways"
And I am glad that you are comfortable with your decision to approve this tower in defiance of the Migratory Bird Act.
I get it.
And I'm sure the U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service will be happy to overlook that, since AT&T and decision makers for my City took such pains to avoid doing so. Not.
Enjoy your cell phone, after all...."it's all about the bars!"
Kelly
His arrogant (in my opinion) reply....
| Thank you for your e-mail. Yes, I am still comfortable with my decision. Respectfully, Jeff | ||
My Fight with City Hall
I am very disappointed with our city council.
Yesterday most of them voted to approve a 180 foot cell phone tower directly in a major bird migration path. Only Jay Fosle and Todd Fedora voted no.
Councilors cannot say that they were not informed of a potential problem with this site. I sent them this email last week:
Dear City Councilors,
It has come to my attention that the proposed 180 foot cell phone monopole for 78th avenue East and Superior Street will be back on the agenda soon. In light of this news I would like to voice my concern about possible problems with migrating hawks and songbirds. Potential bird kills from Cell towers is an important issue, with research supported by many government and private groups,
“Using numbers from several long-term studies, conservation groups and government biologists estimate that communications towers kill from 4 to 50 million birds a year. They endanger or threaten at least 50 species.” Quoted from
http://www.learner.org/jnorth/tm/ToweringTroubles.html
As you are all aware, Duluth has a unique geography which contributes to our spectacular migration each fall and spring. Raptors and songbirds follow the shoreline to Duluth, avoiding the long dangerous trip across Lake Superior where there is no food and no opportunity to rest on land. I live on East Superior Street and enjoy watching thousands of birds migrate in spring and fall. Every morning while my daughter and I wait for the bus we watch flocks of birds flying directly over the area between Superior Street and Highway 61. The birds fly quite low sometimes, this spring we watched the migration of hundreds of nighthawks that were approximately 30-50 feet above our heads. My concern is that we will be placing a tower directly in a migration path. I have contacted the US Fish and Wildlife Service with a specific request for information on this site’s suitability for a cell tower. I will pass on any information that I receive from the Fish and Wildlife Service. There is further information on this issue at their website http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm
At the least we should make sure that this tower does not have guy wires or any type of beacon or up lighting. At 180 feet it is under the guideline, this is good news. It is unfortunate that this tower is planned in an area where it will be the only tall structure. Please read the following guidelines for placement of new cell towers which is from the Fish and Wildlife Service website. My goal is to provide you with information to help you make your decision on this tower. If we must place it at 78th Avenue East, please make sure that it fits the guidelines established by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm
I included in the email, the US Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Cell Towers which clearly state that local governments should take all measures possible to place cell towers away from migration paths. I warned them that I had already contacted Fish and Wildlife for confirmation that this is a migration path, and that they should take this into consideration when making their decision. I received a phone message today, from an agent at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that this site is indeed, a major migration path.
I'm guessing the council wrote my concerns off as another eco-nut. Not one councilor mentioned this as a potential issue.
I'm not done talking to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They don't seem to be disregarding my concerns, and they seemed quite willing to help.
How is the City of Duluth going to look when it gets out that we are okay with placing a cell tower where we will likely see hawks, eagles and all manner of migrating birds killed because we were listening to an AT&T salesmen selling to us with the phrase, "It's all about the bars!" People don't like dropped calls! People want to be able to take pictures while they're running the marathon! Do you think that all those folks who come here to watch the Hawk Migration will understand and appreciate the 3G service in this 2 mile area?
I understand that people want their cell phones, and that we need coverage for 911 cell phone calls in emergencies, but are we really not able to slow down and look for a more appropriate spot?
If the tower is built I will be inclined to document the bird kills and find some way to get that information out. Is it really "progress" for our community when we sacrifice so much to make a phone call?
Yesterday most of them voted to approve a 180 foot cell phone tower directly in a major bird migration path. Only Jay Fosle and Todd Fedora voted no.
Councilors cannot say that they were not informed of a potential problem with this site. I sent them this email last week:
Dear City Councilors,
It has come to my attention that the proposed 180 foot cell phone monopole for 78th avenue East and Superior Street will be back on the agenda soon. In light of this news I would like to voice my concern about possible problems with migrating hawks and songbirds. Potential bird kills from Cell towers is an important issue, with research supported by many government and private groups,
“Using numbers from several long-term studies, conservation groups and government biologists estimate that communications towers kill from 4 to 50 million birds a year. They endanger or threaten at least 50 species.” Quoted from
http://www.learner.org/jnorth/tm/ToweringTroubles.html
As you are all aware, Duluth has a unique geography which contributes to our spectacular migration each fall and spring. Raptors and songbirds follow the shoreline to Duluth, avoiding the long dangerous trip across Lake Superior where there is no food and no opportunity to rest on land. I live on East Superior Street and enjoy watching thousands of birds migrate in spring and fall. Every morning while my daughter and I wait for the bus we watch flocks of birds flying directly over the area between Superior Street and Highway 61. The birds fly quite low sometimes, this spring we watched the migration of hundreds of nighthawks that were approximately 30-50 feet above our heads. My concern is that we will be placing a tower directly in a migration path. I have contacted the US Fish and Wildlife Service with a specific request for information on this site’s suitability for a cell tower. I will pass on any information that I receive from the Fish and Wildlife Service. There is further information on this issue at their website http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm
At the least we should make sure that this tower does not have guy wires or any type of beacon or up lighting. At 180 feet it is under the guideline, this is good news. It is unfortunate that this tower is planned in an area where it will be the only tall structure. Please read the following guidelines for placement of new cell towers which is from the Fish and Wildlife Service website. My goal is to provide you with information to help you make your decision on this tower. If we must place it at 78th Avenue East, please make sure that it fits the guidelines established by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm
I included in the email, the US Fish and Wildlife Guidelines for Cell Towers which clearly state that local governments should take all measures possible to place cell towers away from migration paths. I warned them that I had already contacted Fish and Wildlife for confirmation that this is a migration path, and that they should take this into consideration when making their decision. I received a phone message today, from an agent at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that this site is indeed, a major migration path.
I'm guessing the council wrote my concerns off as another eco-nut. Not one councilor mentioned this as a potential issue.
I'm not done talking to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They don't seem to be disregarding my concerns, and they seemed quite willing to help.
How is the City of Duluth going to look when it gets out that we are okay with placing a cell tower where we will likely see hawks, eagles and all manner of migrating birds killed because we were listening to an AT&T salesmen selling to us with the phrase, "It's all about the bars!" People don't like dropped calls! People want to be able to take pictures while they're running the marathon! Do you think that all those folks who come here to watch the Hawk Migration will understand and appreciate the 3G service in this 2 mile area?
I understand that people want their cell phones, and that we need coverage for 911 cell phone calls in emergencies, but are we really not able to slow down and look for a more appropriate spot?
If the tower is built I will be inclined to document the bird kills and find some way to get that information out. Is it really "progress" for our community when we sacrifice so much to make a phone call?
Looking Back on the Season
Each year we try some new gardening methods and plant varieties in our vegetable garden. One of the methods we are using is the “no-till” method. Normally we would hire a friend to come out and till our soil. At the same time we would amend the soil with organic turkey fertilizer. There is a cost to tilling, and the turkey fertilizer was not cheap either. Repeated tilling will eventually cause soil compaction. It also disturbs the beneficial critters in the soil that help break down organic matter into even better soil. We decided that our gardens are not so huge that we couldn’t aerate the soil by hand. We are fortunate to have a friend who is a welder, and he was able to build us broad forks in trade for some artwork. The broad fork looks like a stout potato fork with two handles. You simply push the broad fork into the soil (I have to stand on it sometimes) and pull it back with both handles to loosen the soil. By loosening the soil, rather than tilling we maintain the biological structure of the soil and help build a better environment for the beneficial critters like worms and microbes. Broad forking is great exercise and requires no gas or machine maintenance.
The drawback of no-till is that you can get a lot of weeds.
I tried not weeding. Really, I didn’t weed…much. What I did do, was plant buckwheat as a cover crop. Buckwheat is fantastic. It grows very quickly and is very easy to pull up. I planted it in between the rows and around the edges of the garden. It quickly takes over where weeds would’ve filled in. When it just started to blossom I’d let the bees at it for a couple days and then pull it up and drop it around my plants for mulch. Buckwheat has a hollow tubular stem and breaks down very quickly as compost, adding nutrients to your soil. I also use a fair amount of straw as mulch. I always mulch my tomatoes, and strawberries. In the past I’d spread straw around most of the other plants in my garden, but this year I let the buckwheat do the trick. I thought I was pretty smart with this Buckwheat method, and for the most part it worked well. But we also applied a four inch layer of well seasoned manure. It produced a lot new weeds! I’m glad we added the manure, because I think it really helped our yield. But we had a lot of Clover, Creeping Charlie, Lambs Quarter, and Purslane. I know that some folks eat Purslane and Lambs Quarter; I just haven’t acquired a taste for it…yet. I don’t mind pulling some of these weeds, but Clover and Creeping Charlie are very difficult to pull. Next year I’m going to try much heavier layers of mulch. Some folks layer their mulch like lasagna. I think I’ll try shredding newspaper and white paper, layer it around where I’ve planted, soak it well, top it with a layer of compost, and finally add a layer of straw. I’ll plant the buckwheat in between the rows and all around the garden. I think I’m just going to relax and learn to work with the weeds, they don’t seem to inhibit our yield, we have never had so many peas. We had huge cabbages, zucchini coming out of our ears, and more cucumbers than we could keep up with (thus the 40 jars of pickles in the basement) All in all, this year was a garden success, but there’s always something new to try.
The drawback of no-till is that you can get a lot of weeds.
I tried not weeding. Really, I didn’t weed…much. What I did do, was plant buckwheat as a cover crop. Buckwheat is fantastic. It grows very quickly and is very easy to pull up. I planted it in between the rows and around the edges of the garden. It quickly takes over where weeds would’ve filled in. When it just started to blossom I’d let the bees at it for a couple days and then pull it up and drop it around my plants for mulch. Buckwheat has a hollow tubular stem and breaks down very quickly as compost, adding nutrients to your soil. I also use a fair amount of straw as mulch. I always mulch my tomatoes, and strawberries. In the past I’d spread straw around most of the other plants in my garden, but this year I let the buckwheat do the trick. I thought I was pretty smart with this Buckwheat method, and for the most part it worked well. But we also applied a four inch layer of well seasoned manure. It produced a lot new weeds! I’m glad we added the manure, because I think it really helped our yield. But we had a lot of Clover, Creeping Charlie, Lambs Quarter, and Purslane. I know that some folks eat Purslane and Lambs Quarter; I just haven’t acquired a taste for it…yet. I don’t mind pulling some of these weeds, but Clover and Creeping Charlie are very difficult to pull. Next year I’m going to try much heavier layers of mulch. Some folks layer their mulch like lasagna. I think I’ll try shredding newspaper and white paper, layer it around where I’ve planted, soak it well, top it with a layer of compost, and finally add a layer of straw. I’ll plant the buckwheat in between the rows and all around the garden. I think I’m just going to relax and learn to work with the weeds, they don’t seem to inhibit our yield, we have never had so many peas. We had huge cabbages, zucchini coming out of our ears, and more cucumbers than we could keep up with (thus the 40 jars of pickles in the basement) All in all, this year was a garden success, but there’s always something new to try.
Growing Fruit in Zone 3
This year we added some new fruits to our garden. I planted red and black currents from bare root plants. I don’t think I’ll see fruit on those for a couple of years. In the future I might spend a bit more for fully mature plants, as you will see fruit in less time. Currants are considered the easiest fruit for a novice to grow. I like that, something I can stick in the ground without a lot of fuss. Currents are highly nutritious and will make nice juice for jelly. We also added blueberries. We amended the soil with peat moss for acidity, and some sand for drainage. We mulched with pine bark, also very acidic. Blueberries need some fussing. You have to have good acidic soil with good drainage. We did get a few berries, nothing to crow about yet, but hopefully in a year or two we will be able to add preserved blueberries to our pantry.
We expanded our strawberry patch to include June bearing strawberries. These require that you train the plants into alternating rows. Each year you discard the plants that bore fruit and keep the new plants that you trained to grow off to one side. I don’t think we have our bed configured properly for this purpose. We are going to have to move the new plants to another bed in the spring. I notice a distinct difference between June bearing and Everbearing Strawberries. The June bearing strawberries have a lot more flavor, but they are small and very delicate. Also, as their name indicates, they bear fruit in only in early summer. The Everbearing variety produce very large strawberries, much like the “store bought” type. They are not as sweet, but the make dynamite jam and preserves, and they produce a LOT of fruit. We picked at least a pint a day for much of the summer, and in mid-summer I picked two pints on most days, I was still picking strawberries into October. I have 50 Everbearing plants, and from those we canned 50 jars of strawberry jam and preserves, froze 9 quarts of whole berries and ate strawberries almost daily. I do fuss over my strawberries. I make sure that the bed is weed free and mulched. We top dressed the plants with fertilizer in the spring and sprinkled a handful of manure around each plant in July. The plants really responded to the manure. I also make sure that I clip all of the new baby “sucker” plants as they emerge. You must clip all of the suckers in order to let the plant put energy into making fruit. Everbearing strawberry plants last about 3-4 years before they begin to slow down in yield. You then replace them with new plants. I’m also a big advocate of regular watering. I take note of when it rains and when it’s dry. I make sure that my garden gets an inch of water each week, and it is best if it’s from rain.
My husband is very handy, and built a frame for berry netting. It’s simply che
ap pvc pipe configured like a cube over the garden. We hung netting on top and around the sides, leaving a space for us to enter. The birds, deer, chipmunks, and squirrels have been kept out so far! Deer will eat the plants right down to the dirt. They took quite a few of my Junebearing plants because we didn’t have them covered.
All the work is really worth it, we opened a jar of strawberry marmalade this morning...heaven on a waffle!
We expanded our strawberry patch to include June bearing strawberries. These require that you train the plants into alternating rows. Each year you discard the plants that bore fruit and keep the new plants that you trained to grow off to one side. I don’t think we have our bed configured properly for this purpose. We are going to have to move the new plants to another bed in the spring. I notice a distinct difference between June bearing and Everbearing Strawberries. The June bearing strawberries have a lot more flavor, but they are small and very delicate. Also, as their name indicates, they bear fruit in only in early summer. The Everbearing variety produce very large strawberries, much like the “store bought” type. They are not as sweet, but the make dynamite jam and preserves, and they produce a LOT of fruit. We picked at least a pint a day for much of the summer, and in mid-summer I picked two pints on most days, I was still picking strawberries into October. I have 50 Everbearing plants, and from those we canned 50 jars of strawberry jam and preserves, froze 9 quarts of whole berries and ate strawberries almost daily. I do fuss over my strawberries. I make sure that the bed is weed free and mulched. We top dressed the plants with fertilizer in the spring and sprinkled a handful of manure around each plant in July. The plants really responded to the manure. I also make sure that I clip all of the new baby “sucker” plants as they emerge. You must clip all of the suckers in order to let the plant put energy into making fruit. Everbearing strawberry plants last about 3-4 years before they begin to slow down in yield. You then replace them with new plants. I’m also a big advocate of regular watering. I take note of when it rains and when it’s dry. I make sure that my garden gets an inch of water each week, and it is best if it’s from rain.
My husband is very handy, and built a frame for berry netting. It’s simply che
ap pvc pipe configured like a cube over the garden. We hung netting on top and around the sides, leaving a space for us to enter. The birds, deer, chipmunks, and squirrels have been kept out so far! Deer will eat the plants right down to the dirt. They took quite a few of my Junebearing plants because we didn’t have them covered.All the work is really worth it, we opened a jar of strawberry marmalade this morning...heaven on a waffle!
Deer Deer Deer
Deer…dear deer, at least I used to think so. This year the deer were not nice to us. They pillaged our gardens on a daily basis. They became a nuisance early on, ignoring our shouts and chomping away on those lovely zucchini blossoms. This was the first year that we tried eating zucchini blossoms. I baked them into a frittata and they were delicious! I had planned on trying some stuffed with cheese, battered and fried. The deer decided that they should have them instead.
I do like watching deer. Fifteen years ago when we moved into this house, we set out food so we could watch them. I guess that so many years of living in Saint Paul and not seeing much wildlife got the best of our common sense. The deer became quite tame, coming in for apples and carrots, showing off their babies. What fun it is to watch fawns play and cavort out in your yard! We’d watch them racing around and around the house…what a hoot!
When we started vegetable gardening I always planted more than we needed. I’d say to the deer, “You can have some, but don’t take it all.” There were days that I’d be four feet from a buck, he’d be contentedly nibbling around the edge of my garden, but he’d never venture into the middle, even when I was watching from the house. This went on for well over ten years. The deer would stay out of the middle of my garden and eat around the edges. Everyone was happy. I do use “Liquid Fence” quite liberally as insurance. I got into the habit of putting bamboo stakes down either side of my rows of beans, and suspending netting over the top. The deer weren’t able to control the temptation of green beans, so I learned to protect them. I also use predator tape, which is a mylar ribbon that you attach to poles and place around the garden. It works well in the spring but the deer seem to get used to it.
This year we had several does that would trounce right into the middle of the garden like it was planted for them. They ripped down deer netting, crashed through fencing and basically just ate anything they could reach. We lost a lot of squash, they ate whole squash! Not just little bites. Then they ate the leaves off of everything except the potatoes and cucumbers. They ate zucchinis and squash blossoms, pumpkins, beans, beet greens, carrot greens, lettuce, broccoli, beans, strawberries, strawberry plants, and peas. They took bites out of a lot of tomatoes, ruining them in the process.
I think I’m paying for all my years of gloating. People would ask me, “Do you have a deer fence?” I’d reply, “No, I plant enough for the deer too. They never take too much, we coexist.” Now I’m asking myself, “Bigger garden or beefier fences?” I have resorted to a slingshot and small pebbles. But that doesn’t help when I’m not at home. I’ve also said to the deer, “Keep eating! I’ll get my veggies from you in the fall!” Only problem is that we are in the city limits, and I can’t shoot ‘em. So, we are researching an electric fence. I’m tired of sharing, and they aren’t giving enough back.
I do like watching deer. Fifteen years ago when we moved into this house, we set out food so we could watch them. I guess that so many years of living in Saint Paul and not seeing much wildlife got the best of our common sense. The deer became quite tame, coming in for apples and carrots, showing off their babies. What fun it is to watch fawns play and cavort out in your yard! We’d watch them racing around and around the house…what a hoot!
When we started vegetable gardening I always planted more than we needed. I’d say to the deer, “You can have some, but don’t take it all.” There were days that I’d be four feet from a buck, he’d be contentedly nibbling around the edge of my garden, but he’d never venture into the middle, even when I was watching from the house. This went on for well over ten years. The deer would stay out of the middle of my garden and eat around the edges. Everyone was happy. I do use “Liquid Fence” quite liberally as insurance. I got into the habit of putting bamboo stakes down either side of my rows of beans, and suspending netting over the top. The deer weren’t able to control the temptation of green beans, so I learned to protect them. I also use predator tape, which is a mylar ribbon that you attach to poles and place around the garden. It works well in the spring but the deer seem to get used to it.
This year we had several does that would trounce right into the middle of the garden like it was planted for them. They ripped down deer netting, crashed through fencing and basically just ate anything they could reach. We lost a lot of squash, they ate whole squash! Not just little bites. Then they ate the leaves off of everything except the potatoes and cucumbers. They ate zucchinis and squash blossoms, pumpkins, beans, beet greens, carrot greens, lettuce, broccoli, beans, strawberries, strawberry plants, and peas. They took bites out of a lot of tomatoes, ruining them in the process.
I think I’m paying for all my years of gloating. People would ask me, “Do you have a deer fence?” I’d reply, “No, I plant enough for the deer too. They never take too much, we coexist.” Now I’m asking myself, “Bigger garden or beefier fences?” I have resorted to a slingshot and small pebbles. But that doesn’t help when I’m not at home. I’ve also said to the deer, “Keep eating! I’ll get my veggies from you in the fall!” Only problem is that we are in the city limits, and I can’t shoot ‘em. So, we are researching an electric fence. I’m tired of sharing, and they aren’t giving enough back.
Summer in a Canning jar
We have two very large vegetable gardens, two strawberry patches, raspberries, currants, blueberries, and rhubarb. Because of this, I spend a lot of time in the kitchen canning in late summer. It's very rewarding to go down into the root cellar and see shelves full of jars. To me those jars are summer. Each and every one is precious, I love opening them throughout the winter and tasting how wonderfully good home made preserves, veggies and pickles can be.
This year we made a lot of pickles, hot pickles, sweet pickles, curried pickles, bread and butter pickles, and pickled green beans. We're famous among our friends at parties for those green beans!
We just finished a batch of german red cabbage. We made this last year and when I tried some right out of the jar, I didn't like it. Then just last week I took out a jar and heated it...wow! It was better than any red cabbage I'd had in a restaurant. So, that solved the problem of "what do we do with all the red cabbages in the garden?"
We had trouble with tomatoes. They didn't ripen. So they're in boxes and ripening slowly. Every few days I get enough to make a few cups of sauced tomatoes for the freezer or a batch of salsa. If you grow tomatoes and do not have a Back to Basics Food Strainer and Sauce Maker...get one! I got mine at Ace Hardware. It looks like an old fashioned meat grinder with a big bowl on top. you wash the tomatoes, cut them in large chunks and grind them. The seed, skin, and core come out one end and you have nice tomato pulp out the other end. Gone are the days of me blanching tomatoes, dropping them into ice water, peeling, coring and seeding. Ugh! It is a nice quick way to process tomatoes for salsa.
We also bought a Mehu Maija steamer on Ebay. They are available at Amazon and Ebay, but I haven't ever found one locally. It's a Finnish invention that allows you to steam whole fruits in the top, and extract the juice via a tube at the bottom. No more cooking apples, running them through the ricer, then squeezing the pulp through a jelly bag! This baby made quick work of 5lbs of wild plums. We just put them in the top, set the top onto the pan of boiling water and let it simmer for 90 minutes. You then open the valve on the tube and fill jars with beautiful clear juice, ready to be canned or made into jelly. I'm looking forward to trying it on berries next year.
This year we made a lot of pickles, hot pickles, sweet pickles, curried pickles, bread and butter pickles, and pickled green beans. We're famous among our friends at parties for those green beans!
We just finished a batch of german red cabbage. We made this last year and when I tried some right out of the jar, I didn't like it. Then just last week I took out a jar and heated it...wow! It was better than any red cabbage I'd had in a restaurant. So, that solved the problem of "what do we do with all the red cabbages in the garden?"
We had trouble with tomatoes. They didn't ripen. So they're in boxes and ripening slowly. Every few days I get enough to make a few cups of sauced tomatoes for the freezer or a batch of salsa. If you grow tomatoes and do not have a Back to Basics Food Strainer and Sauce Maker...get one! I got mine at Ace Hardware. It looks like an old fashioned meat grinder with a big bowl on top. you wash the tomatoes, cut them in large chunks and grind them. The seed, skin, and core come out one end and you have nice tomato pulp out the other end. Gone are the days of me blanching tomatoes, dropping them into ice water, peeling, coring and seeding. Ugh! It is a nice quick way to process tomatoes for salsa.
We also bought a Mehu Maija steamer on Ebay. They are available at Amazon and Ebay, but I haven't ever found one locally. It's a Finnish invention that allows you to steam whole fruits in the top, and extract the juice via a tube at the bottom. No more cooking apples, running them through the ricer, then squeezing the pulp through a jelly bag! This baby made quick work of 5lbs of wild plums. We just put them in the top, set the top onto the pan of boiling water and let it simmer for 90 minutes. You then open the valve on the tube and fill jars with beautiful clear juice, ready to be canned or made into jelly. I'm looking forward to trying it on berries next year.
Sewing with my Daughter
One day this summer I took a day off from canning and gardening to spend some time designing and sewing with my daughter. We had just received the book "Stupid Sock Creatures" in the mail, and we wanted to make some new buddies! We started out going to rummage sales in search of socks and buttons. We found a couple pairs of socks at the first rummage sale that would be just perfect for some of the projects in the book. We took some time to have lunch together, including dessert, and lots of good conversation. It was really nice to take time for Marlena and not have to say, "I'm busy right now, I've got too much to do."
In the afternoon we leafed through the book and Marlena decided on a couple creatures she'd love to make. We chose socks, and buttons for eyes, pulled out the sewing machine, and got busy! This is Red Wetty, we decided he likes to toast marshmallows on his tail, that's why he's so chubby. His tail and teeth were the hardest to sew, my machine did not like the small seam allowances I used, and it tended to pull the stretchy fabric down into the lower part of the machine, screwing up the tension. I'm learning that I have to use a bit wider seam, so that the feeder feet will move the fabric evenly. I also learned a trick from my Mom, she places waxed paper under the fabric to keep it from getting stuck in the feeder. This works well with fleece too.
The first creature we made went pretty smoothly, it was a thicker sock and was a bigger creature. He also has a neck, and this required a bit more cutting of the sock. Marlena did the final stitching up of his stuffing hole. Here's Wronky, he needs someone to cheer him up, he loves to have you make him smile. He also likes wearing sweaters, perfect for our chilly fall days. He likes sitting on top of the television, using his antennae to make sure you have a clear picture. He doesn't know we have satellite TV.
We're really enjoying these projects. It's a good way to recycle old socks and the stuffing from old pillows. I'm thinking we should include some charms or notes inside each creature...something special about them or us. This is also getting Marlena excited about sewing. It's a good way to show her how things are constructed. I'm giving her crewel embroidery needles to hand sew so that she doesn't poke her fingers (like I do) and decide that sewing is painful. Marlena says, "Let's make all of them in the book!"
In the afternoon we leafed through the book and Marlena decided on a couple creatures she'd love to make. We chose socks, and buttons for eyes, pulled out the sewing machine, and got busy! This is Red Wetty, we decided he likes to toast marshmallows on his tail, that's why he's so chubby. His tail and teeth were the hardest to sew, my machine did not like the small seam allowances I used, and it tended to pull the stretchy fabric down into the lower part of the machine, screwing up the tension. I'm learning that I have to use a bit wider seam, so that the feeder feet will move the fabric evenly. I also learned a trick from my Mom, she places waxed paper under the fabric to keep it from getting stuck in the feeder. This works well with fleece too.
The first creature we made went pretty smoothly, it was a thicker sock and was a bigger creature. He also has a neck, and this required a bit more cutting of the sock. Marlena did the final stitching up of his stuffing hole. Here's Wronky, he needs someone to cheer him up, he loves to have you make him smile. He also likes wearing sweaters, perfect for our chilly fall days. He likes sitting on top of the television, using his antennae to make sure you have a clear picture. He doesn't know we have satellite TV.
We're really enjoying these projects. It's a good way to recycle old socks and the stuffing from old pillows. I'm thinking we should include some charms or notes inside each creature...something special about them or us. This is also getting Marlena excited about sewing. It's a good way to show her how things are constructed. I'm giving her crewel embroidery needles to hand sew so that she doesn't poke her fingers (like I do) and decide that sewing is painful. Marlena says, "Let's make all of them in the book!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)