I have talked with many people about this cell tower since the article in the paper. Friends mostly, people who share my views. But there are a few people who have questioned my reasoning, and my passion for stopping one tower.

One of the arguments was at a New Years party. A couple of friends were praising my activism and asking about the issue further. We had a great discussion about all of the steps a person goes through to try and stop city hall. One of my friends was listening and finally asked, “You know that cats kill more birds than cell towers, why are you going after one cell tower?” I answered, “I know that cats kill thousands of birds, and birds hit windows in bigger numbers too. But I didn’t choose that battle, and the fact that you are aware of that issue means that SOMEONE is fighting it! I saw that no one was objecting to this tower and I chose to speak up.”

Some people believe this tower will not be an issue because it is under 200 feet.
Research provided to me from a Doctoral candidate at UMD shows that the majority of birds flying during daytime are flying much lower than is usually assumed:

“these birds are generally flying low (within 100m of the
forest canopy).”



So the majority of the birds are flying between the treetops and 328 feet above the treetops. This monopole will project at least 100 feet above the trees. This area is mostly Poplar, which average 50 – 80 feet high. Stick a pole 100 feet above that with four big dish type antennas on it, add the enormous numbers of birds that pass through this area, and you have a perfect opportunity for at least some to become victims.

The other problem with this site is are the enormous numbers of birds that pass through it in the fall and spring.

Here are some totals from Hawk Ridge counts sent to me by Anna C. Peterson, PhD Candidate Conservation Biology, Natural Resources Research Institute University of Minnesota Duluth

Total raptors 2007: 60412
Total raptors 2008: 61514
Total raptors 2009: 48853

Season high 2003: 201825

These numbers include significant numbers of Bald Eagles and Peregrine
Falcons. These raptor species and many other non-raptors are on the
MN DNR's list of Species of Greatest Conservation Need

Many of these birds are SGCN and help make the North
Shore one of the most concentrated passerine (songbird) migrations in the
interior U.S.

Nonraptors totals from HRBO:
2008: 160,000+ (I don't have individual numbers)
2009: 126404 (including 4632 Rusty Blackbirds, ~19,000 warblers,
~23,000 robins)
These numbers are from Karl Bardon, HRBO counter.

Common Nighthawk count (2009): 13,000+ in 3 days


I've heard arguments that birds have great eyesight, this is true, especially of the raptors. BUT, when you design the tower to blend in with the landscape, add rain, or fog, or very low clouds at night (which is actually when most songbirds migrate to avoid being eaten by the raptors who migrate in daylight) you will likely have birds hitting this tower because they had no chance of seeing it. Birds are not stupid because they hit the tower. Put a cement barrier in the middle of any freeway, make it blend in, and see if people can avoid it on a dark night, with fog and rain. Are they stupid, or was it stupid to put it THERE?

This is the description of this specific area from the Minnesota DNR website:

“This is one of the most important and visible migratory corridors for songbirds and raptors in the entire Midwest as birds pass along the North Shore and over Hawk Ridge every fall.”

Speaking up was just the beginning. I didn’t really think that one email to the City Council and one letter to the local newspaper would lead to months of working on this issue. I am learning the ins and outs of cell tower siting, learning a lot more about the North Shore migration, and learning how to communicate my position so that others might be persuaded. I’m hoping that it doesn’t all end with a “Wall of Shame” website where I post pictures of the dead birds alongside pictures of the bureaucrats who didn’t listen.

Did Mankind Inherit the Earth?

I have found that there are many people who will argue about an issue without a whole lot of knowledge to back up their beliefs. My personal crusade to stop a cell tower in my neighborhood has brought out the worst in some people, both online and in person.

I began my fight because I thought that this tower would be placed in an area that is significant to bird migration. My daughter and I wait at the end of our driveway for the school bus. Each fall we watch flocks of birds fly right over our heads. These are extraordinary in that they are huge flocks, and virtually constant. These birds travel in a narrow strip, from the lakeshore to just beyond our yard, uphill from the lake. There are several tiers of flocks. On some days you see Eagles, Hawks and Songbirds flying less than one hundred feet high and some that are tiny specks, several hundred or even thousands of feet high. But there is one constant, lots and lots of birds. Because Hawks and Eagles migrate in the daytime, there are probably 10 times more Songbirds migrating at night!

One evening this fall; as I worked in my garden, I watched the annual migration of Nighthawks. They flew about 30 feet above, I could see their white patches on the undersides of their wings and that their mouths were wide open. Nighthawks cannot swallow, so they fly openmouthed and the bugs they catch slide right down their throats. It was so thick with Nighthawks that a woman jogging down the road stopped and walked in circles, exclaiming, “This is amazing!” Each fall and spring we are fortunate to witness this amazing one day migration. Once, many years ago, I stepped out into my yard and witnessed a Bald Eagle drop a salmon, smack dab into the middle of the yard. That was the moment I started watching the sky, paying attention to the birds migrating through this extraordinary place.

We are fortunate to live directly under the most significant flyway in the western Great Lakes. It is the concentrated path that the birds follow when they come down from Canada. Birds instinctively know that if they were to attempt to fly across Lake Superior they might not eat or find a place to land for a very long time. Therefore they follow the shoreline along Lake Superior. By the time they reach Duluth the numbers are huge. They follow the shore and catch the thermals up to the hill we call Hawk Ridge. Some of these flocks are so large that they are detected on NEXRAD radar! My instincts told me that a place with so much bird movement would not be a good place to erect a man made obstacle like a cell tower. I received confirmation of my belief when Bob Russell with the US Fish and Wildlife Division of Migratory Bird Management called me and encouraged me to fight this tower. He confirmed that this is an “egregious” place for a tower. He regrets that FWS does not have the authority to stop a tower under 200 feet, but acknowledges that this tower should absolutely not go in this major migration path. He was able to help by sending a letter of warning to the City. The letter explains that if this tower is built, FWS will enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act if and when there are documented bird deaths at this tower.

People have shocked me with their ignorance and arrogance. Some people do not believe as I do, that the birds are more important than having improved cell phone coverage for AT&T. They argue that more birds die from window strikes and cat predation. I agree. But this tower is not yet built. It is something that we can avoid. Can we go back and ask everyone to board up windows on buildings already built? Can we enforce a law that says you must keep your cat inside? Those are issues that are ongoing, people are trying to find solutions. That doesn’t mean that we throw up our hands and say…”geez there’s more dead bodies from this, these dead bodies don’t matter.” And then there is the argument that our needs are greater than the lives of animals. This is the argument I’ve seen on the blogs. “If the birds are too stupid to avoid the tower, they deserve to die.” And “It's called survival of the fittest for a reason. If a bird isn't smart enough to fly around the tower, maybe it just wasn't meant to pass along it's genetics to the next generation.”

So we intentionally place an object in the flight path these birds have instinctively followed for thousands of years, and call them stupid if they hit it. We disregard animal life to such an extent that we make fun of a very serious issue. Are people so disconnected from nature that they do not realize that if we continue to trash the Earth and creatures, WE will no longer live? I guess this is the same lack of ethics that allows people to dump their garbage on the side of the road. Or pour motor oil down the sewer drain. Somehow corporations find a way to justify pollution in the name of profits. How about the jerk that shot the last successful breeding Whooping Crane from the eastern migratory population? I’m sure he/she thought it was great fun to kill something. It escalates to the point where we don’t care about each other. We find a way to justify our lack of regard because it’s for the good of humankind. I don’t get it. I really don’t. I find it hard to understand how mankind has gone from being a steward of nature to a dominator.

We claim extraordinary intelligence, but lack the ability to think deeper about our role on the Earth. We are part of a system, a system with a tenuous balance. When we are so arrogant that we cannot even fathom that life might be more valuable than “improved cell coverage and wireless communication” we are in great trouble.

Perhaps you think I’m making a mountain out of a molehill. “Oh, it’s just one tower!” But it is one tower today, placed in one of the most significant avian flyways in the Western Great Lakes. Let this one go and there will be more. Eagles, Hawks, and Songbirds all stand to lose if we have one bad weather day. In fog or rain they will not be able to see this tower, and at 180 feet it is far above the treetops. This has nothing to do with the bird’s intelligence, how smart are we when we place an obstacle in a path that has been used for migration for thousands of years?

Big Egos Make For Flawed Decisions

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.

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?

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!

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.

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?



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?

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.

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....

Attachments:

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?