Home › Bonita › Bonita
Judge sides with Bonita Bay in eagle’s nest debate
RELATED STORIES
- Bonita residents continue fight to protect eagles’ nest
- Bonita ends fight over eagles' nest
- Bonita’s weary eagle fight gets final life
- State approves housing near Bonita bald eagle’s nest
More Bonita
- Lee County police beat: Jan. 9, 2009
- Judge to decide on zoning for mining in Lee County case
- State GOP meets in Orlando this weekend
Tell us about it
- What would you add to this story? Tell us what we missed.
- Do you have photos from this event? Documents we need to see? Share with us.
- Upload photos & videos
- More ways to get your stuff online and in the paper.
STORY TOOLS
Share and Enjoy [?]
A judge has sided with a developer in how close new construction can come to a bald eagle’s nest in Bonita Springs.
It’s not the final decision — the case between Bonita Bay and the city of Bonita Springs still has another layer of state review ahead — but the recommended order from Administrative Law Judge Kent Weatherell is the last major step in the process before a final ruling.
That would come from Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission. The commission is essentially a special meeting of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and his Cabinet to take up a small handful of land use issues each year.
What will be decided is whether Bonita Bay Properties and SWF Properties can reduce an eagle protection zone that is part on a 15-year-old eagle management plan.
The change would allow construction of 15 new homes in the Baywoods Phase II portion of the 2,400-acre community as close as 330 feet to an eagle’s nest that’s on a 23-acre piece of land between a golf course and a marsh.
Weatherell, who heard about two days’ worth of arguments at City Hall earlier this year over the history of nest LE-005 and the various ways scientists look at what it is the birds need to thrive, came to the conclusion that in this case, the developer should get the go ahead.
He did side with the city on one point — that this was a matter that deserved review at the local level — but he disagreed with the city’s conclusions that the change flies in the face of Bonita’s comprehensive plan.
It was a change the majority on City Council had voted last June to deny. The resolution that followed the vote described the change as one that would “adversely affect environmentally critical areas or natural resources.”
Fighting Bonita Bay on this was something incoming Mayor Ben Nelson supported and something outgoing Mayor Jay Arend opposed.
The city made this decision about the same time that federal standards on whether bald eagles were endangered were changing. The birds were officially taken off the list of plants and animals protected by the Endangered Species Act last August.
In asking for a reduced eagle protection zone of 330 feet, Bonita Bay had argued that the older, larger protection zone — which had initially been 1,000 feet — was set up in a time when there was “limited knowledge about the habitats of eagles and what was needed to assure their recovery. The agencies acted with an abundance of caution.”
In the recommended order Weatherell gave out Thursday, he agreed that the evidence shows eagles adapt to human activity nearby.
With a few interruptions, eagles have used the nest even as Bonita Bay was built, some as close as 900 feet away.
While the current protection zone effectively closes the surrounding area to development as long as the eagles keep nesting there, Weatherall said the argument that eagles adjust was more persuasive than the city’s argument that eagles “do better” with a larger protection zone in which new construction is prohibited.
“It is likely that the existing protection zones around nest LE-005 have helped to protect the eagles and the nest. However, it is also clear that the eagles have adapted to the development ... and the associated human activities,” he wrote. “There is no credible evidence that the proposed development will cause the abandonment of nest ... and the wildlife ecologist presented by the city could only testify that the proposed development ‘may’ and ‘has the potential to’ adversely affect the eagles using the nest.”
As a footnote, he added that the witnesses for Bonita Bay had “far more extensive qualifications and experience concerning eagles than did the city’s wildlife experts.”
And as for the argument that eagles tolerate living near development better when they pick the site, rather than when development nears their nest after they’ve already made a location their home, there was “no credible scientific evidence on this issue, one way or the other,” Weatherell wrote.
Just what kinds of accommodations developers must make for the birds has varied over the years and by which agency is reviewing the plans, and in this case, the city argued that the standards in its comprehensive plan should apply.
The plan has no mention of the size of eagle protection zones, but calls for broad efforts to protect Southern bald eagles as well as plant and animal diversity in general.
Weatherell viewed the revised eagle management plan Bonita Bay was proposing as consistent with the goals in the city’s comprehensive plan.
Both sides now have a chance to look over this recommended order and respond, then the decision goes to the governor and the Cabinet.
---
TIMELINE
• 1977: First records of this particular bald eagle’s nest near Estero Bay
• 1981: Bonita Bay set up as a development of regional impact
• 1993: Plan for Bonita Bay revised to add a golf course and set up a primary protection zone of 1,000 feet and a secondary protection zone of another 500 feet between the nearby nest and residential development
• 1997: Protection zones between the nest and residential development shrink a bit: down to 850 feet
• 2000: Bonita’s first year as a city
• July 2006: Bonita Bay requests changing the eagle protection zone to 330 feet
• Oct. 2006: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service gives its opinions on the nest and Bonita Bay’s eagle management plan
• April 2006: The city’s zoning advisory board recommends accepting the change
• June 2007: City Council denies the change
• August 2007:
-- Bonita Bay appealed the decision to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission
-- Eagles are taken off the list of species covered by the federal Endangered Species Act
• Feb. 2008: Two-day hearing on the case held at City Hall
• April 2008: Administrative law judge sides with Bonita Bay
Comments
This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. Break our rules, and we will ban you. No exceptions, no second chances. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.
Judge Weatherell wisely sided with the experts on Bald Eagles and the City's own Zoning Advisory Board.
We all need to make a choice: Share all the comforts, pleasures and conveniences of urban living with urbanized Bald Eagles
OR
Move to the middle of the Everglades and share the wilderness with the wild boars, panthers and Bald Eagles who may or may not establish a nest on the roof of your outhouse.
#1 Posted by Naplestango on April 23, 2008 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
By the way, George Washigton and his cohorts wanted the Wild Turkey as our national bird as it is indigeneous to America and was crucial to the pilgrims survival.
It was later replaced by the Eagle who stands as the national bird for 52 other nations.
The coat of arms of Albania has a black double-headed eagle.
The coat of arms of Armenia has a gold eagle and lion.
The coat of arms of Austria has a black eagle.
The coat of arms of the Czech Republic integrates the symbols of Moravia and Silesia (both with female eagles in their emblems - red-and-white chequered and black respectively) on the coat of arms of the Czech Republic with Bohemia's lion.
The coat of arms of Egypt is a golden eagle looking towards the viewer's left.
The coat of arms of Germany has a black eagle.
The coat of arms of Ghana has two golden eagles holding it.
The coat of arms of Indonesia has an eagle-like garuda carrying a shield on its neck and a banner on its feet.
The coat of arms of Iraq has the golden Eagle of Saladin
The coat of arms of Jordan has a black eagle.
#2 Posted by Naplestango on April 23, 2008 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The coat of arms of Mexico golden eagle perched upon a cactus devouring a snake.
The coat of arms of Moldova consists of a stylized eagle holding a cross in its beak and a sceptre and a branch in its claws.
The coat of arms of Montenegro represents the two-headed eagle in flight.
The coat of arms of Nigeria has a red eagle on top.
The Insignia of the Pakistan Air Force includes an Eagle.
The coat of arms of Panama has a harpy eagle
The coat of arms of the Philippines has the bald eagle of the United States.
The coat of arms of Poland has a white eagle with a golden beak and talons wearing a golden crown.
The coat of arms of Romania has a golden aquila holding a cross in its beak and a mace and a sword in its claws.
The coat of arms of Russia has a double-headed eagle.
The coat of arms of Serbia has a white bicephalic eagle of the House of Nemanjić.
The coat of arms of Syria formerly had the eagle of Saladin.
The Great Seal of the United States has a bald eagle.
The coat of arms of Yemen depicts a golden eagle with a scroll between its claws.
The coat of arms of Nigeria has a red eagle on top.
Hellenistic Egypt. The Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt used it as their seal.
First French Empire. Napoleon Bonaparte used the Roman Golden Eagle as the symbol of his new French empire.
Persian Empire. The symbol of Persian Army was an Eagle
Rome. The Romans used it on the standards of their armies. From this derives:
The late Byzantine Empire chose a two-headed golden eagle as its symbol. It is popularly that one head symbolised ancient Rome, and the other head symbolised "new Rome" at Constantinople. From this derives:
Albania. The two-headed eagle is the emblem of "Shqipëria" or Land of the Eagles, which is known in English as Albania (see The Tale of the Eagle for the legendary origin of the name)
Russian Empire. After the fall of Constantinople, the Russian Empire took the two-headed eagle as its own symbol.
Charlemagne and Holy Roman Empire. After his crowning as the new Roman Emperor, Charlemagne adopted the ancient Roman eagle as his own symbol. The Holy Roman Empire born of his kingdom took the eagle, but the Habsburgs replaced the golden eagle by an imperial eagle. From this derives:
Austria. The Austrian Empire had a two-headed eagle as its symbol. After the abolition of Austria-Hungary, Austria took as its symbol a one-headed eagle in the modern coat of arms of Austria.
Germany and Prussia. Prussia, and later Germany have used a black eagle as their national symbol.
Spain. The "Catholic Kings", Isabella and Ferdinand, used the Golden Eagle as a part of the royal shield. The eagle was on the Spanish shield until 1978.
The Seljuk Turks and Ottoman Turks used a double-headed eagle as coats-of-arms.
#3 Posted by Naplestango on April 23, 2008 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And still mysteriously silent our so called environmental groups. Not a peep from Audubon, FWF or the Conservancy. Could it be large donations from the Bonita Bay Group have something to do with it?
#4 Posted by swampbuggy on April 23, 2008 at 9:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Naplestango:
It was Benjamin Franklin who favored the wild turkey.
#5 Posted by elnuestros on April 23, 2008 at 11:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How many palms were greased this time? With all of south west Florida's environment in such a precarious state, I would think that the judge presiding over this case would have ruled differently. And Bonita Bay purports to being an environmentally friendly development? I'll bet the promo material for the new development will show an eagle's nest in clear view of one of the many penthouses. Big development wins here.
#6 Posted by toowoo4s on April 24, 2008 at 6:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here is a question for those that are opposed to the ruling: Who developed your community? Exactly. It is too bad that Bonita Bay Group wasn't the developer because your community and the environent would have been a whole lot better in SW FL! All of the those environmental groups are involved in EVERY community pre & post build out. BBG has received environmental awards year in / year out. There will always be development and I am proud to say that BBG has always raised the bar and continues to do "The Right Thing" ---- THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEADER = BBG
#7 Posted by DONUTS on April 24, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
toowoo4: I'm sure you mean well in your zeal for the eagles, however Administrative Law Judge Kent Weatherell could take offense at your accusation of "palm greasing" influencing his ruling.
NDN may not know your real name, but it's easy to identify the computer from which your blog originated .
#8 Posted by Naplestango on April 24, 2008 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Donuts,,,,that post doesnt deserve a decent response,,,
#9 Posted by Bullbat on April 25, 2008 at 9:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)