HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 5.D-Lttr 06/07/20043
the freshwater channels at Shollenberger Park. We take this opportunity to place this
proposal on the record
It has been nine months since excessv dredge water was allowed to flow through open
weirs into the freshwater side channels at Shollenberger Park, raising the salinity to a
hazardous level that damaged indigenous flora and reduced fauna. I recently sent photos
to the city's Water Resources and Conservation Department showing dead cattails and
willows within the side channels, as of early June. Prior to the recent dredge cycle, excess
dredge waters had not been allowed into the side channels since 1992, according to my
informal research. In the interim, with rain and the infusion of spring waters, the saline
level of the channels has normally been "fresh' or "slightly saline ", I'm convinced, based
upon some sample tests.
believe the high saline level (at 18ppt the end of September, 2003) also impacted the
following populations: Pied - billed Grebe, Virginial Rail, Western Pond Turtle and
Common Muskrat.
With the purchase of the Grey property, we now believe it is feasible to pipe excess
dredge water below the southern Shollenberger trail directly into "Parcel B" - the tidal
mudflats. Chris McAuliff, of U.S. Filter, suggested this remedy to us some time ago, and
we feel it makes sense. The Shollenberger property appears to be higher than Parcel B,
so this flow should occur by gravity flow. This would spare the side channels (and Adobe
Creek) from infusion of highly saline water.
We respect the right of the City of Petaluma to use Shollenberger Park as a dredge spoils
site and are aware of the city's permission to do so by the California Department of Fish
and Game until 2025. Our point is that we feel excess saline water could be returned to
the river more efficiently via Parcel B, without inconveniencing and harming life in the
freshwater channels at the park, or Adobe Creek.
To date, we have had no response from Water Resources and Conservation regarding
this proposal which has been made to them several times during the past year. Perhaps
this is not the correct venue for expressing our concerns; however things have changed
since the acquisition of the Grey Property and its purchase offers an opportunity to correct
a problem, and enhance the experience and enjoyment of those who visit Shollenberger
Park to view its wildlife
Norris (Bob) Dye
Senior Docent, Shollenberger Park/ Alman Marsh
1708 Granada Court
Petaluma, CA 94954
(707) 763 -2934
nrdyer(o)comcast. net
1
s� Y xS
tsgw?'S H
June 7, 2004
Mayor Glass
City Manager Bierman
City Council
Subject: E.I.R. ADDENDUM, APRIL 2004
My testimony is as Senior Docent, Shollenberger Park and Alman Marsh, as appointed by
the City of Petaluma, reflecting docent observations.
We believe the changes to the EIR are positive, reflect a significant costs savings
and will lessen environmental impact.
We also believe the Shollenberger park docents should be involved as consultants in the
planning of access improvements, including trails and bird blinds, as well as any
educational facilities.
The docent program has expanded over the past year. Since January we have conducted
tours for over 600 people, 500 of them school children. These tours plus other duties at
the park place us in an ideal position to see what is working there, and problems_ The
major problem is dogs (or rather, irresponsible handlers). There is a reference on 1310 -1 C
(Page 3 -11) to requiring leashing of dogs. We believe dogs should not be allowed at
all on any trails established on the new property.
DOG PROBLEMS:
1. Threatening wildlife
2. Leaving fecal matter
3. Threatening other dogs or people
4. Handler problems
THREATENING WILDLIFE
Here is an extract from a recent email sent by Docent Gerald Moore:
Breen Heron- Shollenberger Park, Petaluma
2
"This woman and her dog, on a long zoom leash [which can be 10 -20 feet long]
came barreling past us this morning while we were waiting for the kids to show.
Len [Docent Len Nelson], Andy [Docent Andy LaCasse] and I yelled at her to
slow down and stop chasing the wildlife. Ducks and geese (with goslings) were
all over the area... The woman and dog went right toward the water at high speed.
The waterfowl scattered as fast as they could go .... dog on their heels. She was
wired [listening to music on earphones] and only acted when Andy yelled loud,
then acted as if she had done nothing wrong."
This was as much a "people" problem as a dog problem, but the telescoping leashes we
often see allow dogs to threaten wildlife that the distracted handler may fail to notice in a
timely manner.
LEAVING FECAL MATTER
We erected containers for "doggie bags" but a certain percentage of handlers do not
care. It is probably 10% of the handlers that are negligent, and the distant threat of a fine
does not deter. The fecal matter can be a health problem, is depressing, and a distraction
(especially for the children).
THREATENING OTHER DOGS, AND PEOPLE
There have been a number of occasions where dogs without leashes have threatened and
fought with other dogs, or scared people. Animal Control sometimes has been brought in
but their arrival is usually too late as they do not have the staff to respond quickly. Again,
the threat of fine is small. As docents we remind people about leashing their dogs but
often when they have proceeded 50 -100 yards, they unleash their animals again.
OTHER HANDLER PROBLEMS
We have seen people training their retrievers in the central pond.
Recently I encountered a fellow with two large dogs who decided to allow them to lie down
on one of the picnic tables where the children often eat snacks or lunch. When I asked
him to remove them, it led to a 30- minute threatening tirade. His best answer was that he
had seen "ducks" on the table before. All this was witnessed by another docent.
I am not suggesting dogs be banned from Shollenberger Park or Alman Marsh. They
have been allowed there (on leash) for years and it is much more difficult to take
away a right than to prevent a future problem by a prospective ban on the' new trails.
The majority of dog owners are responsible — again, it is the 10% that have caused
the problems at Shollenberger — but the problems are real.
SHOLLENBERGER'S FRESHWATER CHANNELS
Although not mentioned in the EIR, we feel a water management change should be made
to allow excess dredge water to flow into Parcel B, the tidal mudflats, as opposed to using