|
Joseph C. Neal 145 E. Cleburn St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 479-521-xxxx (home) 479-637-xxxx (work) April 22, 2002 The Honorable Dan Coody, Mayor City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear Mayor Coody, This letter and enclosed photographs are in reference to the proposed Business Tech Park. I attended a tour of the area on Saturday, April 20, with a group from the Northwest Arkansas Audubon Society. One reason for this letter is to compliment Mr. Gary Dumas for taking part of his Saturday to show us around. He provided us with information and answered all of our questions. Please thank him for his efforts. The trip on Saturday was my 8th to the proposed tech park since March 2002. I have now invested about 40 hours of my private time in field trips there. Of course there is always more to learn, but a few things stand out. I wish to call them to your attention, and to that of members of our City Council, in hopes they can be addressed as planning goes ahead. I assume that all of the legally required wetlands are covered in the current plan and I salute the planners for being diligent. However, the area of genuine biological wetlands is more extensive than that shown on the map provided on Saturday and no doubt involves a larger area than is covered in law. I support the proposed protections for the Arkansas Darter and the spring. However, much of the low land on the west and north areas of the site within the "500 year floodplain" is actually seasonally inundated or damp prairie wetland. There are shallow ponds with sedges and other aquatic vegetation. The low fields associated with these ephemeral wetlands and the Clabber Creek bottomlands host several special bird species, including Sora (rail), Henslow's Sparrow and Sedge Wren, all of which appear on various science-based lists of special concern. These lists mostly are a result of habitat loss: both nesting as well as migration habitat. Potential habitat loss at the proposed tech park is a good example of why these lists continue to grow, and cause headaches for planners. The City is probably not required by law to provide habitat for them, but does it make sense to ignore these realities? I photographed all three of these birds today in these fields and wetlands. These aren't award-winning photographs, but hopefully they illustrate the point. These low lying fields and prairie wetlands are remnants of a once much more extensive area of wet prairie habitat that, roughly-speaking, extended from the proposed tech park in a northwardly and then eastwardly fashion, more or less west and north of the bypass all the way around to south of NW Arkansas Mall. The wetter areas were harder to farm, even in dry years. In these places there are still telltale signs of the historical prairie: low conical mounds, and during wet seasons, small pools, and here and there shallow ponds and marshes. In the early years of NW Arkansas, these weren't rare habitats, but as population grew and farming technology advanced, it became possible to alter more and more of them, primarily via drainage. Wheat farming, fruit production, corn, and now chickens and cattle-all have fostered enormous changes in land use. So now this is a very rare habitat. In so far as I know, the proposed tech park constitutes one of only a tiny handful of seasonally wet prairies remaining in NW Arkansas. It is the only one I know in public ownership. There is an opportunity here to do something unique. It's almost 100% certain that Fayetteville will have no more opportunities of this sort. None of this was understood in the early 1990s when the land was acquired and when Clabber Creek was damaged by channelization and attempts to drain the prairie wetlands. We do know it now. This knowledge should alter the priorities and timetable for development. A professionally qualified prairie wetlands biologist or ecologist should be consulted before any additional dirt work is planned in these low-lying areas, including the 500-year floodplain. My experience tells me that typical Army Corp of Engineers wetland folks do not understand prairies. I don't mean this as a smear on their professionalism. It's just that they typically don't evaluate the biological complexities of prairies and hence aren't much help in these matters. We could probably get assistance closer to home. Ed Dale, retired from UA Botany here in Fayetteville, is a prairie ecologist, as is Tom Foti of Arkansas Natural Heritage in Little Rock. I don't know if they could or would help, but they could at least steer us in a productive direction. It makes no sense to me as a citizen of Fayetteville to make additional large investments in construction when a relatively small amount could be invested to better direct development efforts. Considering the seasonal prairie wetlands situation, I think there is a more than average chance that there are endemic crayfish within the project area. A qualified specialist-there is such at UA-Fayetteville-- could sort this out. Moving ahead without this information risks making even more species "endangered," a headache for everyone. As you know, Mike Mlodinow is working on a volunteer bird study. I am participating in this project. We are already finding a number of unique species. Please give full consideration to his findings. I haven't found anything myself that would give me pause about development in the undisputed, obvious upland portions of the project area. Such development is appropriate and would provide balance with protection of the more sensitive low areas. I have heard and read that if our city government isn't allowed to develop this area as it sees fit, it will just sell off all or part of the land. When several of us raised questions about development within the floodplain on Saturday, Mr. Dumas said something along these lines. Is this really the policy of our city government? This parcel is a valuable asset to the citizens of Fayetteville. Its proper development will benefit the entire community. Fayetteville has had many "firsts" to its credit. Why not be the first to fully protect a prairie wetland in a city that began in "Prairie Township" alongside an innovative approach to business development? Finally, in my own profession as a public lands wildlife biologist, I am constantly urged to work for the "best and highest use" of lands entrusted to government. I urge the same concept for the proposed tech park. Protecting a now rare habitat on public lands is a best and highest use, and this can be balanced with compatible development. I took all of the pictures on the attached sheet today, April 22, 2002, in the project area (primarily around Clabber Creek), except for the picture at the golf course, which shows the low mounds better. Please don't hesitate to contact me about any matter raised in this letter. Sincerely, Joseph C. Neal |