Showing posts sorted by relevance for query for the birds. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query for the birds. Sort by date Show all posts

For the Birds: Snowy Owl Facts and Precautions - Interview with Nature and Bird photographer Paul Bannick

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Phone interview with Paul Bannick, Author and Photographer of The Owl and The Woodpecker 11/17/2011, by Christine Southwick

With the reports of sighting along the Washington coast, this year appears to be an irruptive year for the Snowy Owl.

"Snowy Owl Singing in Fog"  Photo: paulbannick.com
Reprinted with permission


Paul, WHERE ARE THESE OWLS COMING FROM AND WHY ARE THEY HERE?

Snowy Owls breed on the Arctic Tundra, but the young disperse widely, so we don’t know if these owls are from Alaska, Canada, or Asia. We do know that they are here in search of food. The most common explanation is that the birds are responding to a fall in lemming populations to the north. The success of the prior year’s breeding owls likely plays a role as well, with many more birds putting pressure on whatever lemming populations remain.

These owls are hungry. The only reason that they fly this far south is to get enough food to survive. They need all the energy and fat that they can acquire. It is important that people, in their enthusiasm to see these magnificent owls, don’t crowd them and cause them to waste valuable calories. Expending energy unproductively can be the margin between surviving or starving.

IS THERE A SPECIFIC AGE OR SEX OF THE SNOWY OWLS THAT FLY SOUTHWARD TO FIND FOOD?

There is a hierarchy in Snowy Owls, with the adult females initially retaining breeding territories, while males and juveniles move south with juvenile males traveling the furthest. Therefore, most of the Snowy Owls who travel down into Washington are juveniles, and the majorities of these are males.

WHAT KINDS OF FOOD ARE THESE OWLS EATING WHILE THEY ARE HERE IN WASHINGTON?

They are eating mostly rodents, and opportune birds. Rodents mostly move at night or dusk, so while the Snowy Owls are in Washington, most are hunting dusk through dawn. Having found an area that sustains it, a Snowy Owl may stay in the area for a while.

HOW WOULD I KNOW IF I AM TOO CLOSE AND CAUSING A SNOWY TO WASTE ENERGY?

These owls live on or near the ground. They need much more distance than other owls because of their exposure. If you are closer than 100 yards (length of a full football field), you may be too close! Half a mile is more ideal. If you see the owl opening its eyes during full daylight, defecating, climbing to a higher perch, or especially flying away from you, you are probably TOO CLOSE. You are causing an owl harm every time it has to launch itself for reasons other than feeding.

WHAT SUGGESTIONS WOULD YOU OFFER PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THESE OWLS IN WAYS THAT ARE HEALTHY FOR THE OWLS AND SATISFYING FOR THE VIEWERS?

First and foremost, keep your distance. That means use a scope if at all possible. If you are taking pictures, take advantage of high-powered lenses and tripods and/or digi-scoping . Be prepared to stay in one place for a while.

It is recommended that people wait for a few weeks when they hear about a Snowy Owl in a new location. By late December or January, many of these owls will be in place and settled, and less likely to require that half mile. It may even be able to tolerate a closer approach, especially if you use your car as a blind. Watch for those signs of nervousness, and back away if you are bothering the owl.


Read more...

Local soccer teams to square off in season finale Tuesday

Monday, October 22, 2018

Soccer ball
Photo by Wayne Pridemore
Tuesday night, October 23, 2018 at 7pm at Shoreline Stadium, the Shorecrest and Shorewood girls soccer teams square off in the regular season finale.

If ever there was a night for local youth coaches (of both boys and girls teams) from the Hillwood and Shorelake Soccer organizations to bring their teams to a game, this would be it. 

Nearly all the players they’ll be watching are the product of the two programs, and watching the ‘big kids’ play can teach them invaluable soccer techniques as well as great lessons regarding sportsmanship, effort, hustle, and team play. Dry weather is in the forecast.

The teams come into the game with very similar records. The Scots are 8-3-2 in WesCo action, while the T-Birds are 8-4-1.

Both teams have strong coaches. Mindy Dalziel is at the helm for the Scots, while long-time local coach Gary Harris leads the T-Birds.

Both schools have long, proud, and successful programs, with State Championship banners adorning the walls of both gyms. Michelle Akers, arguably the greatest female American player, was a Scot, while her US National and World Cup Champion teammate Lori Henry (who is a long-time assistant coach for SC) played for the T-Birds. 

Nina Lowe, a two-sport SW State Champion (in soccer and basketball, as well as a former T-Bird girls basketball coach) was on the 1999 championship team, while Scots coach Mindy Dalziel won State in 1992 and 1993 as a player at Shorecrest.

It will be the first meeting of the year between the two teams, and with the District One 3A playoffs starting next weekend, much is at stake.

Those teams ranked in the top six in the complex RPI system earn their way into Districts with a bye into the tournament, while those ranked 7-10 must win a dreaded ‘win-or-go-home’ play-in game that precedes Districts. Both teams have a chance to finish in the top six. A top-four finish earns a team a first-round home game.

The latest RPI rankings can be found HERE.

The outcome of Tuesday’s match will go a long way to determining the final seeding of both teams, as well as deciding if either (or both) teams get a first-round home game next Saturday.

Players to watch - For Shorewood, freshman twin sisters Kaitlyn and Morgan Manalili are very technical ball-handlers with great awareness, along with the ability to create and finish plays. Look for senior defender Hai-Ying Aw to make long throw-ins. Sophomores Grace Kamilla and Shea Mertel both hustle like crazy.

For Shorecrest - Junior Izzy Menning plays with passion and drive. Junior defender Sydney Van Ness is a stud; an anchor on the back line with a big free-kick leg. Junior Sevi Mitsopoulos, back from injury, is a real playmaker. Senior captain Amanda Kagarabi brings great all-around athleticism and leadership qualities to the team, as well as the experience that comes with having been a part of two state champion teams for the Scots, in track and basketball.

Kagarabi, especially, is looking forward to Tuesday’s showdown. 

“I’m so excited for this game. We are all playing for pride, and our games with Shorewood always have a whole ‘nother type of energy. We’re excited to end the regular season on a high note as we prepare for the playoff battle coming up over the next few weeks.”

--Sports Desk



Read more...

For the birds: Birds need them - we need them - let’s save the trees

Friday, August 2, 2019

Golden-crowned Kinglet in tree
Photo by Elaine Chuang
By Christine Southwick

All our local birds need trees. Our yard birds are classified as Perching Birds since their feet have evolved to clinging to tree branches.

Most of the birds in our area eat, sleep, and breed in trees. Northern Flickers, Downy, Hairy, and Pileated Woodpeckers, and Red-Breasted Sapsuckers are prime examples.

Did you know that Black-capped and Chestnut-backed chickadees, plus Red-breasted Nuthatches, are just some of the birds that use old woodpecker cavities for their nests

That’s already eight cavity nesters that need good-sized local trees for food, raising their young, and for shelter and sleeping.

Red-breasted Nuthatch high in tree
Photo by Elaine Chuang

All kinds of birds build their nests in our local trees: Robins, Steller’s Jays, Yellow Warblers, et al. 
  • White-crowned Sparrows, Dark-eyed Juncos, and Spotted Towhees use trees as look-out posts from which to watch for predators near their nests.
  • Golden-crowned Kinglets, Yellow-rumped Warblers, Merlins, Band-tailed Pigeons, and many other birds need tall evergreens in which to lay their eggs
  • Red-breasted Nuthatches have been known to build their nests 120 feet high in conifers, Cedar Waxwings and kinglets often nest 60 feet up.
  • Willow Flycatchers, Olive-sided Flycatchers and Pacific Slope Flycatchers pass through our area during northern and southern migrations and use treetops from which to fly out and catch the bugs needed to fuel their journeys.

Birds glean tiny bugs off trees, helping to keep trees healthy. Their lilting songs lift our hearts and reduce our stress levels. Birds and bees help pollinate trees.

Pileated Woodpecker on old tree
Photo by Elaine Chuang


How do we humans benefit from trees? Why should we keep them? 

Trees reduce noise, moderate temperatures, reduce dust and help clean the air. Trees, especially year-round conifers, deflect rain and snow from falling directly to the ground, thereby slowing runoff and diminishing stormwaters and flooding.

Many people don’t know that Shoreline Parks only have 20% of our city’s tree canopy, while 71% of the tree canopy is owned by private homeowners. Therefore, tree-cutting homeowners directly reduce Shoreline’s tree canopy, and affect their related neighborhood.

Red-breasted Sapsucker with sap holes
 (these holes do not hurt trees)
Photo by Elaine Chuang
Trees need to be kept. Thin a tree, don’t cut it down.

If a tree is sick, don’t cut it flush to the ground, leave a ten foot or higher snag. It will cost you less, and the woodpeckers will start using the snag.

Other birds will soon claim the used woodpecker holes.

Give birds places to live and improve our breathing/noise/and climate change issues.

Keep the trees! 
Help save the Birds!



Read more...

For the Birds: Babies to the left of me, babies to the right...

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Song Sparrow fledgling begging for food
Photo by Christine Southwick


By Christine Southwick

Babies to the left of me—Babies to the right of me-Babies over my head!

Finally, a sunny weekend allowed me to see the following baby birds:
  • A newly fledged Spotted Towhee in its dark camouflage;
  • A juvie Oregon Junco wearing its striped suit;
  • A fledgling Song Sparrow learning to bathe (and still begging for food);

Three, hours-old, fledgling Black-capped Chickadees, wings a-flittering were squeaking for food. These came this morning from the nest box in my blue spruce. Both parents are yard-residents. I know this because they were both color-banded in my yard for a local study being done by the Puget Sound Bird Observatory.

Oregon junco father feeding his two striped off-spring
Photo by Christine Southwick

A little group of Chestnut-backed Chickadees, probably as young as the Black-capped Chickadees, were also fluttering their wings, and begging. These were being fed suet by one dutiful parent who was color-banded.

One of my banded Red-breasted Nuthatches was feeding suet to two freshly fledged babies. Suet is such a quick source of healthy protein, and makes the job of feeding a brood much easier for the parents.

Fledgling Chestnut-backed Chickadee -learning to use feeder
Photo by Christine Southwick

And a Bewick’s Wren has built a second nest. The first one was in a nest box — this one is on an under-eave wall-divider near the nest box. The jury is still out as to whether this is for a second brood, or is a replacement brood. I can’t check the nest box until she is done with this nesting.

What joy making my yard a “Certified Wildlife Habitat”  has brought me!

By supplying the four essentials: food; water; space; and a place to raise young; and by not poisoning the bugs they eat; I have created an oasis that is beneficial to wildlife and uplifting me.

Juvie Red-breasted Nuthatch--Now, where is the food?
Photo by Christine Southwick

Did you know that Shoreline is a National Wildlife Certified Community Wildlife Habitat? We became one in 2010. In order to maintain our certification, the community needs to earn 40 NWF points a year. We earn these points through educating local groups, environmental work parties, and staffing booths at local events. We encourage home/apartment owners (one point each), workplaces, and places of worship (three points each), and schools (five points each) to become certified wildlife habitats. 

I may not be able to save all the birds in the world, but I can make a difference in my part of the world. I choose to do so—will you join me?


Christine Southwick is a Board member of the Puget Sound Bird Observatory and is their Winter Urban Color-banding Project Manager. She has completed the 40-hour class to become a National Wildlife Federation Certified Wildlife Habitat Steward.

For previous For the Birds columns, click the link under the Features section on the main webpage.

Read more...

Birds at the Burke Saturday

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Puget Sound Bird Observatory is partnering with the Burke Museum for an annual event about birds from your backyard, and around the world.

Birds at the Burke, Saturday, October 19, 2013, 10 am – 4 pm
Included with museum admission; FREE for Burke members or with UW ID

Join the Burke Museum for a new annual event all about our feathered friends! See and touch hundreds of birds from the Burke’s ornithology collection, from hummingbirds to hornbills.

Activities include:

  • See beautiful nests with eggs from the Burke’s bird collection – on public view for the first time ever.
  • Also learn about the most common nests you can find in your backyard.
  • Meet a live macaw from Cougar Mountain Zoo (10 am - 12 pm) and a live owl from Woodland Park Zoo (1-3pm).
  • Discover how scientists safely capture and band wild birds for research with mist net demonstrations, and practice with toy birds.
  • Examine how birds are prepared for museum collections by viewing bird specimen preparation.
  • Hands-on bird crafts and family activities.
  • 11:30am & 1pm: join Neil Zimmerman from Seattle Audubon for a short bird walk around the museum grounds. Bring your Binoculars!
  • Talks throughout the day ranging from how birds learn to sing, to the lives of owls

Our "For the Birds" columnist Christine Southwick, President of the PSBO, will be at the event with exhibits on local birds and what they eat.



Read more...

Football: Rotary Cup Recap

Thursday, October 3, 2019

Family photo at the Rotary Cup
Rod Mar, SC grad, does this every year


Football Rotary Cup 9/29 @ Shoreline Stadium
Shorecrest 42 - Shorewood 22

By Rob Oxford

Whether either team wants to admit it or not, the Rotary Cup between Shorecrest and Shorewood is undoubtedly the biggest game of the season sans any playoff. Made even more so by the presence of Chris Egan and the KING 5 “Yellow Jackets” who were there to film Friday Nights “Game of the Week” for broadcast. (See article here)

Chris Egan King 5 interviews QB
Eladio Fountain for the Big Game story
Photo by Rob Oxford
After a 30-minute delay due to lightning in the area, Shoreline Stadium had nearly reached its capacity when the 41st Annual Rotary Cup began.

Projected to be the dominant team in 3A WesCo South this year, with the exception of a convincing win over Everett, Shorecrest has looked anything but “dominant” in their first 4 games this season and last Friday’s matchup against Shorewood would once again test the team’s collective mettle.

Shorewood would receive the kickoff and maintain control of the ball for the first 7 minutes of the game. Although the Scots Defense appeared physical in their attack and were applying ample pressure, the Thunderbirds were able to weave their way down field amidst poor tackling and unnecessary penalties, something the Scots must address before their next away game at 2 – 2 Snohomish. Many a big play has been negated this year due to lack of discipline on the field.

The T-Birds were able to put the first points on the board after what appeared to be a punt situation caught the Scots off guard and extended the drive with a first down. Shorewood Quarterback Spencer Osborn then handed the ball to Ibrahim Benzina who scampered 12 yards into the end zone untouched.

During their first offensive series, Scots Quarterback Eladio Fountain again showcased his incredible arm by barely overthrowing a wide-open Des Fox, a play Coach Christensen would return to later in the game with a much different result. The Scots also made good use of the screen pass moving the ball into scoring position, but an errant pitch to Markus Selzler fell to the ground and was recovered by the Thunderbirds on their own 7-yard line, resulting in another stalled Shorecrest drive.

The Rotary Cup changes hands
Photo by Rob Oxford

Surprisingly, both the Scots Offense and Defense were tested the entire night as the Shorewood Coaching Staff seemed to have developed an effective game plan to combat the “favorites”.

Later in the 2nd quarter Robbie Oxford stepped up with 2 big plays to slow down the Thunderbird Offense. The first, a batted ball intended for a wide-open Shorewood Receiver and the second forcing a T-Bird ball carrier back inside on an attempted end around. The result was a fine defensive play by his teammates and a 7-yard loss for the Birds. Unfortunately, due to what was deemed a “blow to the head, dead ball personal foul,” Shorewood was given yet again, another fresh set of downs.

The Scots Defense would then muster an impressive goal line stand and keep Shorewood out of the end zone, sending both teams to the locker room with the Thunderbirds up 7 – 0 at the half.

The rain stopped just in time for the customary “Family Photo” taken by Seahawks Photographer Rod Mar, a Shorecrest Graduate, and the Scots were anxious to receive the second half kickoff.

Late in the 3rd Quarter, Offensive Coordinator Tommy Eulberg would dial up a similar pass play to the one just out of Des Fox’s reach in the first quarter. This time Eladio Fountain would deliver a beautifully thrown ball 45 yards to the sure-handed Fox and the Scots would be on the board. After Gavin Dalziel tacked on the PAT, the game would be all tied up and the momentum would seem to have shifted to the Home Team Scots.

The Thunderbirds continued to challenge the Scots, but after a fumble recovery in the 4th Quarter, Shorecrest would go back to what has so far been their bread and butter, the tandem running attack of Markus Selzler and Marcus Tidwell. Tidwell would eventually gallop through a giant hole opened up by the Scots O Line and Shorecrest would take the lead for good.

The responsibility for preserving the win would first fall on the shoulders of the Scots Defense who needed to stop the Thunderbirds from driving downfield during the closing minutes. A final 4th Down pass attempt by Osborn to tie the score was broken up by Shorecrest DB’s Jacob Cruz and Mo Dean.

With only minutes left on the clock and a 6 point lead, Fountain, Tidwell, Selzler and Junior Gabe Nelson would rely on the big fellas up front to chew up the clock by continuing to gain first down yardage. When they needed it most, 2-way starter James Huffman, Juniors Elijah Shultz, Jacob Halvorson, Jordan Glessener and Senior Damarious Kellogg-Duncan kept pushing the Thunderbirds Defense back towards their own end zone.

When the clock hit double zeros, many Highlander fans admitted it was an “ugly win,” but a win they’ll take nonetheless.



Read more...

For the Birds: Barred Owl- fierce protector of its territory

Saturday, November 24, 2012

Barred Owl. Note barring at neck and chest
Photo by John Riegsecker


By Christine Southwick

Barred Owls want to know, “Who cooks for you?  Who cooks for you all?”

But don’t answer near the nest tree—they will strafe invaders with their strong talons—the only defense they have. Unlike other raptors, owls rarely tear their food, preferring to swallow it whole, and then cough up the un-digestible parts in tidy packets, called pellets, which can often be found underneath their roost trees.
Barred Owl away from trunk
Photo by Doug Parrott
Barred Owls are closely related to Spotted Owls, and will hybridize with them where their territories overlap.  Barred Owls are larger and fiercer than Spotted Owls, with the females weighing up to two  pounds, but looking bigger because of all the feathers.

Barred Owls are generalist hunters, meaning that they have a wider range of prey choices than the Spotted Owls, which allows the Barred to live in mature second growth, and the edges of logged old growth, where they out-compete the pickier Spotted Owls. Barred Owls have learned to use abandoned hawk, crow, or squirrels nests, in addition to their traditional nests in large tree cavities. They will often use the same nest for a number of years.

Barred Owl
Photo by John Riegsecker

Barred Owls are recent arrivals in Washington State, having been long established on the East Coast.  They did not arrive in eastern Washington until 1965, and western Washington in 1973. This has put extra pressure on  the already threatened Spotted Owls. 

Barred Owls form long-term monogamous pair bonds, and both defend their territories throughout the year, but especially in early spring when they begin raising their two-to-four young. Reports of owl attacks usually occur during late fall, when people are still jogging and using trails late in the day, within the actively-defended Barred Owl territory. In the early spring, fewer people are running during the times the owls are active.

My,what a big foot you have
Photo by Doug Parrott
Usually it is hard to see any owl. Barred Owls mostly hunt at night, but will call, and hunt during the day, if the prey comes where they are sitting, waiting. Crows, jays and other birds will mob an owl, and will often be your best Barred Owl locator during the day. Look for owls high up in tall trees, near the trunks. Whitewash on the trunk or nearby branches, and pellets at the base of trees, are also good clues.

So, next time you hear, “Who cooks for you?," look for your successful local Barred Owl.


Christine Southwick is on the Board of the Puget Sound Bird Observatory and is their Winter Urban Color-banding Project Manager. She is a National Wildlife Federation Certified Wildlife Habitat Steward, having completed their forty hour class. We're happy that she is sharing her expertise with us about the birds in our backyards.

For previous For the Birds columns, click on the link under the Features section on the main webpage.



Read more...

For the Birds: Killdeer love lawns - and Cromwell Park

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Killdeer baby, Olympia
Photo by Keith Brady
By Christine Southwick

Killdeer can be found running and searching for insects and other delicacies along water edges, on lawns, gravelly driveways and parking lots, and even golf courses. This mostly land-based shorebird prefers earthworms, snails, and aquatic insect larvae, but will eat large insects, grasshoppers, beetles, even small frogs and dead minnows and crawfish. Being an opportunistic eater it can thrive in places other birds ignore.

Killdeer
Photo by Glenn Hansen
Killdeer got their name from their loud call that sounds like “Killdeerr”. They call early and into the night, and even on the wing. You will usually hear a Killdeer before you see it. Their coloring blends with many backgrounds (except the lawns) making it hard to notice. It usually runs in bursts, then stops to search for its next meal, sort of like a robin. It is most easily identified by its round head, shorebird-length legs, double chest bands, and by their loud distinct call.

Killdeer will nest in almost any open, fairly flat area with vegetation one inch or lower, and that has sufficient water and food nearby. The male make several scrapes, not-built nests, on the ground, and the female selects the one she’ll use for her four to six eggs. The other nest scrapes may help confuse predators, and from time to time the parents add twigs and rocks to the scrapes.

The "broken wing" trick
Photo by Doug Parrott
Like all plovers, the babies are precocial—meaning that they are born with full feathers, and as soon as the feathers dry from hatching, the babies start running around. The babies are tiny, only have one neck ring and hide under their parents for protection. The watchful parents protect their young by loudly faking a broken wing and leading any predator astray.

Killdeer mother and chick
Photo by John Tubbs
In Shoreline, check out Cromwell Park, with its wetlands created to slow and clean rain runoff flowing into the north branch of Thornton Creek. Now that the native plants are filling in, both Killdeer and Red-winged Blackbirds are raising their young within viewing range of observant people.

Another place you can usually find a Killdeer or two is at Thornton Place near Northgate, where the Northgate branch of Thornton Creek is day-lighted.

The nest by the side of the road
Photo by Leah Serna
Listen for loud “Kill-deerr, Kill-deerr” starting about April when they have returned from wintering in South America. Then look on the ground for a bird about the size of a long-legged robin, running, stopping, then running again. You will find your noisy Killdeer.



Christine Southwick is on the Board of the Puget Sound Bird Observatory and is their Winter Urban Color-banding Project Manager. She is a National Wildlife Federation Certified Wildlife Habitat Steward, having completed their forty hour class. We're happy that she is sharing her expertise with us about the birds in our backyards.

For previous For the Birds columns, click on the link under the Features section on the main webpage.


Read more...

For the Birds: What’s Your Name, Little Bird?

Thursday, July 27, 2017

Juvenile Junco - How could you not love this face?
Text and photos 
by Christine Southwick

Are you seeing strange birds, mostly brown stripy things that don’t look like birds in your bird books?

You could perhaps have a rare bird for this area, but more likely you are seeing juvenile birds that have been born nearby.

Congratulations! You are doing something right for the environment with your yard.

Spotted Towhee juvie
just starting to change coloring
Perhaps you have plants with berries, flowers that attract hummingbirds plus other birds, and water for bird baths.

Majorly important, you have made space for them — either with bird boxes, or trees and bushes for them to rest and to hide in.

And you are not using pesticides which kill the bugs that parent birds feed their young!

How do you learn to identify these young rascals?

Watch — do you see an adult that you do recognize feeding this mystery bird? 

Song Sparrow juvie with gape
 (colored area around mouth for parental feeding)
Dark-eyed Junco’s, especially the black-headed males, will often be seen feeding their young (the females are most likely on a second brood).

Watch for a flash of white in the outer tail feathers as they fly away — this is what is call a “diagnostic” clue for all local juncos.

Or maybe you see a gorgeous Spotted Towhee around some gawky-looking brownish-rust colored birds.

These birds are larger, and have darker wings and tails than the other funny looking Song Sparrows juvenile(juvie).

Young Red-breasted Nuthatch
How do I get to the food?
These are our year-round resident birds, so they are the ones that you will most likely see and can learn to identify.

There may be other juveniles stopping at your feeders and water spots.

Black-headed Grosbeaks (BHGR) are starting to head South. I saw a female BHGR at one of my feeders yesterday evening, at least I believe it was a female.

Purple Finches will be hard to determine gender — young males don’t show color for a year. 

Some warblers may look funny right now through August, if you do get a good look at one. Probably it is another juvie.

Another way to ID a juvie is to watch how it moves and interacts with its environment.

Male Junco feeding juvie
A chickadee on the ground, looking confused? Probably a juvie.

A red-breasted Nuthatch being mystified to the access to a seed feeder? Probably a juvie.

A Pileated Woodpecker with an orange punk head not knowing how to hammer? Probably a juvie.

You are making a difference -- you have living proof in the form of juvenile birds visiting!



Read more...

Frank Workman on Sports: Rotary Cup game preview

Friday, September 25, 2015

Frank Workman
By Frank Workman

When our community's annual biggest gathering commences Friday night at Shoreline Stadium with the 7pm kickoff of the Rotary Cup Game, the focus will shift from the Booster barbecue and the bands, the color and the pageantry, to the two teams that will battle it out in the friendly rivalry that exists between the Shorecrest Scots and the Shorewood Thunderbirds.

Fans are advised to arrive early (6pm) to avoid long ticket lines, bring their appetites, seat cushions, blankets, and binoculars, and maybe even a neighbor kid or two. Do partake of the Booster barbecue's $5 Full Meal Deal and the concession stand's Best Popcorn In WesCo.

There will be no live video of the game this year, for the first time since 2008. If you want to see the game, buy a ticket.

For those fans wanting to focus on football, here's some of what you'll want to know.

Both teams appear to be improved from where they were last year.  

Shorewood is 0-3 but has played the more rigorous schedule in Everett, Mountlake Terrace, and perennial league champions, Glacier Peak.  

Shorecrest is 2-1, their wins coming over lightly-regarded Sultan and Sammamish; their loss was by a single point to Lynnwood.

The Scots won this game nine straight times from 2004-2012. But the T-Birds took the Cup back in 2013 with a thrilling 17-14 win, on an Isaac Whitaker field goal at the gun, and retained it last year with a 33-7 romp over the Scots.

Shorecrest leads in the series 23-13.

The best athlete on the field Friday night is Shorewood senior Ronnie Gary (#1).  He high-jumped 6' 9" this summer. From his wide receiver position, he can go up and catch almost anything thrown his way.

Last year the T-Birds had a big-but-young offensive line. They haven't shrunk any, and they're all a year older and more experienced. The Blair brothers (Andrew, #59, and Justus, #71) are the anchors.

SW's most versatile athlete is Isaac Whitaker (#24), now a junior. He'll run the ball out of the wing formation, he catches passes with aplomb, and he does all the kicking. 

Running backs Kaimana Aki and Justin Cho are small but quick. They're both a threat to squirt through the line and pile up big yardage whenever they carry the ball.

T-Birds' Head Coach Brandon Torrey is in his first season leading his team.

Senior QB Aaron Okamura will be starting his third Rotary Cup and gives his team a big experience edge at the position. He's a threat to run or pass on any play.

For the Scots, gritty junior QB Jack Koss is starting just his first Cup game. He has an array of receivers to choose from, in Brig Weaver (#1), Ian Prieve (#7), Race Treat (#3), and Aubry Victor (#22), who also handles the kicking chores.

Their offensive line features Isaiah Banks (#59) and Diego Fountain (#61), both seniors.

Their middle linebacker with the splendid football name, Jake Smotherman (#53) figures to have his name called over the PA frequently Friday.

Head Coach Brandon Christensen is in his sixth season at the helm for the Scots.

Who's going to win the 2015 Rotary Cup? The game could come down to a single play. Or the recuperative powers of a rivalry game that brings an injured player onto the field for the first time all season.

Most likely it will be the team that lifted the most weights over the summer, listened most intently to their coaches, practiced perfectly this week, and devoted themselves to the collective effort that's necessary to win a rivalry game.

Getting a favorable bounce of the ball wouldn't hurt, either.



Read more...

5 Acre Woods – Urban Forest - Natural School

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

We Love 5 Acre Woods
Photo by Jerry Pickard
By Donna Hawkey

A little 5.6 acre of urban forest has remained untouched for forty years and the Lake Forest Park Stewardship Foundation (LFPSF) is leading an effort to help acquire it.

The goal is to preserve “5 Acre Woods,” as it is lovingly referred to by residents, and to establish public trails within this nature gem.

Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) acquired the land many years ago for a water reservoir site but never developed it for that purpose, so they intend to sell it; the property hasn’t been used by anyone for forty years - except the wildlife!

The 5 Acre Woods vision is for low impact trails and a small playground, but the entire forest is a natural school or laboratory for both children and adults, and a sanctuary for many wildlife species.

Tony Angell leading the May Event with 5 Acre Woods
Lead and LFPSF board member Natalie-Pascale Boisseau.
Photo by Jerry Pickard


The LFP Stewardship Foundation and “Friends of 5 Acre Woods” held a May educational event with a walk to the SPU property led by resident Tony Angell, master sculptor and past supervisor of environmental education in the Office of the State Superintendent of Schools.

“Kids glued to a computer screen are facing the possibility of atrophy of the muscles that are required for full vision, not to mention those large muscle groups that allow us to walk and run and do something with our eye to hand coordination that is beyond punching buttons,” said Angell. "We have never seen anything quite like these potential changes in our children.
“This is a perfect place," Angell continued, "for kids to develop and strengthen their senses – sight, touch, smell and auditory capacity. And here is a laboratory location to apply some of the classroom facts, figures and mechanisms for these measurements first hand. These sensory moments are pathways for discovery of what’s going on in our natural world and will be of singular use throughout our lives. The forest gives us all these free services!”

You can almost hear the birds singing
Photo by Jerry Pickard

This is undoubtedly a nesting place and corridor for many wildlife species since it has been undisturbed for so long. Hawks, eagles, owls, coyote, deer, mountain beavers and even long tailed weasels have been found on this site.

“Steep slopes, a stream, riparian wetland, and hillside seep wetlands all serves as a restorative nursery for the wildlife of our community. Other free forest services are the water purification and containment of run off, the CO2 absorption and noise abatement,” says Angell.

As a master artist and author, his home in Lake Forest Park, where he has lived for half a century, has served as a source of inspiration and type of outdoor studio for his work, so he has a passion for the city’s forest.

So far the LFP Stewardship Foundation has contributed to raising close to $300,000 in conservation grant funds and private donations to purchase 5 Acre Woods so that it can remain a City of Lake Forest permanent nature school and park.

Laura Swaim from Friends of 5 Acre Woods
discovering the giant old growth forest.
Photo by Miguel Esteban
The property is the largest undeveloped site remaining in Lake Forest Park. More grant applications, donations and other sources of funding are pending.

LFPSF’s current activities include continuing monthly walks to 5 Acre Woods to educate the community about its environmental and community value.

Some residents are holding their own house parties to assemble neighbors and discuss how more money can be raised and to bring about further awareness of the project.

And in the summer, there will be other activities such as block parties to continue the efforts.

Another strong community connection and support for 5 Acre Woods took place in 2015 when the Seattle Green Spaces Coalition (SGSC) decided to help facilitate efforts along with the Lake Forest Park Stewardship Foundation.

Mary Fleck from SGSC said when she heard of this property and knew of the history and culture of Lake Forest Park and how it has valued its connection to nature, she knew it could be a win-win situation.

“And when residents, strong organizations, and local government work together like this, anything is possible,” she says.

Tony Angell said “we really don’t know what the full diversity of life is in this forest. Clearly not only an abundance of song birds and raptors but reptiles, amphibians, insects and many plants have yet to be inventoried. 
"There’s an old Joni Mitchell song I used to sing when I went out to schools to share stories of nature. There’s a wonderful line that sums up what we’re looking at and it says… ‘Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone. They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.’”

5 Acre Woods property is located just north of where 40th Pl NE and 45th Pl NE intersect in Lake Forest Park.


The next two summer walk events are currently scheduled:
  • June 10th with Ben Pedigo, a birder who grew up in Lake Forest Park, will speak to his passion and knowledge of birds.
  • On July 8th Sarah Cooke, a wetland biologist, will discuss the benefit of wetlands.
  • The walks start at 10:30am from the Lake Forest Park Elementary School on Ballinger Way. See the 5 Acre Woods Facebook page for more information. 
Honey Bear Bakery provides complimentary pastries and coffee!
Seattle Green Space Coalition provides juice and fruits!
Come join the fun and learn!

If you want more information about the 5 Acre Woods project, see the projects tab on the Lake Forest Park Stewardship Foundation website. LFPS is a 5013C non-profit and has been in existence for over 20 years.

~~~
Donna Hawkey, author of this article, is a 20-year resident of Lake Forest Park. Thank you to Tony Angell for his contributions.



Read more...

Notes from Shoreline Council meeting July 26, 2021

Saturday, July 31, 2021

Pam Cross, reporter
Shoreline City Council Meeting
July 26, 2021

Notes by Pam Cross

Mayor Hall called the remote meeting to order at 7:00pm.
Councilmember Robertson was excused for personal reasons.

Approval of the Agenda
Agenda adopted by unanimous consent.

Report of the City Manager Debbie Tarry

COVID-19


For adults over 30 in North Seattle and Shoreline, the fully vaccinated rate is over 80% so Thank You!
  • Ages 20-29 61% are fully vaccinated, and ages 12-19 the number is 62%.
  • Vaccinations are open to everyone 12+.
  • Vaccination locator 
  • Or call 1.800.525.0127. Language assistance available

Help us fight hunger by signing up for the Can Castle Contest.


This week’s Shoreline Walks is a walk around Twin Ponds Park. For details go to shorelinewa.gov/shorelinewalks

A reminder that Primary Election ballots are due August 3.

Council Reports

Councilmember McGlashan again testified at the Sound Transit Board meeting in support of 522/523 bus rapid transit (BRT). There might be a modified plan under consideration. Whether there will be parking garages is still unknown.

Public Comment

Speaking for the protection of established trees
  • Bill Turner, Shoreline
  • Nancy Morris, Shoreline
  • Kathleen Russell, Shoreline, Save Shoreline Trees
Jackie Kurle, Shoreline
  • Encourages ongoing oversight as the enhanced shelter nears capacity.
Approval of the Consent Calendar
Consent Calendar approved unanimously by a vote of 6-0.

Action Item 8(a) QUASI-JUDICIAL: Closed-Record Appeal Hearing - Shoreline Preservation Society, Regarding Naval Hospital Chapel Landmark Designation

City Attorney Margaret King

Because the Council will be acting as a quasi-judicial body, the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine applies to their decision tonight. Councilmembers must show that they can act in a fair and impartial manner, free from improper influence.

The City Attorney previously questioned the Councilmembers.

Two Councilmembers advised they had had contact with some of the parties involved. Attorney King asks for additional information.

Councilmember Robertson reported she had had some contact. However, since she is absent from this meeting for personal unrelated reasons, there is no need to pursue.

Deputy Mayor Scully reported he was contacted by Janet Way who asked him a couple of procedural questions. He did not respond to Ms. Way except to say he didn’t know the answers. He contacted the City Manager and staff responded to Ms. Way. He did not receive any additional information. He states he can act in a fair and impartial manner.

Ms. King does not see a need to ask anyone to recuse themselves.

Does DSHS or the Shoreline Landmark Commission have any questions or concerns?
No concerns or objections.

We can proceed.

This is a Closed-Record Hearing which means that the City Council’s decision is to be based solely on the Record before the City Council and on the arguments and supporting exhibits of the parties. Under the rules of appeal, the Council does not have the authority to request additional information from others, including DSHS.

The decision being appealed is the Shoreline Landmarks Commission’s revised designation of the Naval Hospital Chapel, located within the Fircrest Campus at 1902 NE 150th St. 

More specifically, the appeal is of the Commission’s decision to revise its original designation of the Chapel by reducing the 2.7-acre area surrounding the Chapel to 2.6 acres by revising the eastern boundary to include a section south of the contributing lower parking lot and to exclude a 60-foot by 260-foot section north of the lower parking lot. The revised designation was based on a Request for Reconsideration filed by the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS).

Because of the nature of this action item, this will be a more structured presentation than normally seen at Council meetings. While the Appeal Hearing will be open to the public, only SPS, DSHS/DNR, and a representative for the Shoreline Commission may participate. The City Attorney will be present to assist the Council in the appeal proceedings.

The participants:

1. SPS (Shoreline Preservation Society) seeking Historical Landmark status

2. DSHS/DNR (Dept. of Social and Health Services / Dept. of Natural Resources) owners of the property

3. Commission (Shoreline Landmarks Commission) whose purpose is to designate, preserve, protect, enhance, and perpetuate historic landmarks

The process:

The schedule for oral argument of the appeal proceeding is as follows:
  1. SPS’s (Shoreline Preservation Society) Opening Argument 45 minutes
  2. DSHS/DNR’s Response Argument 40 minutes (Dept. of Social and Health Services/ Dept. of Natural Resources).
  3. Commission’s (Shoreline Landmark’s Commission) Response 15 minutes
  4. SPS’s Rebuttal 10 minutes
After each oral argument, Councilmembers have the opportunity to ask clarifying questions, but will not discuss the topic until the conclusion. At that time they will meet in a Closed Session. At the end of that session, Council will return with their findings.

Burden of proof:

The burden of proof to show the Shoreline Landmark Commission’s (Commission) decision was in error is on the Shoreline Preservation Society (SPS).

SPS’s opening argument included a detailed description of the Navy Chapel’s importance as an historical landmark presented by Janet Way.

NOTE: This is an appeal of the Commission’s decision to alter the boundary of the original designation as a result of DSHS’s Request for Reconsideration. It is not an appeal of the Shoreline Commission’s decision to designate the Fircrest Naval Chapel as a Shoreline Landmark. As a result I am including only those remarks relative to the boundary. For details about the Chapel, please go to the staff report at www.shorelinewa.gov




DSHS requested change


This sketch is an amateur attempt to superimpose SAS “after reconsideration map” over the original designation map. The parking lot (the U-shape on the right or southeast side of the property) is wanted by both SPS and DHSH/DNR.

The issues:

Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
  1. in granting the Motion for Reconsideration filed by DSHS because it did not apply the proper legal standard for a motion for reconsideration?
  2. when it concluded that revising the eastern boundary to exclude the proposed 60 feet by 240 feet section would not have a significant adverse impact on the integrity and character of the Chapel setting?
  3. because it failed to give due consideration to the findings set forth in the February 2, 2021, Findings and Fact and Decision of the Shoreline Landmark Commission?
  4. when it did not accept testimony and arguments on protecting the existing landmark from environmental harm?
  5. to the extent it considered evidence of DSHS’s intent to use and develop the Fircrest property in the future?
  6. to the extent its decision to revise the boundary was a response to a threat of litigation by DSHS
  7. Was the Appeal Action the result of an unfair and improper public process due to a lack of reasonable public notice and unfair timeline causing substantial harm to Appellant?
  8. Was the Appeal Action the result of an unlawful and unfair hearing process because Appellants were not given the opportunity to rebut DSHS arguments recently presented to Appellant?
  9. Was DSHS required to notify the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation or tribal groups of its motion for reconsideration?

Following arguments by all parties, Councilmembers may ask clarifying questions about rules and procedures.

Motion and second to extend the meeting to 11:00pm is agreed by unanimous consent.

Council meets with the City Attorney at a Closed Session in a different Zoom meeting.


Council returns to open session.

The Mayor conducted the following discussion as is normally done during a Council meeting.

Mayor Hall: Does anyone object to asking for staff documents that were most recently sent? We want to make sure we have all the information we need to make the decision.
  • No objection.
  • Documents are emailed to Council.
  • Councilmembers appear to be reading the documents.
Mayor Hall: Do we need more time to review?
No.

Are we voting on each issue as we go? Or at the end?
Both. We will have to direct staff to prepare an ordinance that remands, revises or upholds the Commission’s decision. Because there are so many issues, if we seem to reach consensus on each individual one we don’t need the formality of voting on each one. If we get to one where we’re divided, then I think we need to ask for a motion and then put it to a vote. And at the end, we will be voting on the totality of what we’re directing staff to put in the Ordinance.

1. Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
in granting the Motion for Reconsideration filed by DSHS because it did not apply the proper legal standard for a motion for reconsideration?

The original decision had to be based on an error or omission of fact, or new information that was not readily available. I urge Council to vote that the Commission did properly consider the motion for Reconsideration, regardless of the result. I believe they properly considered it. DSHS’s argument was founded in an argument there were errors or omissions of fact: that the Commission erroneously designated the entirety of the parcel rather than a section of it that DSHS thought they should exclude.

I thought SAS proposed a map, DSHS proposed a different map, and the Commission came up with their own map. I don’t see the underlying error.

This doesn’t fit cleanly into parameters. If one party proposed a map, the other party proposed a different map, and a decision was reached, then it shouldn’t be called a Reconsideration but just a continuation of the hearing. Procedurally, it doesn’t make a difference. They are still entitled to review here.

Because the map was mischaracterized?

Yes, so they are entitled to argue either that it was an error of fact how it was characterized, or it was an error of fact how it was presented on the map.

We heard that the Commission felt they did it properly. Their rules state that any party can petition the decision based on the grounds that it was based on error of fact. DSHS did submit a petition. The Commission reconsidered it and rendered a revised map. That map, then, had the parties looking differently at the northern and southern parts. It appears the Commission did it correctly.

I came to the same conclusion. After reading the minutes carefully to determine what map/boundaries they were talking about, I noticed there were some that didn’t appear to be 100% sure of the boundaries they were discussing. There was confusion and I felt that was enough, but then there was the new information of whether there would be a material effect on the landmark designation. I think Reconsideration was appropriate.

Council reaches general consensus.

2.  Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
when it concluded that revising the eastern boundary to exclude the proposed 60 feet by 240 feet section would not have a significant adverse impact on the integrity and character of the Chapel setting?

Note: the section being discussed is the parking lot (refer to maps).

I don’t believe they did. It was never clear to me how the exact boundaries were selected. They seemed to be based on the roads. I believe asking for Reconsideration on any of the boundaries would be appropriate.

I came to a different conclusion. I don’t see how you can reach any conclusion, using any standard, that the character of the forest isn’t important to the integrity of the structure. The photographs and historical description show that the forest is integral to the importance of the site. If the boundaries are not retained, who knows what could be built on the property that could adversely affect the Chapel setting of peace and tranquility.

I don’t think we’re tasked to make a decision on what could possibly be built there.

I agree. We can’t make decisions on what might possibly be built there. Owners change; circumstances change. Something can be built next to any landmark at any time and anywhere. I think it’s important in this case that there’s a buffer.

But we do have to think about that. All kinds of uses could go in there. Also, the new boundary doesn’t make sense - it’s not a uniform shape, it doesn’t follow the road, it doesn’t follow the contour lines, it doesn’t follow a path - it’s just kind of there.

I agree. There are several references that there are pathways to the Chapel that are important to the site. To exclude the path (from the parking lot) does not seem logical.

You need to have a topographic map to see how the changes could affect the feel of the Chapel. Based on the topography, I agree with the map after the Reconsideration. There is a slope down to the (parking lot) and the feel of the Chapel is based on what you can see.

I have no problem with the map. Area to the west of the Chapel is flat so there is a lot of visibility. To the east, there’s the hill sloping away.

The Commission stated they agree that the forest is significant but disagree on the scope based on photos and visits. Based on the deliberations that the Commission went through are evidence enough to me that there is no single perfect boundary. I don’t see that they made an error. Reasonable people can disagree. I’m ok with the boundaries and don’t see a need to second-guess that decision.

Do we have a consensus?
4 people think it is not an error.

MOTION to extend the meeting to midnight. Agreed by unanimous consent.

3. Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
because it failed to give due consideration to the findings set forth in the February 2, 2021, Findings and Fact and Decision of the Shoreline Landmark Commission?
 
Council does not see an error.

4. Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
when it did not accept testimony and arguments on protecting the existing landmark from environmental harm?

I’m torn on this one. Testimony was in the record. They didn’t say you may not provide this testimony. But the health of the forest had not been considered. It is not appropriate to discuss the forest as a habitat for birds or animals, but the health of the forest is integral to protecting the landmark. If there is a problem what would be the solution? I’m not sure.

Agree the health of the forest is important as part of the landmark, but one of the things we have to recognize is that Shoreline, King County and Washington State codes do not grant the Commission the ability to consider environmental issues. Their focus is on buildings/structures.

I think they accepted all of the testimony and arguments that they got. I don’t see an error here. Did they adequately consider whether the environmental harm to the forest would impact the Chapel? I don’t see that they did. But there’s no evidence that a different boundary would have a different impact.

5. Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
to the extent it considered evidence of DSHS’s intent to use and develop the Fircrest property in the future?

I don’t see that their decision to revise the boundary was based on any specific plan to develop or not develop in the area.

No disagreement.

6. Did the Shoreline Landmark Commission err
to the extent its decision to revise the boundary was a response to a threat of litigation by DSHS?

The attorney clearly tried to intimidate, to negotiate a resolution instead of arguing the facts of the law which should have been done. These are volunteers - no different from a jury. Some people are clearly intimidated by this. This generated a lot of anger and a loss of decorum.

I’m not convinced this didn’t have an impact on the decision. I don’t think we should let this one go.

Not everyone is intimated. This is bad lawyering but I don’t think it changed the outcome.

I’m undecided. He was just stating the facts: if things go one way, then this will be our next step.

The reaction of one of the Commissioners to recuse himself because of how he felt he was being treated, cannot be seen as harmless. We don’t know what would have happened had he stayed.

It doesn’t bother me enough to send it back.

7. Was the Appeal Action the result of an unfair and improper public process due to a lack of reasonable public notice and unfair timeline causing substantial harm to Appellant?

Having a hearing was optional. The Commission could have chosen to review the record and revise or reverse their decision without holding a hearing. They elected to hold a public hearing. They provided notice 6 days in advance instead of the correct notice of 10 days in advance.

They should have followed the public process (of 10 days notice). The people of the State through the Legislature, have spoken loud and clear that with violations of the public process we need to stop and redo. 6 days just wasn’t enough time and this is something fairly major. I think the proper decision is a remand for another hearing.

Did it cause substantial damage? Not sure it would have made a difference.

I agree an extra 3.5 days probably would not have affected the outcome, but rules are rules and a notice is a notice. It should have been rescheduled.

We face the same thing in what we do. We delay and re-notice. What is a harmless error? 6 days to prepare instead of 10? Definitely less time but no way to know what would have changed. Although it’s going to involve a lot of work by a lot of parties, and the outcome may be the same, we need to play by the rules and remand.

8. Was the Appeal Action the result of an unlawful and unfair hearing process because Appellants were not given the opportunity to rebut DSHS arguments recently presented to Appellant?

Council doesn’t have a problem with this one.

9. Was DSHS required to notify the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation or tribal groups of its motion for reconsideration?

Based on the record and the testimony we’ve heard, it seems pretty clear that this action requesting reconsiderations is not subject to this notification law.

Motion and second to direct staff to prepare findings and conclusions that tracks the majority of the Council’s comments tonight
  • in favor of the appellant SPS (Shoreline Preservation Society) on issue #7, and 
  • in favor of the respondent DSHS/DNR (Dept. of Social and Health Services/ Dept. of Natural Resources) on the remaining issues, and 
  • present that to Council at the next available meeting, and 
  • remand to the Landmark Commission on issue #7.

Attorney King offers guidance in the wording of the motion.

City Manager, Debbie Tarry advises the next available meeting is August 9th

VOTE

Passes unanimously by a vote of 6-0.

City Attorney King confirms that Councilmembers are still bound by the appearance of fairness as outline at the beginning of this discussion.

MEETING ADJOURNED



Read more...
ShorelineAreaNews.com
Facebook: Shoreline Area News
Twitter: @ShorelineArea
Daily Email edition (don't forget to respond to the Follow.it email)

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP