Skip to comments.CT Audubon Society opposes cell towers in state parks
Posted on 04/02/2012 12:20:38 PM PDT by matt04
Connecticut Audubon Society said it's opposed to a legislative proposal that would allow cell towers in state parks and forests and is urging the public to help them fight the idea.
A provision in a bill before the General Assembly, An Act Modernizing the State's Telecommunications Laws (SB 447), would allow communications companies to build towers in state parks and forests. The act needs the approval of the commissioner of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
The Audubon Society believes cell towers would seriously damage wildlife habitat by causing forest fragmentation. The group said that cell towers are also a hazard to migrating birds.
The bill recently passed the Energy and Technology Committee. The Audubon Society is asking the public to write to their lawmakers and ask them to strike the provision from the bill.
So birds only fly into cell towers placed in state parks and not on other locations?
“...forest fragmentation.” Huh?
Is that like their “glow-bull warming” garbage?
“The Audubon Society believes cell towers would seriously damage wildlife habitat by causing forest fragmentation. The group said that cell towers are also a hazard to migrating birds.”
An individual wind turbine is far, far worse than a cell tower. Thousands of wind turbines are thousands of times again worse.
Stem cell towers?
Cliffs! Birds fly right into them and that’s it.
Any bird killing itself by flying into a stationary cell tower is so rare that it is probably just improving the gene pool for the species.
You are absolutely right. There are thousands of birds and bats killed every year in this huge wind farm in Ontario, and not a peep about it from environmentalists.
Wind turbines cause bird fragmentation. No theory or guessing required.
I am a butterfly enthusiast (watcher, not a collector).
A clearing within a forested area (or even just wooded area) would let in sunshine, thereby allow for the growth of native plants that could provide nourishment for butterflies in the caterpillar and adult stages.
Fragmented forests (e.g., along power line cuts) are a boon for butterflies and those who search to view them. The native (and many non-native nectar producing [aka weeds]) plants near the bases of towers that are missed by the mowing/clearing folks provide sustenance for lepidoptera.
I don’t understand that “logic” at all-the wind turbines are way worse, and we have plenty of those in Texas. The rural area I live in has a couple of cell towers, and they are in clearings surrounded by woods and small neighborhoods. I’ve seen crows and other birds perching on them-don’t birds in Connecticut do that?
Apparently, the Audubon people forgot that butterflies and other insects that birds dine on live/feed on plants that grow in forest clearings. I live right at the edge of the woods and leave my property natural, only trimming it after everything goes to seed to spread them, but my neighbor scalps his every 2 weeks to the ground. I have flowers, butterflies and even fireflies, and all kinds of birds. My neighbor has nothing that blooms and no wildlife, and doesn’t understand why.
Shouldn’t someone tell the Audubon bunch what they are doing wrong, or is this really a NIMBY issue in the guise of harm to birds?
Yeah those dumb birds can migrate thousands of miles dodging all sorts of obstacles except cell towers. Boy when people focus too closely on a subject they make idiots of themselves.
Given how these towers make great rigid places to make nests a case could be made they might actually increase bird populations rather than those weak dangerous tree limbs.
Good grief get a life you myopic people.