Can’t the disturbed areas be restored?
We take issue with the HCP definition of restored habitat since it doesn’t speak to successful restoration, or describe the amount of biodiversity of a restored site compared to the native site. Even by the meager HCP definition, only 2 to 2.5 acres have been successfully restored in 26 years. The promise of the HCP has not been fulfilled, but endangered species habitat has been destroyed by the plan, and not mitigated as promised. • If it takes $400,000 a year to restore the habitat on San Bruno Mountain, what other alternative is there to trading habitat for restoration money? What we see as preferable is a concerted effort to find other sources of funding and to develop a very active volunteer stewardship organization. Such a plan does not destroy and or fragment even more habitat, remove open space and threaten already vulnerable species. • The Bay Area needs housing, yet SBMW is blocking housing from being built. Does San Bruno Mountain Watch care more about butterflies than peopl
Related Questions
- In the disturbed areas of the median where seeding is required, can the contractor conventionally seed and straw the disturbed area and eliminate the need for erosion control blanket?
- What will areas of green space be restored to and how big will they be?
- Why is some power restored in some areas quicker then others?
