Land swap tied to endangered bird draws concerns
A developer in north Bexar County is asking the federal government for permission to remove 30 acres from a conservation easement aimed at protecting the endangered goldencheeked warbler — a plan that’s drawn the ire of some residents and neighbors.
In exchange for moving those 30 acres out of the easement, Florida-based Starwood Land is offering to add 144 acres to the easement, a swap it says will make its development, Cibolo Canyons, more contiguous. It says the move also would benefit the birds by adding to the conservation area.
In late 2022, the company asked to swap 63 acres from the easement in exchange for the larger parcel, but after receiving backlash in public comments, that application was withdrawn and replaced with the proposal for the smaller swap.
Opponents say allowing the swap would set a bad precedent of modifying conservation protections to benefit developers. They say the exchange still would affect the warblers, which nest in Central Texas in the spring and raise their young here before flying south to Mexico and South America.
The decision ultimately rests with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Starwood Land wants to build 107 homes on the 30 acres, which are on the north side of the property, said John Brian, the company’s east region president. Building there instead of on the 144 acres currently approved for development would allow for “development efficiencies,” he said, but also would result in less impervious cover — materials that don’t absorb rainfall, such as concrete or shingles — and less impact on the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone, while also preserving more land for the warblers.
The birds are endangered be
cause they’ve already lost much of their habitat to development.
“Golden-cheeked warblers are endangered because many tall juniper and oak woodlands have been cleared to build houses, roads and stores,” according to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. “Some habitat was cleared to grow crops or grass for livestock. Other habitat areas were flooded when large lakes were built.”
The 768-acre conservation easement has been in place since 2005, as a requirement under the Endangered Species Act. A former developer received a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, allowing it to develop on 846 acres.
The permit allows the property’s developer — which is now Starwood — to conduct activities that wouldn’t be allowed without the permit, such as “taking,” harming or harassing the species. In exchange for setting aside land for the birds’ protection, the federal agency allowed for incidental taking of the species “resulting from vegetation clearing for construction of homes, apartments and other such facilities.” The permit expires in 2036. The proposed amendment says the land that would be removed “does not contain warbler habitat and, therefore, does not support warblers,” while the 144 added acres have “sufficient habitat to support warblers periodically.”
Brian said surveys of the property show that the warblers haven’t been seen on the 30-acre section in about two decades, while the 144 acres “is surrounded by warblers, as recent as this year.” Based on the company’s data, the birds are migrating to areas with less development, he said.
“Our plan, what we’re proposing, reduces the total development area,” he said.
It also preserves a more continuous conservation area, which he said ultimately will benefit the warbler population. He also said opponents should consider the overall environmental impact. He said building on the smaller parcel will result in less impervious cover and less impact to the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone, which is where water enters the groundwater system that’s a supply for more than 2 million people. Brian said the company could put more than 200 homes on the 144 acres if it weren’t pursuing the land swap.
But a group of opponents has continued to push back against the plan, saying it’s bad for the birds, for the area and for potential precedent. As of Wednesday, more than 230 comments had been submitted to the Fish and Wildlife Service on the proposal, many objecting to the swap.
“This petition to encroach on the warbler habitat is precisely what endangers the species when its prime breeding ground continues to be fragmented,” Chris Wasik wrote in one comment. “This latest request is one more nail in the coffin by proposing to incidentally chip away at a habitat for the warbler that is already challenged by the effects of climate change and rise in oak wilt.”
Some people who left comments raised concerns about the quality of the warbler habitat on the land that will be conserved in the exchange, arguing the canopy coverage on the larger parcel isn’t sufficient for the birds.
According to management guidelines for the warblers from Texas Parks and Wildlife, the songbirds prefer woodlands with mature Ashe juniper trees, also known as cedar trees. The areas “generally will have a nearly continuous canopy cover of trees with 50% to 100% canopy closure, and overall woodland canopy height of 20 feet or more,” the guidelines said.
Others have said the amendment, if approved, would send the wrong message by modifying a conservation easement to meet a developer’s request.
“What precedent will this set for a federal program that has been a catalyst for environmental stewardship?” Diane Temple wrote in her comment. “Those who want to bequeath a legacy that will live beyond their lifetimes — in perpetuity — will begin to see it as a risk, as a gamble. The protection of areas with genuine public value should not be jeopardized.”
“If USFWS approves this, it will only set a precedent for this developer and other land owners, realizing that ‘in perpetuity’ has no meaning,” Patrick Lippmann told the service in January.
Brian said that issue should be looked at in the context of Starwood’s
specific request, which is looking to increase the overall amount of land conserved by 114 acres.
“A modification to a conservation easement can be a good thing for the broader conservation area,” he said. “If developers make good environmental decisions, they should be allowed to make those modifications.”
If the latest application isn’t approved, Starwood will build on the area currently approved, Brian said, unless a third option materializes. He said the company is open to selling the land to an environmental group or state or federal buyer and has provided a price to potential purchasers.
In that case, Starwood would sell the 144 acres and leave the 30 acres in the easement “if that option were to present itself,” he said. He declined to provide the price to the San Antonio Express-news but said it’s at a “significant discount” from what the company could get from just selling the land at a market rate.
“Those that have expressed interest, we’ve committed to giving them some time to try to raise money to do the deal, prior to our development work commencing,” he said.