Category:
Impact on Bats
Maple Ridge Wind Power Avian and Bat Fatality Study Year One Report FINAL REPORT
June 25, 2007
by Aaftab Jain et al, Curry and Kerlinger, LLC
The following report describes the research design, initiation and completion of the first
year of postconstruction study (fall migration only) of avian and bat collision fatalities at the 120 turbine
Maple Ridge Wind Power Project in Lewis County, New York.
The work was conducted in accordance with the “Proposed Scope of Work for a Postconstruction Avian and Bat Fatality Study at the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Lewis County, New York” dated March 14, 2006, and agreed upon in mid-May 2006, after several revisions. People/agencies who reviewed the proposed scope of work included staffers from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), Environmental Design and Research (EDR), NYS DEC staffers, developers (PPM and Horizon), and others. Representatives from some or all of these groups have been included in a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which has the responsibility of reviewing and commenting on progress reports, annual reports, and other updates from this project.
The work was conducted in accordance with the “Proposed Scope of Work for a Postconstruction Avian and Bat Fatality Study at the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Lewis County, New York” dated March 14, 2006, and agreed upon in mid-May 2006, after several revisions. People/agencies who reviewed the proposed scope of work included staffers from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), Environmental Design and Research (EDR), NYS DEC staffers, developers (PPM and Horizon), and others. Representatives from some or all of these groups have been included in a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which has the responsibility of reviewing and commenting on progress reports, annual reports, and other updates from this project.
Comments: Statewide Guidelines for Reducing Wildlife Impacts from Wind Energy Development (Docket No. 06-011-1)
June 18, 2007
by Dan Boone
Comments submitted to the California Energy Commission regarding proposed guidelines for conducting post-construction bird-bat mortality surveys at wind energy facilities. These comments were submitted by Dan Boone, a wildlife biologist with over 30 years professional experience.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) reviewed the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for PPM's Horse Creek wind facility proposed for the New York towns of Clayton and Orleans, Jefferson County. The project consists of approximately 62 wind turbines (130 MW) with 54 turbines in the Town of Clayton and 8 turbines in the Town of Orleans. The project scope also includes construction of two permanent meteorological (met) towers, an operations and maintenance facility, approximately 16 miles of gravel access roads and approximately 28 miles of buried electric collection lines, and an interconnection substation adjacent to the existing electric transmission line.
Biological Survey responds to PA Game Commission wind energy voluntary cooperation agreement
May 31, 2007
by Pennsylvania Biological Survey
This report, authored by the Wind Energy and Bats subcommittee to the Pennsylvania Biological Survey's (PaBS) Mammal Technical Committee, documents the PA Game Commission's direct side-stepping of a long-established memorandum of agreement with the PaBS when the Game Commission developed and finalized the Wind Energy Voluntary Cooperation Agreement without the review or input of the Biological Survey. The memorandum of agreement was created over 10 years ago to help ensure that the Game Commission obtained advice from experts about actions affecting the mammals inhabiting the Commonwealth.
The possible effects of wind energy on Illinois birds and bats
May, 2007
by Illinois Department of Natural Resources
Report of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to Governor Rod Blagojevich and the 95th Illinois General Assembly.
Staff recommends WV PSC deny siting permit for Liberty Gap Wind Force
May 16, 2007
by West Virginia Public Service Commission
Excerpts below are from the May 16, 2007 Proposed Order of WV PSC denying Liberty Gap's application for CPCN (siting permit) for 50 wind turbine project atop Jack Mtn in Pendleton County:
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Views|
Erosion|
Noise|
Zoning/Planning|
West Virginia]
Bird and Bat Studies Conducted at Proposed or Existing Windpower Facilities
February, 2007
by Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
This document includes studies in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia.
Also filed under [
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Birds|
Maryland|
Maine|
Minnesota|
New Hampshire|
New York|
Pennsylvania|
Virginia|
Vermont|
West Virginia]
USFWS Letter to UPC Re. Proposed Sheffield Wind Plant
January 3, 2007
by Michael J. Bartlett, Supervisor, New England Field Office
As a general comment, the Service appreciates the fact that UPC Wind has conducted radar and acoustic studies on bird and bat migration and bat activity at Hardscrabble Mountain and other locations at or near the proposed project. We believe the radar, visual, and acoustic information contained in the above-referenced reports is useful, but that it is not sufficient to demonstrate, at an appropriate scale, the spatial and temporal uses of the airspace over Granby, Libby, Barrett, and Norris Mountains by birds, bats, and insects.
Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Wind Energy Development in the Mountains of Virginia
October 17, 2006
by Rick Webb, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia
Rick Webb's presentation on October 17 at the Energy Virginia conference provides a thought provoking analysis of the costs and benefits of industrial wind energy.
Also filed under [
General|
Technology|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Landscape|
Pollution|
Energy Policy|
Zoning/Planning|
Virginia]
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries' Comments to the State Corporation Commission concerning the proposed industrial wind plant in Highland County
September 20, 2006
by Virginia Natural Resources Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
To reiterate, if the SCC chooses to license this project, we request adherence to the monitoring and mitigation recommendations described in this letter and attachments. In the absence of such conditions, we feel this project would pose an unacceptable risk to the Commonwealth’s wildlife resources.
Below are two Phase I Avian Risk Assessments reports, prepared by Paul Kerlinger, for Vermont's East Haven Wind Farm (July 2003) and New Hampshire's Lempster Mountain Wind Power Project (June 2005). Phase I assessments have proven inadequate in assessing mortality at several sites in the U.S. including Mountaineer in West Virginia and Meyersdale in Pennsylvania. The US Fish and Wildlife Interim Wind/Wildlife Guidelines calls for multi-year evaluation of avian and bat activity using remote sensing.
Lempster Wind Project: USFWS Letter to Community Energy
July 28, 2006
by Vernon B. Lang, Assistant Supervisor, New England Field Office
Starting with our first interagency meeting on April 8, 2005, we have generally discussed three broad categories of activities that pose a potential concern for fish and wildlife resources. These include the potential for bird and bat collisions with turbines, habitat fragmentation effects on wildlife and impacts to waters/wetlands. At the April 8, 2005 interagency meeting, we recommended that CEI collect three (3) years of radar data on spring and fall bird/bat migrations to document the spatial and temporal use of the airspace by these flying vertebrates. Three years of radar data should be sufficient to gather information on the spatial and temporal distribution of birds in the airspace, including the year-to-year variability in migration patterns at this site, and represent our normal request for these data at wind projects. We have consistently requested that this data be collected at our meetings and field visits and continue to make this request for radar information.
Vermont PSB Denies 'Certificate of Public Good' to East Haven Project
July 17, 2006
by Vermont Public Service Board
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Public Service Board of the State of Vermont that:
1. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Hearing Officer are hereby adopted, as modified above.
2. The proposed Project will not promote the public good of the State of Vermont, and a certificate of public good shall not be issued pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248.
Dated at Montpelier, Vermont, this 17th day of July , 2006.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Public Service Board of the State of Vermont that:
1. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Hearing Officer are hereby adopted, as modified above.
2. The proposed Project will not promote the public good of the State of Vermont, and a certificate of public good shall not be issued pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248.
Dated at Montpelier, Vermont, this 17th day of July , 2006.
Because time seems to be running out on fossil fuels and the lure of
non-polluting windpower is so seductive, some people are now promoting windpower
initiatives at any cost, without investigating potential negative consequences-- and with
no apparent knowledge of even recent environmental history......Throughout my experience, I could not substantiate a single claim developers made for
industrial wind energy, including the one justifying its existence: that massive wind
installations would meaningfully reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. When you
understand this, you realize the wind business is not really that complex. But there are a
lot of complicated issues swirling around it that obscure and distract from this main point,
issues such as global warming, property values, the nature of wind leases, local revenues
and taxes, wildlife, natural views, and a host of others. So how does one know the truth of
it all? How does one go about separating the reality from spin?
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Birds|
Impact on People|
Noise|
Impact on Economy|
Property Values|
Tax Breaks & Subsidies|
New York]
Compliments of Andrew Chapman, the attached pdf files contain extensive documentation particularly with respect to the impact of wind turbines on wildlife as part of an ongoing effort to prevent the construction of the Bald Hills Wind Farm, South Gippsland, Victoria.
While it has been approved by the Victorian State Government the presence in the Bald Hills area of migratory species of national and international significance that are protected by treaties with Japan and China in the Bald Hills has placed the final decision in the hands of the Federal Government. This decision is pending.
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Birds|
Impact on People|
Noise|
Impact on Economy|
Property Values|
Tourism|
Australia / New Zealand]
Macarthur Windfarm Proposal: Evidence On Behalf Of The Department Of Sustainability And Environment
March, 2006
by Andrew Gosden on behalf of the Department of Sustainability and Environment
In its submission today, the department will not reiterate all of the matters raised in the 21 October submission, rather the department wishes to focus largely on the matters arising from this proposal affecting Brolga and Southern Bent-wing Bat.
Avian Fatalities Caused by Wind Turbines, Cumulative Impacts, and Trade-offs for Birds and Bats
February, 2006
by Albert M. Manville, II, Ph.D., Senior Wildlife Biologist, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The Service favors:
--conservation of wildlife in the public trust;
--development of renewable energy that is bird and bat friendly; and
--use of informed decisions based on adequate environmental assessment and sound science.
--conservation of wildlife in the public trust;
--development of renewable energy that is bird and bat friendly; and
--use of informed decisions based on adequate environmental assessment and sound science.
Impacts of Wind Energy Development on Wildlife - Key Issues of Concern
January 6, 2006
by Bat Conservation International
We believe that wildlife kills can be prevented or minimized, and we advocate broad collaboration to achieve this end. However, until reliable solutions are developed, high risk areas should be avoided. These include locations along major migratory corridors or within the normal flight range of large roosting and feeding aggregations of birds or bats.
Also filed under [
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Birds]
A Radar and Visual Study of Nocturnal Bird and Bat Migration at the Proposed Highland New Wind Development Project, Virginia, Fall 2005
January 6, 2006
by ABR, Inc., Environmental Research & Services
This study focused on nocturnal migration
patterns and flight behaviors during the peak
periods of passerine and bat migration during fall
2005 at the proposed Highland New Wind
Development in Highland Count. Virginia. The key
results of our study were: (I) the mean overall fall
passage rate was 385 targetsikmh; (2)mean
nightly passage rates ranged from 9 to 2,762
targetshh, (3) the percentage of targets passing
below 125 m agl was 11.5%; (4) the estimated
turbine passage rate of nocturnal migrants passing
within the airspace occupied by each proposed
turbine was 3.4-24.7 migrantslturbineid during the
fall study period; (5) fall migrants flying at or
below maximal turbine height consisted of 88%
birds and 12% bats; and (6) passage rates, flight
altitudes, and visual observation rates of birds and
bats did not differ between the two survey sites
within the project area.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to the Town of Prattsburgh (NY)
November 28, 2005
by David A. Stilwell, Field Supervisor
The Steuben County Industrial Development Agency (IDA), as lead agency in the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process, is considering potential impacts from construction of 53 wind energy turbines which would generate approximately 79 megawatts of power. Turbine structures are anticipated to be approximately 389 feet tall from the ground to the highest blade tip. Structures such as a substation, 4.8 miles of buried cable, an unspecified amount of overhead transmission lines, and 3.4 miles of access roads must also be built in the 33,000 acre project area. This project is situated at the southern end of the Finger Lakes, near the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Hi Tor Wildlife Management Area, the Hi Tor Bird Conservation Area, and generally along a north-south oriented ridge.
| << Impact on Birds |
- Options :
- View Archives