Documents
Category:
Impact on Wildlife and Vermont
Browse in :
All
> Topics
> Impact on Wildlife
(105)
All > Location > USA > Vermont (61)
Any of these categories
All > Location > USA > Vermont (61)
Any of these categories
Wilderness Society and Center for Biological Diversity comment on Deerfield Wind DEIS
November 27, 2008
by Mary C. Krueger and Mollie Matteson
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Landscape]
Ridge Protectors was an intervenor on the Sheffield Wind case before the Vermont Public Service Board. This petition letter was sent to the US Fish and Wildlife Service in response to the requirement that UPC Wind, the developer, secure a federal permit for wetlands impacts at the site.
Army Corps letter to Sheffield Wind regarding individual wetlands permit application
August 23, 2007
by Curtis L. Thalken
Army Corps' letter to UPC Wind states that the Sheffield Wind project "is not eligible for authorization under the VT General Permit, and must be reviewed under the individual permit review procedure." The letter further states that UPC Wind "may not proceed with any proposed work within our jurisdiction until you have received written authorization from this office." The full letter can be accessed by clicking on the link below.
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Landscape]
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 Birds|
Impact on Bats|
Maryland|
Maine|
Minnesota|
New Hampshire|
New York|
Pennsylvania|
Virginia|
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.
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.
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. ยง 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. ยง 248.
Dated at Montpelier, Vermont, this 17th day of July , 2006.
Vermont Public Service Board: Hearing Officer's Recommendation re. East Haven Windfarm
March, 2006
by Kurt Janson, Esq., Hearing Officer
For the reasons set forth.., I conclude that the proposed Project will not promote the
general good of the state. Therefore, I recommend that the Board not issue a Certificate of
Public Good for the proposed Project. However, if the Board does issue a CPG, I recommend
that it include the conditions outlined in this Proposal for Decision.
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Landscape]
To help guide our own internal policy on wind energy, VNRC has developed a list of criteria that we feel is appropriate to consider for wind energy development. These criteria are not exclusive to state owned land, but rather focus on developing a vision for siting wind energy infrastructure in Vermont. We have included specific considerations for State lands as well.
The goal is to integrate the need to develop new in-state sources of renewable energy with protection of existing environmental values and public policy goals.
Adam Kelly: Direct Testimony to Vermont Public Service Board on behalf of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
December 22, 2004
by Adam Kelly
...additional radar studies would be required to see if spring migration patterns are different than those measured in the fall. Typically spring migration is shorter than fall migration with fewer numbers in the shorter period of time. How this will affect the numbers of birds passing through the rotor swept volume is unknown. It is important to determine the seasonal timing, altitude and numbers of migrant birds passing over the proposed project site and the effects of weather upon their passage over a greater part of the whole year. In addition, it is possible to determine some of the bird and bat species passing through the project site by accoustical sensors to determine which species, that make vocal calls, are migrating through the site.