Documents
Category:
Impact on Wildlife and Impact on Landscape
Browse in :
All
> Topics
> Impact on Wildlife
(102)
All > Topics > Impact on Landscape (67)
Any of these categories
All > Topics > Impact on Landscape (67)
Any of these categories
This brochure provides a quick, but informative, summary of the key issues pertaining to wind energy development in Virginia and the Appalachian region. The document can serve as a start point for others preparing similar information materials for their community. Click on the link(s) at the bottom of this page to view the final layout including photos.
Also filed under [
Energy Policy|
Virginia]
Attorney Jim Blackburn of the Coastal Habitat Alliance presents a comprehensive summary of the development and impacts of the Kenedy County wind farms in Texas.
Also filed under [
Impact on People|
Texas]
Letter to Florida ARC RE: FPL request to erect turbines on State-owned conservation lands
February 8, 2008
Also filed under [
Impact on People|
Florida]
Below is National Audubon's recently adopted policy pertaining to wind power generation.
Also filed under [
USA]
Mr. Robert L. Cook, a wildlife biologist and former Executive Director of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) provided this testimony before the Brown County Commissioners Court. Mr. Cook supports his recommendation that a wind farm tax abatement not be granted on wind projects in the county.
Also filed under [
Impact on Economy|
Texas]
US Fish and Wildlife Service letter to Gamesa regarding Shaffer Mountain (PA) wind energy proposal
December 19, 2007
by David Densmore, Supervisor US FWS
US Fish and Wildlife Service responded to Gamesa Energy USA in regard to whether an “Incidental take” permit could be granted for the Shaffer Mountain wind project proposed for Somerset County, PA. An “Incidental take” permit allows for the destruction of federally listed species. A subset of the letter is included on this page. The full letter, in PDF format, can be accessed by clicking on the link below.
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.
In my opinion [Mars Hill] is some of the prettiest acreage in Aroostook and I was very happy to come home to it, in fact…it was my dream.
... The turbines however, have changed most of that as the land that was once known for its remote nature, wildlife and solitude is now home to an industrial power plant. For anyone to say that a wind turbine facility has a low impact on the local environment… is irresponsible. Yet the industry and the media surrounding it seem insistent on making light of the problems that exist. The problems are real and they are hurting families emotionally, physically and economically. ...
Also filed under [
Impact on People|
Maine]
Pennsylvania Biological Survey position statement re: wind power development on public lands
September 13, 2007
by Pennsylvania Biological Survey
... because wind energy development has associated environmental costs, wind energy development should only be instituted on state lands if the environmental benefits can be demonstrated to exceed the environmental costs. ... The environmental benefits of wind energy development, in the mid-Atlantic area in general and on Pennsylvania state lands in particular, are small relative to the negative consequences, which include habitat fragmentation and mortality to birds and bats.
Also filed under [
Pennsylvania]
The Cape Cod Commission (CCC) has asserted that the Cape Wind energy project qualifies as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) under Section 12(i) and 13(b) of the Cape Cod Commission Act. The CCC staff report can be accessed from this page.