Documents
Category:
Impact on Birds
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 Bats|
Maryland|
Maine|
Minnesota|
New Hampshire|
New York|
Pennsylvania|
Virginia|
Vermont|
West Virginia]
Poor evidence-base for assessment of windfarm impacts on birds
February 13, 2007
by Gavin B. Steward, Andrew S. Pullin, Christopher F. Coles
Environmental Conservation 34 (1): 1-11 © 2007 Foundation for Environmental Conservation, Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Date submitted: 3 May 2006 Date accepted: 5 December 2006 First published online: 14 February 2007
Also filed under [
UK]
Lempster Mountain Wind Power Project: Direct Pre-filed Testimony of Lisa Linowes
February 7, 2007
by Lisa Linowes
Why did you petition to become an intervenor in this matter before the NH SEC?
With New Hampshire’s recent reinstatement of PILOT agreements and legislative efforts to a Renewable Portfolio Standard, the regulatory groundwork is being laid for more wind facilities to enter the state. Yet, New Hampshire, like many states, has no consistent regulatory process in place for reviewing these projects to ensure our environmental, societal, and economic interests are protected. The work the NH SEC has agreed to undertake in reviewing this application is precedent setting. How the committee approaches its review and the weight it places on arguments presented by all sides will impact other developments in the State as pertains to renewable energy projects.
There are a multitude of conflicting issues at play when considering any wind project. My commitment to this process is to help provide, to the best of my ability, valuable and timely information that will assist the Committee in making an informed decision on this application.
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Landscape|
Pollution|
Impact on Space|
Energy Policy|
New Hampshire]
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.
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.
Dan Boone's Response to Maryland PSC's proposed siting guidelines for windpower projects
August 4, 2006
The attached two documents include the MD Public Service Commision's (PSC) proposed Siting Guidelines for wind energy facilities in MD, and a detailed critique of this draft by Dan Boone, a conservation biologist with nearly 30 years of professional experience involving wildlife biology, forest ecology, and biodiversity protection.
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.
Representative Mollohan's Letter to the Public Service Commission of West Virginia
July 26, 2006
by U.S. Congressman Alan B. Mollohan (WV)
WV's Congressman Mollohan submitted a letter on July 26, 2006 to the WV Public Service Commission (PSC) concerning the Beech Ridge wind energy project proposed for Greenbrier County, WV by Chicago-based Invenergy, Inc. This wind energy developer successfully pushed through a windplant in Wisconsin nearby the Horicon Marsh - a globally-significant wildlife area and National Wildlife Refuge - despite the widespread outcry by national and local wildlife groups who opposed such close siting.
Mollohan's letter points out that Invenergy disregarded recommendations by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for multi-year pre-construction studies regarding the project's potential impacts on migratory birds and bats. He also observed that although WV's one operating wind project in Tucker County has been the site of record-setting bat mortality due to collision with turbine blades, the project operator (FPL Energy) has cut off access to the site for scientific study or investigation, even by the National Research Council/National Academies committee charged by the U.S. Congress to study the environmental impacts of wind projects in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands (see footnote #2 in his letter).
Mollohan's letter points out that Invenergy disregarded recommendations by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for multi-year pre-construction studies regarding the project's potential impacts on migratory birds and bats. He also observed that although WV's one operating wind project in Tucker County has been the site of record-setting bat mortality due to collision with turbine blades, the project operator (FPL Energy) has cut off access to the site for scientific study or investigation, even by the National Research Council/National Academies committee charged by the U.S. Congress to study the environmental impacts of wind projects in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands (see footnote #2 in his letter).
Also filed under [
General|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Landscape|
Noise|
Impact on Economy|
Energy Policy|
Zoning/Planning|
West Virginia]
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.
| Impact on Bats >> |