Documents filed under Impact on Wildlife from Virginia

Highland New Wind notified of intent to sue under U.S. Endangered Species Act

Hnwd_notice_letter-051410_thumb Concerned citizens and conservationists have joined with the Animal Welfare Institute and the public-interest law firm, Meyer Glitzenstein and Crystal, to notify Highland New Wind Development, LLC and the Highland County Board of Supervisors of their intent to sue if HNWD proceeds with turbine construction in defiance of the Endangered Species Act. Earlier this year HNWD "promised" the county supervisors that it would obtain the required Incidental Take Permit (ITP). The notice letter can be downloaded by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.
14 May 2010

Highland County Supervisors liable for non-compliance with Endangered Species Act - letter

Letter_to_highland_board_of_supervisors_thumb Wood Rogers PLC, the Roanoke law firm representing Highland Citizens, has advised the Highland County Board of Supervisors that allowing Highland New Wind Development to proceed without the Incidental Take Permit (ITP) required by the Endangered Species Act will place the county in legal jeopardy. The letter by Attorney James T. Rodier which details the supporting law can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.
28 Dec 2009

Wind power in Virginia: Overstated benefits, understated costs

Overstated_benefits_understated_costs_thumb 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.
1 Jun 2008

VA SCC Final order for Highland New Wind

Highlandwind_scc_final_order07-12-20_thumb The VA SCC issued its final order that conditionally approves the Highland New Wind Development, LLC application to construct and operate a wind energy generating facility in Highland County, Virginia, near the West Virginia border. The proposed facility would consist of up to twenty (20) wind turbines of up to 2.00 MW capacity each. The order included comprehensive monitoring and mitigation for wildlife impacts (bird and bat) and could serve as a model for other projects. One of the commissioners dissented on a provision in the monitoring and mitigation plan.
20 Dec 2007

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries' Comments to the State Corporation Commission concerning the proposed industrial wind plant in Highland County

Dgif-092006_thumb 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.
20 Sep 2006

Direct Testimony of Charles Simmons to the Virginia State Commission on behalf of Highland Citizens

Simmons_testimony_thumb Q. Please state your name and position. A. My name is Charles Simmons and I have been retained to provide assistance to Highland Citizens in regard to the application of Highland New Wind Development, LLC to construct a wind generation facility in Highland County. Editor's Note:This testimony provides an excellent description of how a grid works- particularly the role of 'economic dispatch' and 'spinning reserves'. It also addresses the methodology for estimating emissions savings and numerous other topics of interest.
1 Sep 2006

A Radar and Visual Study of Nocturnal Bird and Bat Migration at the Proposed Highland New Wind Development Project, Virginia, Fall 2005

Radar_study_thumb 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.
6 Jan 2006

http://www.windaction.org/posts?location=Virginia&topic=Impact+on+Wildlife&type=Document
back to top