Article

Rush to Judgment

Your [Boston Globe] front page headline of March 29, "Audubon review supports wind farm" was a rush to judgment according to Vernon Lang, supervisor of Fish and Wildlife’s New England field office, the agency lead official on the Cape Wind proposal. Editor's Note: This letter has been submitted to the Boston Globe.

Your front page headline of March 29, "Audubon review supports wind farm" was a rush to judgment according to Vernon Lang, supervisor of Fish and Wildlife’s New England field office, the agency lead official on the Cape Wind proposal.

The Cape Wind project under consideration for permit in Nantucket Sound is proposed for a site selected by the developer. We did not anticipate the impending industrial proliferation of our ocean area, and or our need to place constraints on development of this precious resource. We are in a precarious ad hoc review of this project as we have not created a comprehensive Master Plan for our ocean that directs development of this nascent technology of offshore wind energy generation.

There is extraordinary risk associated with siting a wind facility in an area within the eastern US migratory bird flyway known as Nantucket Sound. The Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act apply to Cape Wind in this identified bird, and protected marine mammal, and Essential Fish Habitat.

The international wind energy community recognizes the problems created when wind towers are placed in areas of high bird concentration. Economic hardship due to shut downs, and in some cases-project failure, is the result of the violation of the laws that protect many species and the legal ramifications associated with... [truncated due to possible copyright]  
Your front page headline of March 29, "Audubon review supports wind farm" was a rush to judgment according to Vernon Lang, supervisor of Fish and Wildlife’s New England field office, the agency lead official on the Cape Wind proposal. 

The Cape Wind project under consideration for permit in Nantucket Sound is proposed for a site selected by the developer.  We did not anticipate the impending industrial proliferation of our ocean area, and or our need to place constraints on development of this precious resource.  We are in a precarious ad hoc review of this project as we have not created a comprehensive Master Plan for our ocean that directs development of this nascent technology of offshore wind energy generation. 
 
There is extraordinary risk associated with siting a wind facility in an area within the eastern US migratory bird flyway known as Nantucket Sound. The Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act apply to Cape Wind in this identified bird, and protected marine mammal, and Essential Fish Habitat. 

The international wind energy community recognizes the problems created when wind towers are placed in areas of high bird concentration.  Economic hardship due to shut downs, and in some cases-project failure, is the result of the violation of the laws that protect many species and the legal ramifications associated with that event.

California A.G. Bill Locklear has responded to the legal issues regarding the deaths of thousands of birds in Altamont, CA, in an area of high bird concentration. His letter to the Almeda County Board of Supervisors of July 6, 2005 stated:

“The ongoing harm to protected bird species at the Altamont Wind facility (APRWA) is serious and unacceptable.”    “Because the APWA is the largest of its kind in the world, what happens here could set an important precedent for how these issues are addressed elsewhere in California and the United States.” 

Henning Grastrup, the offshore pioneer  and key figure in the Danish government’s first programme for wind energy research, retired after 31 years with Danish utility Elsam was recently interviewed regarding this
subject:

What lessons have we learned in planning the Horns Rev project, Henning?

“I think the most important lesson is that if there are concerns about bird restrictions from the European Commission, for instance, they should be taken seriously because they will not go away.  I have seen some international projects failing to make progress because the warnings were not taken seriously.”

Thank You,

Barbara Durkin  Northboro, MA  


Source: link missing! please notify us

MAR 31 2006
https://www.windaction.org/posts/1967-rush-to-judgment
back to top