Bald Eagle Annual Deaths As High As 14

United States Fish and Wildlife Service predicts that between 8 and 14 American bald eagles could be killed annually if New Era Wind Farm is built as currently designed. The outcome of USFWS's eagle mortality models are dramatically higher than one eagle every-other-year as predicted by New Era's consultant Westwood Professional Services. 
 
In November 2012, New Era was the first wind facility in the nation to apply to the USFWS for an "Incidental Take Permit" to be allowed to kill bald eagles with their wind turbines without the danger of federal prosecution. Bald eagles are protected under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Without an ITP, killing an eagle is against federal law. The ITP process for New Era is not yet completed.

The eagle mortality rates were one part of extensive analysis and comments that USFWS provided in response to New Era's updated Avian and Bat Protection Plan (ABPP) required by the State of Minnesota. Overall, the USFWS found a number of problems with the ABPP methodology and conclusions. The 2010 avian study reported zero nests and no eagles flying in the wind project area; USFWS estimates the area bald eagle population at well over 400. Problems identified by USFWS included a warning about killing golden eagles, which also fly through the area. The Service made it clear that there is no possibility of obtaining an ITP for golden eagles in this area of the country, so that killing one would be a federally prosecutable offense.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources provided comments on the same ABPP. The DNR raised concerns about Northern Harriers, Henslow Sparrow, bats and other wildlife potentially impacted by the project and the lack of data provided by New Era. Northern Harriers are listed as a bird of national concern by the USFWS and a Species of Greatest Conservation Need by DNR.

Goodhue County is located within the broad corridor of the Mississippi River Flyway. This is the largest migration route in North America. Millions of birds pass through and stop over this area on their annual spring and fall travels. The New Era ABPP shows a failure to perform avian migration field studies despite the project's advanced stage in the State permitting process.  Bats are also high on the list of concerns expressed by USFWS and the MN DNR. Bats are a keystone species known to die in large numbers at wind facilities

Few wildlife impact studies have been done before, or after, the construction of industrial wind facilities in the United States. However, the studies that have been done suggest high mortality of birds and bats. Raptors, such a eagles, are known to be at high risk of being struck and killed by wind turbine blades. A study in SW Minnesota showed a 47% reduction in raptor numbers after construction of wind turbines. It is not clear how many died, and how many abandoned the area as no-longer-suitable habitat. Bats die both from blade strikes and barotrauma.

New Era Wind Farm is a 78 MW industrial facility proposed for central Goodhue County in southeastern Minnesota. The project became nationally infamous under its previous owner, Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens. During Pickens' ownership the project was called AWA Goodhue and was wholely owned by his Dallas based Mesa Power. The lack of local public support and the high number of educated and concerned citizens has made this the most controversial wind project in Minnesota history. Peter Mastic, formerly the developer, purchased the wind project from Pickens last fall and changed the name to "New Era Wind Farm."

The previous ABPP for this project was rejected by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission at a hearing on February 23, 2012. It is unclear when the MPUC may hold a hearing on the updated ABPP. Due to Minnesota State laws promoting industrial wind, this project is not required to produce an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as required of other industries.

The Coalition for Sensible Siting is proud of the extensive and important feedback citizens provided on the ABPP. The USFWS and the MN DNR provided excellent and thorough review and comment on the ABPP. Many concerns raised by citizens (below) where confirmed by USFWS and MN DNR.

The updated New Era Wind Farm Avian and Bat Protection Plan (4 parts):

ABPP
Appendices A-P
Exhibits 1-9
Exhibits 10-19

Citizen Comments on the ABPP:

No migration studies in the Mississippi Flyway - Mary Jo O'Rielly
Bald Eagle nest missing from ABPP - Doug Sommers
Failure to study owls - Kelly Norman
Failure to study raptors - Kristi Rosenquist
Eagles, Owls and site control - Rick Conrad
Turbines closer than 2 miles from Bald Eagle nests - Ann Buck
Northern Harriers at risk - Bill O'Reilly
Telling residents how to farm and hunt is nonsense - Joe Hernke
Turbines near conservation lands - Jon Stussy
New Era lacks site control - Rochelle Nygaard
New nest and important eagle use area - Connie Ludwig
Misleading data and failure to perform required surveys - Barb Stussy
Misrepresenting Important Eagle Use Areas - Bob Rosenquist
Waterfowl migration missing - Scott Logan
Turbines located on forest edges - Marilyn Jonas
Raptor nests and territories missing from maps - Scott Logan
Misrepresents eagles and fails to study other species - Mary Hartman
Assessment of turbine distance misleading - Kristi Rosenquist
Obligating local government and citizens without due process - Paul Reese
Request the MPUC perform a site visit - Marie McNamara
60 minute point counts lasted only 45 minutes - Scott Logan
Northern Harrier and other hawk data missing - Erin Logan
Failure to perform required field surveys - Sue Hinrichs
Failure to avoid CRP and other conservation lands - Tom Gale
Performing bat surveys with broken towers - Mary Hartman
Eagle point counts from poor vantage point - Scott Husbyn
Bat mortality at 7800 annually? - Mary Hartman

Read More...

Eight State Habitat Conservation Plan Needs Public Comment

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) announced on August 30, 2012 that they are taking public comment until October 1, 2012 * regarding plans to produce an eight state Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP would be a basis for industrial wind projects to receive Incidental Take Permits  - permits to kill endangered and protected species without prosecution. The "planning partners" in this endeavor are the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and The Conservation Fund.

9/27/12 UPDATE: USFWS's Rick Amidon stated that the initial comment period will be extended by 60 days.

The Coalition for Sensible Siting is asking citizens to:

1.  Request an extention of this initial comment period beyond October 1, 2012.

2.  Send comments about the multi-state Habitat Conservation Plan Process

Send your comments or request information by any one of the following methods:

U.S. Mail: Regional Director, Attn: Rick Amidon, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437–1458;

Facsimile: 612/713–5292 (Attn: Rick Amidon); or

Email: midwestwindhcp@fws.gov

USFWS excerpts from the Federal Register and press release include:

Public Comments The Service is asking the public to help identify issues that are important to them as the plan is developed. The incidental take permit(s) will cover participating wind energy facilities in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin.  USFWS is requesting information and comment concerning the planning process, our permitting approach, biological aspects of the interaction of wind facilities and species, scientific data that may help inform the MSHCP or monitoring of impacts, and any other information that interested parties would like to offer.

Comments merely stating support for, or opposition to, the MSHCP under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not provide information useful in determining relevant issues and impacts. The public will receive additional opportunity to provide comments on the draft EIS and draft MSHCP when they are completed.

Planning partners  in this effort include the conservation agencies for the eight states, The Conservation Fund, and the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)

The eight State conservation agencies participating in the development of this MSHCP are the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Missouri Department of Conservation, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

‘‘Covered activities’’ under the MSHCP include the siting, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning of wind energy facilities within all or portions of the eight-State planning area. Activities associated with the management of mitigation land would also be covered.

Background In 2009, the Conservation Fund solicited the eight States that make up the planning area to support their submission of an application for a grant. The grant would fund development of the MSHCP and an incidental take permitting program. The grant application included virtually identical August 2009 letters of suppport from the eight States' conservation agencies.

Review of the grant materials shows the grant activities would be completed between 2010 and 2012:.

"Work for which funding is requested is scheduled to be accomplished in two years."

Start: June 2010, End: May 2012

Task 1: MSHCP

Task 2: NEPA

Task 3: GI Network Design Focus Groups

Task 4: Mitigation Site Reports Focus Groups

Task 5: Operational Mitigation Measures

USFWS anticipates that "the issuance of individual ITPs would be the permitting approach under this MSHCP. Currently there are additional permit structure options being considered; however, under any permit structure, the MSHCP would meet all ITP issuance criteria found at 50 CFR 13.21, 17.22(b), and 17.32(b), and would be evaluated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 7 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1536)."

"The MSHCP planning partners envision that under any permit approach, no additional NEPA or Section 7 analysis would occur, and ‘‘No Surprises’’ assurances would apply to the MSHCP. Evaluation of the MSHCP and permitting program would include public review by all interested parties. In the event that the MSHCP might need to be amended in the future (e.g., to add a species or consider an activity not previously evaluated), further public review would occur." 

The Conservation Fund states that Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced award of this grant for the development of a landscape-level, multi-species habitat conservation plan throughout the states that "will provide conservation benefits to threatened and endangered species while accommodating wind energy development."

"As the demand for wind energy grows, this plan will provide a means for wind energy developers to avoid, minimize, mitigate and compensate for adverse effects to protected species....  The...states will work in collaboration...[with] the wind energy industry and The Conservation Fund to lead a strategic conservation planning process that focuses on combining species’ needs with potential habitat mitigation across the landscape."

 

Kris Hoellen, director of the Conservation Leadership Network for The Conservation Fund said. “This provides a better way forward for wind energy development that integrates economic and environmental goals.”

Page 28/72 MSHCP Grant Application August 19, 2009

Coalition for Sensible Siting's Kristi Rosenquist contacted Kris Hoellen to determine what, if any, work had occurred on this grant since its award in April 2010. Ms. Hoellen stated that they hired an outside consultant and talked about process. USFWS identified the consultant as SAIC. When asked what information had been gathered and considered already, Ms. Hoellen stated, "none".

This seems odd since the USFWS just finished taking comments on their land-based wind turbine siting guidelines in July 2012. This is the same comment process for which AWEA stated in November 2, 2011, "Last fall, early draft version of Service’s eagle conservation plan guidance was leaked. AWEA staff obtained advance copy." In past years, AWEA has objected to any move by USFWS that would slow or hinder the installation of industrial wind turbines at any location in the US. AWEA is a major participating planning partner driving this MSHCP.

The number of installed industrial wind turbines in the eight state region has nearly doubled in the three years since this grant application was made. State conservation agencies are normally charged with management of State owned lands, not private property. Nearly all industrial wind turbines in these eight states are located on private property leased by wind developers. There is no basis to believe that state conservation agencies possess any detailed knowledge of wildlife on these privately held lands. Certainly they do not posess sufficient information to produce an MSHCP with any meaningful baseline data. This problem with wind turbine siting became clear in Minnesota starting in 2011. 

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has become far more actively involved in the review of industrial wind permit applications in Minnesota since mid-to-late 2011. The increased scrutiny of the MN DNR is directly attributed to the grassroots work of local citizens in response to the AWA Goodhue, LLC site permit.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) required AWA Goodhue to produce an Avian and Bat Protection Plan (ABPP) after citizens revealed that incomplete and inaccurate wildlife information had been provided to the State by the project.  Subsequently, the ABPP presented at the February 23, 2012 MPUC hearing was exposed by citizens as an Avian and Bat Protection Deception Plan and was rejected by the MPUC.

The MN DNR has pointed out numerous concerns and deficiencies to virtually every MN wind permit site application in the past year. This includes the July 2012 review of Spanish owned Gamesa's Eco Harmony wind project in Southeastern Minnesota. The MN DNR noted that the proposed site map shows 28 turbines on, or directly adjacent to, known mapped sink holes. This is also an area riddled with caves in which bats hibernate.

Three years after the grant application, it seems likely that the other seven states' conservation agencies may also have a far different view of wind energy than when they wrote their letters of support in August 2009.

The Coalition for Senisble Siting is concerned that the primary participants in forming and driving this MSHCP process are: 

1. AWEA whose interests are purely financial for the wind industry - not wildlife,
2. The Conservation Fund whose website looks like AWEA promotional material,
3. USFWS staff under pressure to fulfill Ken Salazar's wind energy fantasies, and
4. State DNRs with neither existing data, nor the staff to gather data, about wildlife on private land in their respective States.

Region 3 USFWS staff have been instrumental in confirming citizen's wildlife reports in Goodhue County, Minnesota and providing feedback to wind project owner AWA Goodhue, LLC. Like the state DNR, USFWS does not have detailed wildlife data on privately held lands. A review of recent USFWS information obtained through FOIA requests make it appear that USFWS is under tremendous pressure from Ken Salazar and other political appointees to say and do whatever is required to allow installation of industrial wind everywhere.

Is it really possible for USFWS to perform their mission, demonstrate scientific excellence AND support the development of wind energy all at the same time?

"The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence.

"The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is leading development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for the Midwest that will conserve endangered species, promote development of clean energy which in turn will reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide."
 

 

 

 

 

Read More...

Restraining Order in Order to Trespass

Slap suit against a farmer: This appears to be the latest desperate attempt by T. Boone Pickens' controversial AWA Goodhue industrial wind project. Westwood Professional Services' employee Brie Anderson sought a restraining order that would allow her to trespass on land owned by farmer Dan Ryan.

In short, the outcome of the recent hearing in Hennepin County Court is:
1. Dismissed with "extreme prejudice";
2. the judge lecturing Fredrikson & Byron attorney Emily Duke for ten minutes; and,
3. the judge suggesting that AWA Goodhue should pay Dan Ryan's legal fees incurred while attorney Dan Schleck defended Mr. Ryan.

Fabricating charges against Dan Ryan is just the latest in a string of activities aimed at Ryan, other landowners formerly participating in the wind project, and other citizens living in the area of the proposed project.

Westwood contracted with AWA Goodhue to perform avian surveys, among other things, in the proposed industrial wind project  area located in Southeast Minnesota's Goodhue County. Ms. Anderson is only one of three known to have trespassed on Ryan's land while pretending it was "necessary" in order to gather data on Bald and Golden Eagle activity. Sharon "The Bird Chick" trespassed and was asked not to by Ryan. Ron Peterson, also of Westwood, was believed to be riding in the helicopter when it repeatedly buzzed Ryan's cattle yard and nearly touched down in a field across from Ryan's house. The Goodhue County Sheriff's office received 16 citizen complaints about the December 2011 flight and complaints about the other helicopter flights carried out by AWA Goodhue this past winter.

"This looks like a slap suit to hassle an honest farmer trying to keep profiteers off his property" said Minneapolis Star Tribune's Jon Tevlon in his coverage of the outcome of the recent hearing in Hennepin County Court. 

At the February 23, 2012 Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) hearing where Commissioners rejected the AWA Goodhue Avian and Bat Protection Plan (ABPP), organic dairy farmer Paul Reese posed the question as to whether Westwood was ignorant or incompetent. Westwood originally reported "zero bald eagles nesting" in the project area and stated that they observed no eagles flying through the area. After citizens engaged the Minnesota DNR and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to come on a bald eagle nesting tour in April 2011, the MPUC decided to require further study and the ABPP. It turns out that Dan Ryan's property is an 'important eagle use area' for fall migration.

In the last year, USFWS has confirmed ten active eagle nests in the AWA Goodhue industrial wind project area. Citizens have repeatedly stated and shown pictures demonstrating that the nests and eagles can be seen from public roadways. There is no need to trespass or harass citizens with a helicopter to find eagles in Goodhue County.

Learn more about industrial wind at the Coalition for Sensible Siting.

Read More...

US Fish and Wildlife Service Speaks

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR) weighed in on the AWA Goodhue industrial wind project's "Avian and Bat Protection Plan" (ABPP).  Previously dubbed "the New Pickens Plan" by this blog, USFWS and DNR zeroed in an its many shortfalls. Both agencys' comments were posted to the MN Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) website two days ago.  These official agencies validated factual reports from concerned citizens and voiced by the Coalition for Sensible Siting.

The new Pickens Plan was already exposed for its Rapid Response Roadkill Removal and Promiscuous Ice Fishing.

Concerned citizens have posted their own responses to the Avian and Bat Protection Deception Plan and more will be posted at the MPUC electronic dockets soon.  The MPUC announced yesterday that they will decide whether or not to approve AWA Goodhue's Avian and Bat Protection Plan at their February 2, 2011 meeting in St. Paul.  A "yes" decision would put AWA Goodhue one step closer to constructing 50 industrial wind turbines directly in vital Bald Eagle nesting, migrating, roosting and feeding areas of Goodhue County Minnesota.

The Eagle Siting blog says "no".  It is not a plan to protect; it is a plan to move forward no-matter-what the facts are.  The MPUC should say "no" to this ABPP.  Citizens should not allow use of their tax and electrical rate money as a weapon to kill our nation's symbol of freedom.

Go to the Coalition for Sensible Siting to find out how you can help.

Read More...