afa response smalfootedbat usfws 2011 r

Upload: ztower

Post on 07-Apr-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    1/8

    Allegheny Front Alliance

    94 Orchard Street

    Keyser, WV 26726304 788-5112

    [email protected]

    "To protect the Allegheny Fronts cultural and natural environment"Reference:

    Comments for Eastern Small-Footed Bat and the Northern Long-Eared Bat 90 Day Finding.

    Docket No. [FWS-RF ES-2011-0024] Attention US FWS, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-

    PDM, Arlington, VA 22203

    Allegheny Front Alliance (AFA) represents interested communitymembers concerned over the construction and proposed developmentof industrial wind turbine projects. Allegheny Front Alliance, created inJanuary 2009, opposed the development of two West Virginia Projects,AES New Creek Project and the Pinnacle Project, now approved by theWest Virginia Public Service Commission. AFA offers comments andrecommendations. Pre-construction field studies identified the small-footed bat at the Pinnacle Wind Project, LLC and AES New CreekProjects. These projects are located in Mineral County and GrantCounty West Virginia. AFA believes there are serious environmentalissues industrial wind corporations ignore. Effective regulation iscritical to protect and conserve unique biological, ecological resourcessurrounding these projects.

    In February 2011, AFA co-supported with Friends of Blackwater toseek and urge companies developing and operating the Mount Storm and NewCreek wind power facilities, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS or

    Service), the federal agency entrusted with enforcing the Endangered Species Act, 16

    U.S.C. 1531 et seq., (ESA), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. 703-11(MBTA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 668-668d

    (Eagle Act), to take concrete, expeditious measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate

    these projects impacts to wildlife.1

    1 Available at: http://www.saveblackwater.org/documents/Mount%20Storm%20&%20AES%20New%20Creek%20Wind%20Energy%20Projects_Letter%202-9-11.pdf.

    This document references other wind project studies, developers letters, and historical

    background. Letter source is Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal 1601 Connecticut Avenue,N.W. Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20009-1056. Also at:

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?

    CaseActivityID=319047&NotType='WebDocket'

    1

    mailto:[email protected]://www.saveblackwater.org/documents/Mount%20Storm%20&%20AES%20New%20Creek%20Wind%20Energy%20Projects_Letter%202-9-11.pdfhttp://www.saveblackwater.org/documents/Mount%20Storm%20&%20AES%20New%20Creek%20Wind%20Energy%20Projects_Letter%202-9-11.pdfhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=319047&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=319047&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=319047&NotType=%27WebDocketmailto:[email protected]://www.saveblackwater.org/documents/Mount%20Storm%20&%20AES%20New%20Creek%20Wind%20Energy%20Projects_Letter%202-9-11.pdfhttp://www.saveblackwater.org/documents/Mount%20Storm%20&%20AES%20New%20Creek%20Wind%20Energy%20Projects_Letter%202-9-11.pdfhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=319047&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=319047&NotType=%27WebDocket
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    2/8

    The threat posed by wind power facilities is particularly concerning because huge

    numbers of bats are now dying from White-Nose Syndrome (WNS). WNS has

    emerged as a significant threat to bat populations. In some hibernacula, the FWS reportedmortality rates of 90 % or more. The effects of this disease, the cause of which is

    unknown, have been observed in West Virginia, and the neighboring states of Virginia,

    Pennsylvania, and Maryland. In fact, the West Virginia Department of Natural Resourceshas reported that WNS is present in Hellhole Cave, West Virginias largest bat cave.

    Press Release, W.V. Dept of Natural Res. West Virginias Most Important Bat Cave Has

    White-Nose Syndrome (Feb 23, 2010).2

    AFA supports the US FWS listing the eastern small-footed andnorthern long-eared bats as threatened or endangered under theauthority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

    At the core of scientific management of fish and wildlife is sciencesupported by theory, methods and findings. Rarely does only one studyproduce unequivocal and robust results. The National Academia of

    Science represents distinguished scholars dedicated to furtherance ofscience and technology and to their use for the general welfare.Through Congressional mandate, the Academy requires to advisefederal government on scientific and technical matters. Six guidingprinciples underlie all scientific inquiry.3

    1. Pose significant questions that can be investigated empirically.

    2. Conduct and link research to relevant theory.

    3. Use methods that permit direct investigation of the question.

    4. Provide a coherent an explicit chain of reasoning.

    5. Replicate and generalize across studies.6. Disclose research to encourage professional scrutiny andcritique.

    Kuntz (2007) recommends, Results of scientifically sound research andmonitoring studies are needed to inform policy makers during the sitting,

    permitting, and operation of renewable energy sources. Although bat fatalities atwind turbines have been reported at nearly every wind energy facility where

    post-construction surveys have been conducted, few of these studies weredesigned to estimate bat fatalities and only a few included a full season or moreof monitoring. Rigorous protocols should include reliable estimates of searcherefficiency and scavenger removal to correct fatality estimates for potential

    biases.4

    2 Available at, http://www.wvdnr.gov/2010news/10news031.shtm3 Shavelson, R.J, & Towne, L (Eds.) 2002 Scientific Research in Education. Washington,D.C; National Academy Press. Executive Summary & Introduction, pp. 1-16. Access on

    line, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10236

    2

    http://www.wvdnr.gov/2010news/10news031.shtmhttp://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10236http://www.wvdnr.gov/2010news/10news031.shtmhttp://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10236
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    3/8

    AFA is concerned how developers and hired consultants interpretstudy results towards wildlife protection. AFA asserts developers toooften make a number of scientifically and misleading and inaccuratestatements regarding bat endangerment.

    In this petition, AFA cites and reference several documents that US

    FWS should review and examine concerning these species, includinghabitat destruction and degradation, disturbance of hibernation areasand maternity roosts and impacts related wind turbine constructionand operation and impacts related to White Nose Syndrome. Existingregulations of these activities may be inadequate to protect these twospecies.

    These documents are crucial for providing additional information fora status review. This includes additional data related to existing habit,feeding and sheltering, historical and current range, counts, criticalhabitat and supporting data and studies.

    AES New Creek Project 5

    (1) Study: Fall 2007, Bird and Bat Migration Survey Report, Visualradar, and acoustic bat surveys for the New Creek Mountain Project,WV. Prepared for AES New Creek, LLC, 4300 Wilson Blvd., Arlington,VA 22203. Prepared by Stantec Corporation, (formerly Woodlot)March 2008.6

    Findings:

    The consistently high nightly number of recordings at the talus detector may

    indicate the presence of a valuable and frequently used habitat within the Project

    area. This could be habitat used for roosting by eastern small-footed Myotis and

    foraging habitat for a variety of species. Furthermore, the documentation of the highest Myotis detection rate at the talus

    detector suggests a potential presence of valuable foraging and roosting small-footed

    bat habitat.

    (2) Study:New Creek Mountain Bird and Bat Risk Assessment:A Weight-of-EvidenceApproach to Assessing Risk to Birds and Bats at the Proposed New Creek Mountain. 7

    4 Kunzi, T. H., Arnettz, Edward B., Erickson, Wallace P., (2007). Ecological

    impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions, research needs, and

    hypotheses.Front Ecol Environ, 5(6), 315-324.

    5AESNew Creek, LLC Case 08-2105 E-CS Available at:

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm Use case number 08-2105

    6 Available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm Use case number

    08-2105

    7Available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm Use case number 08-2105

    3

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    4/8

    Project, West Virginia. Prepared for: AES New Creek, LLC 4300 Wilson Boulevard

    Arlington, VA 22203. Prepared by: Stantec Consulting 30 Park Drive Topsham, ME

    04086 Stantec December 2008.

    Findings:

    Two West Virginias bat species are federally listed as endangered, and four otherspecies are classified as either imperiled (S2) or critically imperiled (SI) by West

    Virginias Natural Heritage Program. West Virginia does not have state endangered

    species legislation; species listed as imperiled or critically imperiled are not provided anylegal protection in the state. Eastern Small footed bat is an S-1 status or critically

    imperiled.

    Results of the risk assessment suggest that potential impacts to bats consist largely of

    collision mortality during the spring and fall migration seasons. The documentation of

    collision mortality at operational wind facilities is during the summer, and bats likelyreside within the Project area year-round, bats seem most vulnerable to collision during

    the fall migration period based on results from post-construction surveys at existing

    facilities. Long distance migratory species are most vulnerable to collision mortality, asthey appear more vulnerable than other species and were well represented in the resultsof acoustic surveys. Onsite mist-netting surveys suggest that members of the genus

    Myotis, including the uncommon small-footed Myotis (Myotis leibii), are the most

    abundant bats within the Project area. Acoustic surveys documented an apparent peak inmigratory bat activity during the fall. No Threatened or Endangered bat species were

    documented within the Project area. As such, the risk to bats from the Project will vary

    by species and time of year but is expected to consist primarily of collision mortality tolong distance migratory bats, particularly during the fall migration period.

    (3) Letter: To Mr. Trevor Peterson, Stantec Consulting, 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine

    04086. Letter from Deborah Carter, West Virginia Field Office (US FWS), 694Beverly Pike Elkins, West Virginia 26241, dated September 30, 2009. 8 Twenty-one

    pages,

    Remarks and recommendations:

    Data collected during surveys and radio-telemetry work indicated that the projectarea provides important habitat for the small-footed bat (a state-listed sensitive

    species), as well as foraging habitat for other bat species, including the hoary bat,

    the red bat, and state-listed sensitive silver haired bat.

    In addition, these rocky slopes and cliff faces support a variety of other sensitivewildlife species in the region (e.g., Allegheny woodrat). To protect these sensitive

    resources, the Service recommends avoiding impacts to talus and rocky outcrop

    areas that may be used as roost sites by small-footed bats and other sensitive species.

    However, because of variability in populations and detection rates due to a

    variety of local and regional factors, one year of data does not necessarily reflect

    overall species composition or abundance at a site. Thus, the Service recommends

    8.Available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?

    CaseActivityID=280976&NotType='WebDocket'

    4

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=280976&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=280976&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=280976&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=280976&NotType=%27WebDockethttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/webdocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=280976&NotType=%27WebDocket
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    5/8

    multiple years of pre-construction surveys in order to establish a more complete dataset (Service 2003). Multiple years of pre-construction data can account for natural

    variations in population numbers and composition caused by varying weather

    conditions and other influences.

    Depending on the spread of white-nose syndrome in coming years and the

    susceptibility of these endangered bats to the disease, assessments of cumulativeimpacts to both these species and the status of many other bat species, could change

    dramatically including possible listing of new species under the Endangered SpeciesAct.

    Bats tend to reproduce slowly and have longer life spans than birds; rates of

    collision mortality at existing wind farms tend to be higher for bats than for raptors,nocturnally migrating passerines, or breeding birds; and other risks to populations

    (e.&.. white-nose syndrome) are currently high for this group.

    We offer the following recommendations to avoid and reduce anticipated impactsto birds and bats and to document any mortality events or changes to the species

    populations and diversity due to construction and operation of the proposed New

    Creek wind power facility. These recommendations are based on currently availablebest scientific information. As new information becomes available, we reserve the

    right to modify these recommendations.

    (4) WV PSC _ Order, September 30, 2009 granting AES New CreekProject Approval 9

    The potential impacts to bats are expected to generally follow patterns similar to

    those documented at other facilities, and will consist largely of collision mortality

    during the spring and particularly the fall migration seasons, with bat mortality

    potentially higher on warm, calm nights when long distance migratory species areexpected to be the most vulnerable to collision mortality. AES New Creek Ex. TP-D

    pp. 25-26.

    To reduce the potential for impact on calm nights, the blades of the New Creek

    turbines will be feathered so as not to operate when wind speeds are less than 24

    meters per second. Tr. I., p. 60 (Mr. Colman).10

    9 Available at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm September 30, 2009, AES New Creek,LLC, Commission Final Order granting AES New Creek a Siting Certificate for the Project summarized in

    this order and more fully described in the Application, subject to certain conditions, Use Case Number: 08-

    2105

    10 On November 04, 2009, AES New Creek, LLC filed for change in the commission

    order. Commission Final Order deleting the last sentence of the paragraph on page 22, of9/30/2009 Order beginning Bats, and which reads, To reduce the potential for impact

    on calm nights, the blades of the New Creek turbines will be feathered so as not tooperate when wind speed are less than 24 meters per second. Tr. 1, p. 60, etc.

    AES New Creek suggested that the Commission incorrectly interpreted Mr. Colmans

    hearing testimony appearing on page 60 of the Hearing Transcript.AES New Creek stated that the Commission could correct the error by deleting the last

    sentence of the paragraph. The order was granted November 4, 2009.

    5

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htm
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    6/8

    AES New Creek also noted that eastern small-footed Myotis were detected duringeach of the three survey periods. Although rare throughout the State, eastern small-

    footed Myotis appear to be common on New Creek Mountain.

    To understand the behavior of the eastern small-footed Myotis, Stantec conducted

    radio telemetry surveys to document roosting habits of this species on New Creek

    Mountain. Through the radio telemetry, Stantec detected a number of eastern small-footed Myotis roosts on the western slope of New Creek Mountain, in the clearedtransmission line corridor to the south of the Project, and in vertical rock cliff faces

    within Greenland Gap.

    Given their current presence, following construction, eastern small-footed Myotis

    are still expected to forage within the Project area. However, these species are

    thought to primarily feed and fly below the tree canopy based on their small size andforaging habits. Therefore, Stantec suggested that collision mortality for the eastern

    small-footed Myotis is not expected to constitute as great a risk in comparison to

    migratory species.

    (5)Virginia Highlands Grotto Report entitled "The Proposed New Creek Mountain Wind

    Project's Proximity to Regional Endangered Bat Habitats and Possible Cumulative

    Effects", Prepared by Rick Lambert of the Virginia Highlands Grotto Of theNational Speleological Society P. O. Box 151 Monterey, Virginia 24465 Prepared

    for: Allegheny Front Alliance 94 Orchard Street Keyser, WV 26726, January 29,

    2009. 29 pages.11

    Findings:The study purpose offers a regional perspective on the endangered bat habitat

    within migratory range ofthe proposed Project. Explain why there was a lack of

    endangered bat captures during mist-net surveys. Highlight the potential for impact toRTE species and common bats. Highlight the expected high mortality. Show the

    cumulative effects of multiple wind projects in the area.

    The proposed location for the New Creek Mountain Wind Projectis located in this endangered bat recovery area and migratorycorridor.

    The existing data summarized in this report suggests thatStantec has under estimated the impact to RTE bats and thatStantecs reports contain unreliable information.

    It is likely that the New Creek Mountain Wind Project will have astrong adverse effect on the populations of endangered bats andwill impede their conservation and recovery.

    11 Available at:http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmUse Case Number: 08-2105

    Virginia Highlands Grotto Report entitled "The Proposed New Creek Mountain Wind Project's Proximity

    to Regional Endangered Bat Habitats and Possible Cumulative Effects", filed by Rick Lambert. Also at:http://www.psc.state.wv.us/Scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=258580&Source=OrderSearch

    6

    http://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/Scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=258580&Source=OrderSearchhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/Scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=258580&Source=OrderSearchhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/WebDocket/default.htmhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/Scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=258580&Source=OrderSearchhttp://www.psc.state.wv.us/Scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID=258580&Source=OrderSearch
  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    7/8

    The USFWS (2008) warned AES that if the predicted 78,250 to112,125 bats deaths anticipated over the life of the New CreekMountain Wind Project went unchecked, it could lead to populationlevel-impacts to many species.

    At wind projects Kuntz et al. (2007), reports that no publically available post

    construction mortality surveys have documented fatalities of small-footed Myotis. Kuntzconcluded that that large mortality rates across the species range could not be expected

    since the eastern small foot is uncommon.12 It is believed they migrate very small

    distances. (Best and Jennings 1997, Johnson and Gates 2008)13

    This is not the case of the AES New Creek Project. The largest documented numbers

    for small-footed bat are located at this project site. Bats do not have to migrate to be

    endangered. At the AES New Creek Project, risk increases because greater foraging timeis within the turbine project site. Recent dietary studies of the eastern small-footed

    Myotis suggest the species gleans prey off vegetation (Johnson and Gates 2007);

    however, no published data of foraging behavior supports or refutes this statement.

    (Johnson and Gates 2008)14.

    The Allegheny Front Alliance fully supports the position to raise the level of the

    small-footed bat and northern long ear bat as threatened or endangered under the

    authority of the Endanger Species Act. This issue is extremely important to our members.We join others in requesting you not delegate enforcement of controls critical to the

    protection of wildlife to the businesses, which, by their very function, place wildlife and

    habitat in serious jeopardy.

    It is counter intuitive to think that profit making organizations which now ignore yourrequests will somehow hold themselves to higher standards should you decide to permit

    voluntary enforcement of rules so vital to the protection of these creatures.

    One needs look no further than the AES New Creek in West Virginia to see how

    voluntary enforcement requested by the wind lobby will play out in real life. TonyColman, Vice President of AES wrote, May 18, 2011 the following statement concerning

    US FWS response for comments on Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines

    If the Fish & Wildlife Service's Draft Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines (FWS

    Guidelines) are implemented, they will quite simply prevent the creation of tens of

    thousands of jobs, result in the loss of tens of thousands of jobs, and have a negative

    impact on wildlife as other less wildlife friendly technologies will remain or will be builtinstead of wind. The flaws in the FWS Guidelines are significant, and I leave it to the

    12

    Kunz, T.H., E.B. Arnett, W.P. Erickson, A.R. Hoar, G.D. Johnson, R.P. Larkin, M.D.Strickland, R.W. Thresher, and M.D. Tuttle. 2007a. Ecological impacts of wind energy

    development on bats: questions, research needs, and hypotheses. Frontiers in Ecology andthe Environment 531 5-324.13 Johnson, J.B., and E. Gates. 2007. Food habits ofMyotis leibii during fall swarming in

    West Virginia. Northeastern Naturalist 14:317-322.Johnson, J.B., and E. Gates. 2008. Spring migration and roost selection of female Myotis

    leibii in Maryland. Northeastern Naturalist 15453-460.14

    7

  • 8/4/2019 AFA Response SmalFootedBat USFWS 2011 R

    8/8

    many others in the wind industry who will ably identify them and offer alternatives andsolutions that the FWS should adopt.

    I urge you to reconsider the guidelines and change them to match the Wind Turbine

    Guidelines Advisory Committee Recommendations (FAC Guidelines). A failure to make

    substantial modifications to the FWS Guidelines will have serious negative consequences

    and quite candidly would be counter productive to the FWS' mission to "work withothers, to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for

    the continuing benefit of the American people."

    The role of the USFWS is not to promote business, but to protect wildlife. The goal of

    the wind developer is to make as much money as possible. 15

    Proper scientific inquiry and assessment requires that truly defensible scientific

    evaluations are independent16, comprehensive17, transparent18 and empirical19. AFA isconcerned that AES New Creek project has submitted a package that does not offer

    protection to Eastern Small Footed bat or other wildlife. Any failure to satisfy all of these

    four fundamental criteria can render an assessment biased, incomplete, or flawed and will

    ultimately compromise the assessments conclusions and credibility. As with any trulyobjective review and evaluation process, the burden of proof rests on the proponents who

    seek approval or endorsement of their projects, and Federal regulators shouldconscientiously seek verification of the benefits before endorsing such strategies. This

    need is especially great for industrial wind energy, about which so little thorough and

    credible research (relative to the body of political debate on the subject) has beenconducted.

    AFA appreciates the opportunity to comment upon the 90 Day Findings. Our

    organization sincerely hopes that the Service will consider its perspective in finalizing

    these important rules and safeguards for the Eastern Small Footed Bat and Northern LongEar Bat.

    Frank OHara & Greg TrainerCo Chair

    Allegheny Front Alliance

    15 Available at:(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704629104576190812458488694.html16 conducted by impartial and qualified researchers who wont benefit from one outcomeor another.17 addressing qualitatively the technical, economic, and environmental aspects of the

    proposed strategy.18 presenting all supporting assumptions and data for public scrutiny.19 based on real world evidence, not a chain of assumptions or modeled data.

    8

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704629104576190812458488694.htmlhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704629104576190812458488694.html