Findings for Verizon Cellular Tower at Hyannis Golf Course

Verizon Wireless has issued their findings to the Federal Communications Commission for the cellular communications tower to be placed at the Pelican Beach Golf Course east of Hyannis. The tower is designed to provide service to the village and its local airport.

This is a summary of the details associated with this tower — located along Highway 2 — as submitted via email by the applicant to the Federal Communications Commission (ASR Application No. A0916392) in mid-December:

* The 358-foot (109 meters) height tower will be a self-supported lattice structure that will not include any guy wires.

* A previous application to the FCC by Verizon was cancelled (August 26, 2014) due to a revision in the placement of the tower to the golf course site where access and utilities are available. An alternative site further north was rejected since the resident did not want a cellular tower on their property.

* Verizon has received permission from the FAA (Study Number: 2014-ACE-3331-OE) to utilize "avian-friendly" lighting system of “dual, medium intensity lighting without the use of the steady-burning side lights.” Also, any lights associated with “on-ground facilities should be down-shielded and/or motion-sensored to limit such lighting to within the tower compound.”

* A mid-November letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in consultation on this tower, indicated “it appears unlikely that the proposed telecommunications tower would result in adverse effects to federally protected, threatened or endangered species, or to any critical habitat designated for such species.” An additional recommendation was that there be no “removal or impacts to vegetation during the extended nesting season.” If work is necessary, a qualified biologist should conduct an “avian pre-construction risk assessment of the affected habitats to determine the absence or presence of breeding birds and their nests." A qualified biologist will be engaged "if construction cannot be scheduled outside of the specified dates, to complete an avian pre-construction risk assessment and ensure breeding birds and/or nests are not present prior to construction,” according to the FWS. letter, submitted by Eliza Hines, acting supervisor of the Nebraska Field Office. The agency also requested receiving a written report if a bird survey is done.

* In early November, the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC) concurred with a finding of “not likely to impact” any state-owned property, including Avocet WMA, nor “likely to have any adverse impacts on state-listed threatened or endangered species.”

The NGPC letter also indicated: “We have grown increasingly concerned about the recent increase in tower construction across Nebraska and impacts that this might have on populations of migratory birds,” wrote Carey Greel, an environmental analyst with the state agency. “Aerial photos of the site show the tower would be located in close proximity to an area dense with Sandhill wetland landscape features. These wetlands provide migratory and nesting habitat for numerous migratory bird species, and we have records of trumpeter swan and long-billed curlew, both Tier 1 species identified in our Nebraska Natural Legacy Plan, using wetland and grassland habitats in the area. Tier 1 species are those that are globally or nationally most at-risk, and which occur in Nebraska.”

The other tower at Hyannis (just west of Highway 61) and at Whitman (northward of Doc Lake), have not yet been submitted to the FCC for review as of early December, according to spokesperson for the federal agency. Of the three cellular towers proposed for Hyannis and Whitman, only the golf-course tower has undergone a complete pre-construction review.

Each of the three towers have, however, already undergone an environmental review by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, with similar findings for each tower structure.

---

An attempt to determine further information on this tower was not successful in December. The request to the Federal Communications commission was limited. Results of the terse inquiry were:

Regarding the Sandhills Journey Scenic Byway and how there will be mitigation on the impact of a new structure along Highway 2:

Requester for the first time suggested that the tower may impact the viewscape along the Sandhills Journey Scenic Byway. This e-mail was neither addressed to the FCC nor styled as a reply comment. Moreover, even if we were to treat it as a reply comment, new issues ordinarily may not be raised on reply and Requester has shown no reason why he could not have raised this assertion earlier. In addition, Requester has made no effort to explain how the proposed tower may adversely affect the Scenic Byway.

No information was provided either on the features of the tower, the expected date of construction, nor anything about how the tower will be built.

Cellular Tower Threats to Birds and Sandhill Features

Cellular communication towers being sited near Hyannis and Whitman pose a potential threat to migratory birds, and will also change the local character of the sand hills.

Three towers more than 300 feet in height, with associated guy wires are either approved or being considered by the Federal Aviation Administration. Each one is located in association with wetland habitats near the two communities.

Two towers locations are east of Hyannis and south of Avocet WMA:

* one for Alltel southwest of the intersection of highways 2 and 61, with a height of 308 feet above ground level, and placed upon a hilltop.

* another for Verizon sited at the Pelican Beach Club golf course, and with a height above the ground of 358 feet; a public notice on this tower was recently issued in the Grant County News.

Communication tower guylines are a known hazard to flying birds, according to many studies.

Avocet WMA is a known haven for birds, with nearly seventy different species of birds known to occur. Especially prominent are the Trumpeter Swans, which typically nest each summer season, and when more than half-a-dozen can occur. These birds, the largest of the North American waterfowl, typically fly just above the hills in a steady ponderous flight, and could readily hit any guylines located just south of the wetland. Young, inexperienced juveniles would be especially in danger. Other species present could also strike the lines.

Having two towers placed south of the wildlife area are particularly hazardous due to their proximity and the limitations in flight airspace that will occur.

Near Whitman, a tower is proposed to the north and slightly west of Doc Lake. It would apparently also be a Verizon tower, and also have a height above the ground of a hilltop of 358 feet.

More than seventy species of birds have been recorded to occur at this wetland and lake, including more than a dozen on occasion.

In addition to potential threats to migratory birds, the towers will mar the landscape view. They are all along the Sandhills Journey Scenic Byway and readily visible from Highway 2. The two towers east of Hyannis are also within the northern extent of the Sandhills National Natural Landmark, thus adding further industrial development to this unique tract.

The blinking white lights of these towers will be incessant in the night skies.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is evaluating the towers to determine if there are any concerns that the agency needs to address. Migratory birds are also protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Public Comment Sought Regarding Communication Towers

Public input is currently being sought by the Federal Communications Commission in regards to its oversight role of communication towers.

The federal agency is conducting a programmatic environmental assessment (PEA) of its Antenna Structure Registration program, under obligations required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Facets of the PEA are:

1) NEPA compliance for proposed tower registrations.

2) Effects of communications towers on migratory birds.

The FCC will do a preliminary evaluation of environmental impacts of communication towers, and determine whether a more extensive evaluation - a programmatic environmental impact statement - may be required.

Two public meetings were held: on December 13 at Chula Vista, California and December 15, at Tampa Florida.

A public meeting was also held December 6, at the FCC building in Washington, D.C., which was broadcast live on the internet.

Public comments must be presented by January 14, 2011, and can be submitted online.

The FCC regulates towers through licensing requirements, where every tower built must undergo a federal review.

Addressing Bird Deaths at Communications Towers

The programmatic environmental assessment on the take of migratory birds by communication towers in the Gulf Coast area now being undertaken by the Federal Communications Commission is a court-ordered action, based upon a lawsuit won on appeal by the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) and others, against the FCC.

The focus is the impact of communication towers on migratory birds. The FCC regulates communication tower frequencies through licensing requirements.

In recent years, ABC, National Audubon Society, the Ornithological Council, and other groups concerned with bird mortality at communication towers, have worked with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine measures to reduce "take" of protected migratory birds, now numbering 1,007 different species. A conservatively estimated 4-5 million birds are killed each year due to collisions with towers in the United States, though the actual extent is not known and could be much higher. Until a cumulative impacts analysis is conducted nationwide, the more "true" level of take cannot be determined.

The unpermitted "take" of a migratory bird, such as by incidental or accidental means including tower collision, is a potential criminal violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended. MBTA is a strict liability statute where proof of intent is not required. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act also affords protection to both Bald and Golden Eagles. It, too, is a strict liability statute. Listed birds and other species are also protected by the Endangered Species Act.

Executive Order 13186, issued in January 2001, also requires that federal agencies protect migratory birds, and must develop and implement a memorandum of understanding with the USFWS that will "promote the conservation of migratory bird populations."

Dr. Albert M. Manville, a wildlife biologist in the Branch of Bird Conservation, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has been actively working on the bird strikes issue for many years. Pertinent examples of his involvement include:

1. Instrumental in establishing the Communication Tower Working Group in 1999 - which he chairs on behalf of the Service - to gather information pertinent to the subject;
2. Helped develop USFWS communication tower guidelines in 2000;
3. Provided a lengthy evaluation to the FCC of tools, approaches and changes needed to make communication towers more bird-friendly based on FCC proposed rulemaking in 2007;
4. Published several papers on avian-communication tower collision and radiation issues; and
5. Prepared a briefing paper in April 2009, on the need for research into the cumulative impacts of communication towers on migratory birds.

These efforts are intended to reduce the impacts which an increasing number of communication towers have on hundreds of species of migratory birds.

Towers are known dangers, depending upon their height, location, structure (e.g., monopole, lattice, or guyed -- including how many spans of guy wires are present), and the type of lighting used, as defined and required by Federal Aviation Administration's obstruction marking and lighting circular, soon to be updated.

More recently, Manville was involved as the Project Officer in a research study conducted at 24 communication towers in Michigan intended to scientifically evaluate the impact of communication towers on birds migrating through Michigan.

"Rather than litigate, funds were used to conduct a detailed, multi-year study," Manville said. The focus of the study was on tower lighting, height and presence of guy wires, he explained. "By extinguishing the red, steady-burning lighting on tall towers -- the so-called L-810 lights -- but leaving on the red flashing incandescent or red strobe lighting, bird mortality was reduced by up to 72% at some towers.

"This was an astounding finding with significant ramifications for making towers more bird-friendly," stated Manville. "White lighting is not affected since L-810s are not required on white-strobe-lit towers."

The Principal Investigator of this study was Dr. Joelle Gehring, with the Michigan Natural Features Inventory. Dr. Gehring is currently conducting a follow-up tall tower study in Michigan and New Jersey funded by the U.S. Coast Guard, the preliminary results of which are replicating findings from the earlier Michigan study. Manville also serves as the project officer for this study.

For Manville, there is an obvious fix which can significantly reduce bird mortality: "modify the lighting standard" by phasing out steady burning red lights. This lighting can be replaced by flashing red lights, red strobes, or white strobes.

"Based on the new published bird-friendly standards, especially for lighting, the FCC should implement proposed rulemaking submitted for public comment in 2007," Manville said. The FCC has not yet implemented the memorandum of understanding required by Executive Order 13186, although arguably they are an independent Federal commission rather than a Federal agency. However, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission -- another independent Federal commission -- is about to sign an MOU with the Service under the Executive Order.

"The public needs to better understand the documented impacts of communications towers on migratory birds, published in the U.S. literature since at least 1949, as well as what can be done to significantly reduce bird take," Manville said. "With the new lighting research findings, this should be a priority."

The public can provide comments to the FCC on scoping concerning their Antenna Structure Registry database. Comments are due to the FCC by no later than January 14, 2011.

Nebraska Situation

The Ecological Services Office of the F.W.S. regularly reviews applications for communication and cellular towers. The agency provides recommendations during the planning process for any regulated tower.

During the past couple of months, about 12-15 reviews have been conducted, mostly for cellular towers, according to Martha Tacha, an agency biologist in Nebraska.

"Only three of these towers were not self-supporting or did not address agency recommendations up front," she said.

The USFWS has a set of recommended measures that should be included in tower construction, and the following list is a summary, used for a recent evaluation:

1. Collocate with a nearby tower or other existing structure, if one exists.

2. Construct a tower less than 199 feet above ground level. Try to keep all towers unguyed, monopole or lattice-supported, and unlit. If a taller tower is built that uses guy-wires, install bird deflectors on the wires to reduce the potential for bird collisions. The deflectors should be maintained as long as the tower is present.

3. Where possible under FAA standards, the tower should not be lit. If lights are needed, the agency recommends the use of flashing white or red strobe lights or blinking red incandescent lighting to be used as aircraft warning beacons. Use of steady-burning red lights should be avoided whenever possible.

4. An self-standing tower should not be built within one mile of any wetlands, wet meadows or riverine habitats.

5. The new tower should be designed to accommodate at least two additional users.

6. Security lighting should be down-shielded to keep light within the boundary of the site. Security lights should be motion or heat activated, not left "on" all night.

7. If the tower is constructed, there was a request to allow USFWS and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission and/or their contractors to conduct dead-bird searches on a regular or irregular basis. If such studies are conducted by independent contractors or tower consultants, studies should be coordinated with the USFWS Field Office, appropriate permits acquired where necessary, and results should be provided to USFWS and the Commission.

8. Within one month after construction is completed, post-construction photographs and a signed statement that the above conservation measures were implemented, need to be provided to the F.W.S. and F.C.C.

9. The tower and building should be removed once the facility is no longer in use or is abandoned.

The agency has recently added additional requirements that any projects done during the bird breeding survey, should have surveys done to "determine the absence or presence of breeding birds and their nests." Also, what avoidance measures that can be implemented to avoid the take of migratory birds.

Our office "is not aware of any studies of tower kills in Nebraska," Tacha said.

"It is important to have this kind of information."