Comments on Turbine Mitigation for Nebraska

These are comments provided on the draft "Mitigation Guidelines for Wind Energy Development in Nebraska" as submitted on March 30th.

Why are wildlife species even mentioned when it is only land being mitigated for, not any deaths due to direct impacts? These deaths are a taking violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in most cases, yet those impacts seem to be ignored. Why is that?

What is the view of a wind development company on these voluntary guidelines? It seems doubtful that a company would consult with NGPC and FWS and then have any need to review these guidelines as well. So, what is the value for them doing so? Perhaps this could be indicated? Their value as a preconsultation tool should continue to be indicated.

Why would a developer go through a voluntary guideline process when they will have to pay administrative fees? This document list four items - from finding to assessment - that any acquisition funds would be used for, and that would simply take funds away from what is most important: habitat conservation. Companies are placing turbines so they can make a profit, not pay fees to someone else!

How can this document have an especially beneficial influence on being helpful to avoid turbine placement in sensitive areas? To be useful, it needs to be more than a repeat of a federal document. Are there state specific issues or concerns that can be given particular attention? It would seem that the wetland resources would be one item, especially fens or saline wetlands...

Mitigation should not be focused on providing conservation easements should rather focus on habitat replacement. A conservation easement does not replace lost habitat so this item should be listed as the last option, not the first.

The option of habitat replacement is discussed in such a limited extent, it should be expanded to provide some details on potential entities that could become owners of mitigation properties and manage them for the long term. There are many potential options. Minimal funds should be used for administrative purposes and the vast majority of funds should be used for acquisition. It is easy to prepare a plan once suitable habitat is acquired.

If a group/agency is going to receive some property because of a mitigation effort, what in-kind contribution can they make. Perhaps there could be a mitigation bank established where certain valuable properties have been appraised and would be available for purchase. This is already being done with wetland fill projects and there is no reason the same can't be done for turbine development?

Why isn't the American burying beetle included as a species sensitive to turbine developments?

The whooping crane priority stopover map perhaps should also indicate critical habitat as already designated by the FWS.

Why is there no reference to the findings by UNL staff as a result of research on turbines and prairie chickens? Are there especially important sites/areas where turbines could be especially detrimental to this species of concern?

How can this document be made useful to landowners with interest/concerns with turbine developments. A state document could be especially valuable to its citizens. How can this document be useful for residents to ensure protection of local resources that find important, and which may be influenced by turbine placement? These topics seem to be missing?

Perhaps an example of an approximate timeline process for a turbine development could be illustrated, so appropriate and adequate preplanning occurs?

Details on how to use the mitigation worksheet might fit better in the appendix where the mitigation worksheet is discussed.

Please take some time to revise the verbiage to streamline the text to make it easier to read. There are too many useless transition words used: lastly, therefore, due to, in addition, etc.

Five sentences in one paragraph and four of them begin with playa, and twice with playa clusters. Whew!

There is no such thing as a "living" document. This is a document subject to review and update as needed (i.e.: "This document is based upon the best").

More About Birds and Windfarms

By Marilyn McNabb. March 2015. Babbling Brook 24(3): 5. Used with permission.

The National Audubon report on climate change and birds gives the grim news that about half of the bird species in North America will be at risk of extinction by the end of this century if we pursue business as usual with green house gas emissions. We know we have to make lots of changes, and quickly.

Despite the fact that the relative proportion of the cause of bird deaths by windfarms compared to cats compared to cell and radio towers is about 1 to 8 to 23, we need to do as Audubon chapters have done across the country and keep a careful eye on windfarms' effects on birds and bats. In addition to collisions, windfarm roads and towers may cause damage by fragmenting habitats, creating migration barriers, introducing alien species, and disturbing or displacing wildlife.

Bird Fatalities

In a presentation January 7 to citizens in Cortland worried about the effects of a windfarm in the early planning stages, Carolyn Jezierski, Wind Energy and Wildlife Project Coordinator at UNL, said that so far, because they want to be (or at least appear to be) environmentally sensitive, wind developers have generally participated constructively in discussions with the state.

Both federal Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC) standards are voluntary, but USFWS has the power to sue if a completed project is violating the laws it enforces. Given the enormous potential for wind development in Nebraska, these negotiations could get more contentious as the numbers and pace of wind installations increase. Conflict has sharpened at the national level.

In late December, the USFWS took PacifiCorp Energy to federal court in Wyoming for violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Federal investigators found the carcasses of 38 golden eagles and 336 other protected birds at two PacifiCorp wind projects. The Wildlife Service says it had made recommendations earlier to PacifiCorp which were ignored. Priority for enforcement in court by USFWS is given to projects were built in defiance of Fish and Wildlife recommendations. PacifiCorp has agreed to pay $2.5 million in fines and restitution, with most of the money going toward mitigation efforts to reduce bird deaths.

Bird deaths at wind turbines

Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC), introduced a bill in January to attack the legal basis for USFWS's authority which rests on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act. It's so extreme it probably doesn’t have much chance to pass as proposed, but it alerts us to the likelihood of attempts to weaken federal enforcement power. The source of this push is almost certainly oil and gas companies which are subject to much more stringent enforcement of the Migratory Bird Treat Act than wind and solar farms. The Center for Responsive Politics reports that the leading contributors to Rep. Duncan's 2014 campaign were oil and gas companies.

Bill would gut bird protection laws

Nebraska is in the middle of a public comment period on a 33-page document called "Mitigation Guidelines for Wind Energy Development in Nebraska.”

The deadline for comments is March 31 and should be emailed to windwildlife@unl.edu. I hope some Audubon folks can submit comments.

Mitigation guidelines

The Guidelines classify Nebraska into minimum, moderate, and maximum mitigation areas. This classification, along with a site visit, helps determine the state's recommendations for mitigation ranging from no action at all to purchasing a similar piece of land to be protected.

It is interesting to compare federal rules on the same subject. See Final U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-based Wind Energy Guidelines. The federal rules are much more comprehensive. For example, the federal rules tell developers when they should begin consulting with the agency, direct what methods and metrics to use in their field studies, and require two levels of studies of bird deaths to be done after the farm is operational.

FWS guidelines

As I read the proposed "Mitigation Guidelines," there is no provision for public review except very late in the process where NGPC makes a recommendation to the Power Review Board to approve or disapprove a project. It appears the two agencies perform their negotiations with developers behind closed doors. At no point, even after a windfarm is built, is there provision for public access to the agreements made by the state agency with the developers. It appears the Guidelines are written by wildlife experts with wind developers in mind as the audience. But the public has a stake in these outcomes as well. I'm hoping some Wachiskans can propose how some degree of public involvement might work.

Birdnotes of a Section of the Lower Missouri River

With the variety of bird activity underway amidst the Missouri River valley, it seemed appropriate as the Great Backyard Bird Count was underway, to consider again what species occur at different places.

Associated with this interest, an inquiry was submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, asking if the agency had any information on bird occurrence at mitigation sites.

The agency has no information, nor do their partners in land management, which would be the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

According to an ACE representative:

"After visiting with United States Army Corps of Engineers, Nebraska Game & Parks Commission and Iowa Department of Natural Resources biologists I have gathered the following information on your request for bird information on Missouri River Recovery Program sites: ... There were no known recently conducted bird surveys that anyone could provide me."

The Corps of Engineers has bought many thousands of acres, spent millions of dollars of public funds, and yet, they know nothing about the birds present on that property! Nor how their habitat management efforts have been beneficial to the local avifauna.

Obviously there is a myriad of information available, if the agency decided to give some attention to bird occurrence. They have spent tens of millions of dollars, but as for determining one aspect of their responsibility to mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife, documentation of birds has been completely ignored between Ponca State Park and southward to the southeast corner of Nebraska.

The following list indicates bird details associated with this particular extent of the Missouri River. The summary includes only those details since the latter 1880s, with an even more interesting set of facts available for prior decades, especially during early explorations.

The majority of sites given in the following list are public property, and thus readily accessible to bird watching outings. Details on bird occurrence have primarily been derived from a personal database, with other facts from online resources.

This is a personal perspective on status, and subject to change as additional records become available from places where birds surveys continue to occur. Examples of these sorts of sites include Desoto NWR with its seasonal surveys, Carter Lake with the many sightings associated with this birding hotspot, and Squaw Creek NWR, which also conducts regular surveys of waterfowl and seasonal shorebirds.

The following listing starts at Ponca State Park, and extends southward to the Squaw Creek vicinity.

Site Name	Bird Information	River Mile	Acreage	Site Details
Ponca State Park	151 species, with records dating to 1938	753	2400	Dixon County; Nebraska Game and Parks Commission; recognized as an Important Birding Area
Upper Dakota Bend	no bird records available	725	21.49	river mile 724-726; Woodbury County, IA; Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Mile Long Island WMA	no bird records available		234	Woodbury County, IA; Iowa DNR
Tannery Lake	19 species		0	Woodbury County, IA; Iowa DNR
New Lakes	no bird records available		0	Woodbury County, IA; Iowa DNR
Glovers Point Bend	no bird records available		1859	Monona/Woodbury County, IA; ACE
Browns Lake SWA / Bigelow County Park	41 species dating to 1917		1158	Woodbury County, IA; Iowa DNR; Bigelow State Park, with 36 acres, managed by Woodbury County Conservation Board
IPS Property SWA	no bird records available		168	Woodbury County, IA; Iowa DNR; west of Browns Lake tract
Owego Wetlands	no bird records available		1311	near Owego on the river floodplain; Woodbury County Conservation Board
Snyder-Winnebago Bend	22 species dating to 1837	711	3144.57	Monona/Woodbury counties, IA and Dakota/Thurston counties, NE; ACE
Ivy Island SWA	no bird records available		313	Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR
Omaha Mission Bend WA	no bird records available		138	Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR
Blackbird/Tieville-Upper and Middle Decatur Bend	50 species dating to 1919	693	3861	r.m. 693.8-697; Thurston and Burt counties, NE and Monona County, IA; ACE and Iowa DNR
Blencoe Bend SWA	no bird records available	664	0	r.m. 664; Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR
Onawa Materials Yards WA	no bird records available		0	Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR
Blue Lake and Lewis and Clark State Park	44 species dating back to 1921		865	Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR
Badger Lake SWA	no bird records available		1109	Monona County, IA; Iowa DNR; a designated Important Birding Area
Louisville Bend and Oxbow/Louisville Bend SWA	2 species from 1936 and 2006		1086	Monona County, IA; ACE and Iowa DNR
Soldier Bend	no bird records available	660	248	r.m. 660-664; Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Middle Little Sioux/ Fawn Island	no bird records available	669	16.68	Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Deer Island WA	no bird records available		285	Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Little Sioux Bend [Three Rivers]	no bird records available	669	0	r.m. 669-670; Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Little Sioux Bend	no bird records available	666	190.61	r.m. 666.8-668.5; Harrison County, IA; ACE
Bullard Bend	five species noted during 2009	663	25	r.m. 663-664; Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Soldier Bend WA	one record from 1931	660	248	r.m. 660-664; Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
Sandy Point Bend	no bird records available	656	251.6	r.m. 656-657.5; Harrison County, IA; ACE
Tyson Bend	three species	654	697.86	r.m. 654-657; Harrison County, IA; Iowa DNR
California Bend	three species	649	420	r.m. 649-5-650.6, Harrison County, IA - IA DNR
Desoto NWR	238 species represented from both sides of the river	642	8362	Washington County, NE and Pottawattamie County, IA; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Wilson Island State Park	40 species, starting in 1980	641	544	Pottawattamie County, IA; Iowa DNR
Nobles Lake SWA	31 species, starting in 1979		236	east of De Soto NWR in Pottawattamie County, IA; Iowa DNR
Hitchcock Nature Center	at least 126 species , many from hawk watch effort, and raptor banding		1248	Pottawattamie County Conservation Board
Boyer Chute NWR, including Horseshoe Lake Flats	180 species at a minimum	634	3350	Washington County, NE; FWS; an Important Birding Area
Neale Woods, including Krimlofski Tract	minimum of 198 species	631	600	Fontenelle Nature Association; an Important Birding Area
N.P. Dodge Park	133 species, dating back to 1983	628	445	Douglas, NE; Omaha Parks Recreation and Public Property
Pigeon Creek SWA	17 species	627		Iowa DNR
Big Lake Park	42 species	620	163	Pottawattamie, IA; Council Bluffs Parks and Recreation
Blackbird Marsh	32 species	620	14	Pottawattamie County Conservation Board
Narrows River Park	seven species	619	36	Pottawattamie County Conservation Board
Riverside Park	no bird records available	619	95	Pottawattamie, IA; Council Bluffs Parks and Recreation
Carter Lake / Levi Carter Park	207 species, dating back to 1886	618	519.5	lake 320 ac., park 519.5 acres; Douglas, NE; OPRPP
Council Bend	three species	615	89	r.m. 617-618, Pottawattamie, IA; Iowa DNR
Gibson Bend SWA	18 species	612		Iowa DNR
Mandan Park	65 species	611	71	Douglas County; City of Omaha park; the flats along the river, designated as Mandan Flats, are also City of Omaha property
Lake Manawa/Lake Manawa State Park	239 species, dating back to 1898	607	1529	lake 772 ac., park 1529; Iowa DNR
Fontenelle Forest	254 species, dating back to 1891	603	1400	approx 2000 at both Fontenelle Nature Association tracts
Gifford Point WMA	124 species, dating back to 1919	604	1300	including Gifford Farm; NGPC, with agland leased
Heroes Park	no information available	603	30	Sarpy County; city of Bellevue
Haworth Park	112 species	602	153	Sarpy County; city of Bellevue
Offutt Base Lake	144 species	599	113	Sarpy County; United States Air Force
Saint Marys Bend/St. Marys Island CA	109 species	596	2419	Mills County, IA; ACE
La Platte Bottoms	146 species	595	600	Sarpy, NE; Metropolitan Utilities District; PCS
Schilling WMA	218 species	593	1500	Cass, NE; NGPC
Gilmore WMA/Tobacco Island	52 species	588	1609	Cass County, NE; ACE; managed by NGPC
Nottleman Island	no bird records available	583	1232	Mills County, IA; ACE and DNR
Auldon Bar	six species	578	1329	Fremont County, IA; ACE
Van Horn Bend	no bird records available	576	534	Cass County, NE; ACE
Copeland Bend [WMA]	no bird records available	566	2788	Fremont County, IA; ACE and DNR
Upper / Lower Hamburg Bend	86 species	593	1896.64	Atchison County, MO; ACE
Kansas Bend	ten species	543	1056	Nemaha/Otoe County, NE; ACE
Nishnabotna River Mouth [Nishnabotna Conservation Area]	four species	540	2434	in two tracts; Atchison County, MO; ACE
Brownville Bend	no bird records available	533	89.96	Nemaha County, NE; ACE
Langdon Bend WMA	nine species	530	1667.96	1283 or 1308 ac.; Nemaha County, NE; ACE
Aspinwall Bend	no bird records available	528	309	Atchison County, NE; ACE
Deroin Bend CA	no bird records available	518	1082	Atchison/Holt County, MO; Missouri DNR
Indian Cave State Park	157 species	517	3399	Richardson County, NE; NGPC
Hemmies Bend / Corning Site	no bird records available	514	2003	Atchison/Holt County, MO; Missouri DNR
Thurnau Addition	no bird records available	510	1372	Holt County, MO; ACE and Missouri DNR
H.F. Thurnau Conservation Area	74 species	510	366	Holt County, MO; Missouri DNR
Rush Bottom Bend Conservation Area	72 species	500	811.2	Holt County, MO; Missouri DNR
Rush Bottom Bend	no bird records available	500	1197	Holt County, MO; ACE
Rulo Bluffs	no bird records available; though TNC has kept some records	495	450	ca. 450 acres; Richardson County, NE; The Nature Conservancy
Squaw Creek NWR	249 species	490	7350	Holt County, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; an Important Birding Area
Bean Lake SWA	24 species	488	416	Platte County, MO
			Overall, at least 42,019.76 acres

Overall, at least 392 species have been seen at places along this portion of the Missouri River floodplain, dating back to 1887 as derived from more than 63,000 individual records.

It is obvious that the Corps of Engineers should give birds some attention along this portion of the Missouri River. It would be appropriate for them to initiate an active effort to promote bird surveys on mitigation properties. They should also be attentive to getting the records included within an online repository of avian information, such as ebirds, so results, both past and present, would be publicly available through online access.

It is a mistake for the agency to continue to ignore bird occurrence at mitigation places.

Wind Farm Developers Proactive in Minimizing Threats to Birds

Measures to minimize the threats to birds are an essential part of the planning and construction process by Midwest Wind Energy for a wind farm facility in Knox County, northeast Nebraska.

"We have a proactive approach to addressing environmentally sensitive issues," said Patrick Dalseth, a project coordinator with the Chicago-based company. "We are an environmentally conscious company, so we contacted state and federal agencies early in the planning process while preparing our proposal to the Nebraska Public Power District. The agencies preliminary feedback on environmental concerns were included in the proposal."

The power district had requested proposals to evaluate from which they could select a project that would increase their use of wind-generated power.

The Elkhorn Ridge Wind Project was chosen from among ten proposals submitted, Dalseth said.

Wind turbines at the Ainsworth Wind Energy facility.

In March, NPPD signed an agreement with Midwest Wind Energy to purchase the 80 megawatts of electricity that would be generated on an annual basis by a turbine farm in the rolling hills near Bloomfield.

"The environmental assessment for this project was relatively easy," Dalseth said. "There were hardly any environmentally sensitive issues" such as wetlands or concerns with turbines being placed along an apparent bird migration corridor.

An avian assessment - step #6 in the companies 12 steps to building a wind farm - was carried out by consulting partners. "Sites undergo thorough ornithology studies to ensure migratory routes stay safe," according to the company web site.

Results indicated there are no state or federally listed species on the project site, which is also east of the migration corridor for the Whooping Crane, a species of special concern in regards to potential impacts of wind farm placement. About 58 different species of birds were noted in the area during site visits.

Two leks of the Greater Prairie-Chicken were present, including one in a crop field.

Their occurrence prompted the company to agree to contribute $37,000 to the Nebraska Land Trust. The funds - $1,000 per turbine plus administrative fees - will be used to "benefit the conservation of grassland nesting birds through acquisition of conservation easements in the Verdigre-Bazille Creek Watershed Biologically Unique Landscape area in conjunction with the Nebraska Legacy Project," according to letters of understanding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

An agreement of understanding on this contribution is expected to be approved by the end of May.

Several other measures to protect avian resources are being included with the project, according to the letters of understanding by the two agencies in late April:

"In acknowledgement that the wind project and ancillary facilities can have an adverse affect on state trust fish and wildlife species including threatened and endangered species and migratory birds, the project proponent has made the following items a part of the proposed project:"

1) Power lines between turbines and to substations at the project site will be buried.

2) Bird flight diverters will be installed on the existing transmission lines that extend through the project area. Midwest Wind Energy will work with NPPD on installing these devices, Dalseth said.

3) All facilities within the project site will be constructed in a manner consistent with guidelines set forth by the Avian Powerline Committee to reduce and avoid mortality and injury to migratory birds.

4) Post-construction monitoring will be conducted for two years to determine the affect of operations on wildlife species. Results will be provided to the oversight agencies for evaluation, and discussion of results, if necessary, Dalseth said.

The company also received a nationwide permit, through a Section 404 evaluation with the Army Corps of Engineers, for underground transmission lines that will cross both natural wetlands and one man-made pond on the project site.

Including the cost of the contribution for protecting habitats for grassland species, about $65-70,000 dollars was spent on environmental review and assessment activities, Dalseth said.

It will cost $140 million to construct the Elkhorn Ridge Wind Project, which will have 27 wind turbines with a height of 410 feet spread across about 8,355 acres, which is about 95% cropland, Dalseth said. Each turbine - except for one - will be placed in tilled cropland, generally along a preexisting, high-voltage transmission line. Red-flashing lights will be placed atop the turbine hubs, to mark their location for planes, following regulatory guidelines of the Federal Aviation Authority.

Construction of the project is currently underway, and expected to be completed about December, 2008.

The steps used to develop the Elkhorn Ridge Wind Project are the same procedures that will be utilized for the construction of any other facilities to generate power from wind, Dalseth said. Midwest Wind Energy is currently evaluating the construction of two other wind facilities in Nebraska, and elsewhere within its area of operation.