Many of the thousands of bald eagle carcasses shipped to the Eagle repository have come from wind farms

 

This attachment is important because it is one of the few truly scientific opinions ever published pertaining to the wind industry. Please copy or save it. With this information people and decision makers can better understand some of the wind industry fraud and rigging taking place.  I put out information like this because I believe with the truth, this fraudulent industry will someday be held accountable.  I have added some notes pertaining our wind industry in America in bright blue.

 

I found the enclosed attachment on the internet in April 2010.  As with all information damaging to wind energy development and the pursuit of industry profits, this well thought out set of guidelines, developed by scientists in Poland, was stripped from the internet.                                                   

The white-tailed eagle is mentioned as being particularly prone to wind turbine collisions because of the eagle carcasses being found at European wind farms. Keep in wind energy development is far more extensive in Europe and this statement is very important because these fish eating eagles share the same ecological niche as our Bald Eagle. The primary difference between these two eagles is that the white tailed eagle is missing the white head feathers. 

When has anyone in America related to the wind industry, a conservation group or the FWS ever made a statement like this about our Bald Eagle?  They haven't because of corruption. What this statement also represents is that many of the thousands of bald eagle carcasses being shipped to the Eagle repository have actually come from wind turbine collisions.

 

This is the link this information originally came from................ http://www.psew.pl/en/guidelines_for_assessment_of_wind_farms_impac...;

 

 

These wind turbine guidelines from 2008 were posted on the Official wind farm web site in Poland.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Developed and edited by:

Dr Przemysław Chylarecki (OTOP and Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish

Academy of Sciences),

mgr Anna Pasławska (PWEA).

Consultants:

Prof. dr hab. Przemysław Busse (Bird Migration Observation Post, University of

Gdańsk),

Dr hab. Dariusz Wysocki (Zachodniopomorskie Natural Society),

Dr Jacek Antczak (Pomeranian Academy in Słupsk),

Dr Michał Goc (University of Gdańsk),

Dr Andrzej Wuczyński (Lower Silesian Field Station, Nature Conservation Institute, Polish

Academy of Sciences),

Dr Wojciech Zyska (ZTEP and Naturalist Club),

Mgr inŜ. Jarosław Mroczek (PWEA),

Mgr inŜ. Przemysław Zyska (ZTEP).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Finally consulted and edited on 9 March 2008.

Quotation:

PWEA (2008). Guidelines for assessment of wind farms’ impact on birds. Szczecin.                                              

 

4. Development of wind projects is likely to cause:

a. Bird mortality caused by collisions with operating turbines and/or elements

of auxiliary infrastructure, in particular overhead power lines;

b. Decrease in population due to loss and fragmentation of habitats caused

by deterring effect of the wind turbines and/or development of

communication and energy infrastructure related to operations of the wind

turbines,

c. Disturbance to populations, in particular to short- and long - range bird

migrations (the barrier effect).

5. Mortality caused by collisions and loss of habitats are key in terms of likely

adverse effects on birds populations.

6. The extent of effects on bird population is diversified, depending mainly upon

the location of the wind turbines – from almost no or negligible effects on life

expectancy of bird population, to significant effects with significant loss of

habitats and high mortality caused by collisions                                                                 ..........................................In America the industry's rigged research has not shown this because this type of research has been deliberately avoided.

7. The type of wind turbines used in a project (tower height, rotor diameter,

lighting, linear speed of rotor blade tips), number of turbines within the farm,

layout of the farm (relative to each other and elements of the environment) or

presence of other wind farms in the vicinity (cumulated effects) also affects

the type and magnitude of the effects. The last element will grow more

important as the density of wind farm location increases.

 

8. In general, the risk of adverse effects on birds is higher if a wind farm is located

on an area extensively used by birds. Investments located in such areas, in

particular areas with high intensity of bird migrations in the airspace, have

greater potential for adverse effects than projects developed in locations of

low intensity of birds’ use of the airspace. Conversely, the areas with low

migration intensity are characterized by lower risk of adverse effects.

9. However, the way birds use the airspace (migration altitude, time and way of

land use – is it a sleeping, feeding or breeding ground) and species

composition observed in the particular site (studies prove that the risk of

collisions with wind turbines is different for different species) also matter.

10. Nonetheless, appropriate site selection is of primary importance for minimizing

possible adverse effects on birds, especially avoiding locating wind turbines:

a. in areas extensively used by birds,

b. in areas of concentration of collision–sensitive species, such as for instance:

raptors (Falconiformes), gulls and terns, night migrants, owls and certain air

– mating species;

c. in areas of concentration of Anseriformes and Charadriiformes, known to

have the most intense wind farm avoidance reactions, leading to loss of

habitats;

d. in areas particularly valuable to breeding avifauna.   ......................................... The wind industry has ignored all of this.

 

6. The assessment shall include cumulated effects, in particular effects of other

wind farm project (existing or planned, known to the investor) likely to affect key

bird species. The spatial scope of sites to be considered in assessment of

cumulated effects shall be adapted to ecology of local bird species. In case of

large breeding species (raptors, Black Stork) and concentrations of feeding

migrants (goose, cranes) the assessment of cumulated effects shall take into

account all other farms within the radius of 5 km and 20 km accordingly.    .................  Where has there been a single legitimate wind industry study on the cumulative impacts to any bird species living in and around wind farms? 

  Where are any of the studies discussing nesting failures or habitat abandonment that take place around wind farms?

 

 

 

The ornithology expert, carrying out the screening of a particular site shall take

into account:

a. Population (breeding or non - breeding) of species indicated in Article 4(1)

and Annex I to the Birds Directive,

b. Concentration of breeding or non - breeding (wintering, migrating) raptors,

c. Population of particularly collision – prone species (for instance Red Kite,

White – tailed Eagle, Golden Eagle, Corn Bunting)          ,................................................................          The white-tailed eagle listed here as particularly prone to collision is actually a European Bald Eagle.

d. Presence of non – breeding concentrations of feeding or sleeping large

Anseriformes,,

e. Breeding colonies of large and – medium sized birds in the vicinity of the

site (gulls, terns, cormorants, herons),

f. Distance to SPAs or IBAs

 

 

6. Assessing the predicted project’s impact on birds the ornithology expert shall

take into account:

a. The likelihood of infringing the favourable conservation status of local birds

using the Natura 2000 area, being the species, for the conservation

whereof the area has been established, and of local species, listed in.............................In America with the wind industry or FWS, the term "local" has been twisted to mean an area covering several thousands square miles, which                                                

Article 4(1) of the Birds Directive;                                                                                 completely ignores wind project impacts to local species being slaughtered off.

b. The likelihood and magnitude of bird collisions with turbines;

c. Concentration of key breeding species;

d. Concentration of non – breeding large species;

e. Concentration of non – breeding raptors;

f. Intensity of airspace use by raptors up to the extreme height of the rotor;

g. Intensity of daytime airspace use by birds during the migration period;

h. Intensity of nighttime airspace use by birds during the migration period;

i. Nesting species included in zone protection of habitats;

j. Likely (predicted) decrease in concentration of any species stemming from

the farm’s deterrence effect;

k. Species diversity in breeding and non – breeding periods.

7. The forecast of bird mortality caused by collisions with turbines shall be jointly

based on:

a. Data concerning the observed concentration of birds using the

airspace in the location of the planned farm and the way these birds

use the airspace;

b. Data concerning the risk of collision estimated on the basis of empirical

data from other sites or forecasting models.*

* The expert panel will discuss possible to use forecasting models and recommend

selected ones in the final version of the Guidelines, which will be published on the

PWEA’s website http://www.psew.pl/, as well as on websites of other organizations that

decide to recommend the Guidelines..............................................................................              All wind project mortality forecasting in America is being done with the Wind industry's fraudulent research                                                             IX. Monitoring (after-construction monitoring)

1. The purpose of monitoring is to verify the initial assessment of farm’s effects on

bird populations, in particular to:

a. Assess the changes in intensity of land use by birds compared to the

pre – investment period with regard to baseline;

b. Estimate bird mortality caused by collisions.

2. The analysis of the wind farm’s impact on land use by birds shall use two study

tools:

a. BACI (before – after/control – impact) (described in Annex no. 5) or,                  ......................This has never been done in America because the research is rigged

given lack of reliable data from control areas or systems, BA (before –

after) comparing the data from the same points and transects before

and after realization of the investment;

b. Impact gradient analysis applied to post – investment data and carried

out in gradient of distance to the wind turbines.                                  ......................This has never been done in America because the research is rigged.  If it this research was ever conducted by an ethical researcher wind projects  

4. The results of monitoring shall be used by competent administration authorities                             like those at Altamont or the Montezuma hills would show large areas of golden eagle territory abandonment and population declines

to update the decisions concerning further operation of the farm. In case of                                         surrounding these wind farms.

finding effects exceeding in its magnitude the predictions formulated in the

EIA report being the basis for issuance of the environmental decision, the

authority shall cause:                                                                                ....................................When research is being rigged exceeding predictions can not be shown.

a. Implementation of measures mitigating the observed effects (species –

oriented mitigating measures, for instance: modifications to turbines’

night lighting system, change in structure of land use, temporary

shutdown of wind turbines);

b. Application of compensating measures;

c. Permanent decommissioning of selected turbines.

5. The imperative to implement appropriate programme of mitigating and

compensating measures shall be conditionally stipulated in the environmental

decision acquired by the investor. The conditions for managing such

programme shall be clearly established using measurable criteria, having

regard to the monitoring data.                                                    ....................................When research is rigged establishing measurable criteria that is credible is not possible and all regards for the species being impacted are dismissed.