2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I'm also a staff member at ONDA, and just wanted to add some information about effects of wind power development on sage-grouse. The Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, based on scientific studies of other energy development impacts, in 2005 recommended at least a five mile set-back of wind energy generation and transmission projects from occupied sage-grouse habitat. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/sagegrouse/pdf/section_5.pdf. The potential for serious harm to sage-grouse was confirmed in a recent (July 2009) study published by the U.S. Department of Energy, titled "Sage-Grouse and Wind Energy: Biology, Habits and Potential Effects from Development" (available at http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-18567.pdf).

Extrapolating from the devastating effects of oil and gas development in Wyoming on sage-grouse there, the July 2009 study concluded that "Both wind farms and oil and gas fields consist of large aggregations of infrastructure and activities that share some common features, such as transmission lines and roads, and differ in others, such as wind turbines. Impacts to sage-grouse from wind energy development would likely be similar to those resulting from fossil fuel development described in Section 4" - that is, major harm to the birds, including causing them to abandon nesting and mating sites, abandoning winter habitat, and reducing their reproductive rates.

Wind turbines, with their height, noise and "shadow-flicker," can lead birds that live in a relatively flat and featureless habitat to move many miles away from these projects, and from their necessary habitat. Transmission lines similarly can become perches for predators and lead either directly to sage-grouse deaths or to driving them away from their habitat. In short, wind power development can play havoc with these birds, and it's important that we not ignore or minimize the potential for serious consequences of industrial-scale energy projects on this dwindling species.

- Dave Becker, Staff Attorney, ONDA

posted 3 years, 9 months ago
view in context

Chris Taylor's description of the supposedly low impact of wind energy development on sage grouse was off-base - the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife's Sage Grouse Conservation Assessment and Strategy for Oregon has concluded that wind development could have significant impacts on sage grouse -- ODFW concludes that wind farms should be placed five miles from sage grouse habitat, which may be possible in very few places in Harney County. Here's what ODFW's report says:

Future developments of wind energy might have significant impacts on local breeding populations. Disturbances associated with construction and maintenance of turbines and subsequent power lines may displace nesting females. Wind energy grids (wind farms) should be constructed 8 km (5 miles) from known/occupied habitat. However, the placement of such a facility will require careful planning in sage-grouse range to minimize the potential impacts (Manville 2004).

Equally disingenuous was the suggestion that wind farms will reduce pressure to subdivide land and preserve open space in Harney County - in a county with 7,600 people living in over 10,000 square miles, there is no such pressure.

He's also wrong about aesthetics -- Steens Mountain is a designated wilderness, and Harney County is replete with wilderness study areas and other open, unspoiled land that is suitable for wilderness designation. The federal agency that manages most of the land in Harney County - the Bureau of Land Management - manages most of the land for its aesthetics, based on the fact that it is some of the largest, contiguous, and unspoiled wilderness left in Oregon. The "urgency" for replacing fossil fuels Mr. Taylor cites is not sufficient justification for putting wind farms in places that require new transmission lines that, together, spoil the pristine character of a protected landscape.

Mr. Taylor should put his money where his company's mouth is and genuinely engage with other interested parties in seeking locations for new wind farms that truly balance the need for new, renewable energy development and the equally pressing need to preserve wilderness and unfragmented habitat for sage grouse and other species which depend on the high desert environment. To date, to my knowledge, Horizon Wind has not made any effort to begin a dialogue with any of the environmental stakeholders in the region (The Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, or the Oregon Natural Desert Association).

Dave Becker
Staff Attorney
Oregon Natural Desert Association

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context