eBirdseed.com Wild Bird Feeding Blog

MA Audubon is identified as a "Key Partner" by MMS in the Cape Wind project permit review. Yet, Taber Allison and Jack Clarke of MA Audubon have taken advocacy positions for Cape Wind while they notoriously participate in the collection avian data, the analysis of this data and provide their comments to MMS as avian experts participating in the Cape Wind permit review. Taber Allison is positioned to create rules that will direct development of wind energy on the federal level by his appointment to a FACA Committee; Jack Clarke has been appointed by Governor Deval Patrick to the Ocean Advisory Commission to direct alternative energy development offshore with this same apparent conflict.

It is reprehensible that Taber Allison and Jack Clarke of MA Audubon have conditioned their "support" for Cape Wind on the acceptance of Adaptive Management, monitoring and mitigation, "beginning at construction" if Cape Wind is permitted, "payable by Cape Wind". This condition represents a future multi-million dollar (undisclosed) future contract to count dead birds in an endangered species habitat if Cape Wind is constructed, payable by Cape Wind!

Jack Clarke, Director of Public Policy & Government Relations of MA Audubon's statement to Boston Globe on January 15, 2008 regarding the Minerals Management draft EIS states:

"They have done an adequate and thorough job of reviewing the potential environmental impacts with regard to avian life," said Jack Clarke, director of public policy & government relations for Massachusetts Audubon. His group last year called for more study of the impact on birds and Clarke said the federal agency’s report appears to satisfy those concerns."

Clarke of MA Audubon is completely contradicted by federal USFWS, with purview over endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, comments on the Cape Wind draft EIS:

"With respect to natural resources for which Fish & Wildlife Service is responsible, we find that there is considerable need to correct inaccuracies, explain inconsistencies, clarify ambiguities, fully articulate the limitations of the available science, and reach logical conclusions about the extent of impacts or the inability to predict them in the absence of information," said Michael Bartlett, supervisor of Fish & Wildlife's New England field office in Concord, N.H."

The President of MA Audubon, Laura A. Johnson, submitted MA Audubon’s comments on the Cape Wind DEIS on February 23, 2005 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers:

“By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year.”

Dr. Allison of MA Audubon denied MA Audubon testimony on avian mortalities by Cape Wind in his letter of August 3, 2006 published in South Coast Today:

"Mass Audubon scientists have never concluded that up to 6,600 birds, or any number of birds, would be killed if this project is permitted..."

www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=3686

{CCA replies... Hi Ms. Durkin,

Thank you for your comment... A lot of work went into that, and for that I thank you.

Some thoughts:

* First, I try to stay away from hardball politics on this blog, and stick to the more "coffee table chat" stuff to keep the content varied but light. Here's just one example of why I avoid that kind of depth: http://www.capecodtoday.com/blogs/index.php/2008/07/08/massachusetts-agency-confirms-federal-ju?blog=53

* Are windmills more damaging to the overall environment than coal mining and burning? Speaking as an engineer and a person who's spent way too much time outdoors, I'd say, "No."

* Having grown up and pretty much lived my entire life on Cape Cod, I truly believe that if Cape Wind can actually get the permits it needs in one of the most liberal states in America, their project is probably going to be OK. And if there is a problem, no doubt that Greenpeace, the Mass Audubon Society, et al will be all over it.

* But here's what really galls me about opposition to the plan... When I actually talk with my friends and neighbors and challenge their assertions, almost without exception, when they finally reveal themselves, it always comes down to one sentence... "I just don't want it out there." That seems selfish to me... True, there are folks who truly believe that the effect on the avian population will be devastating, but I've only met one face to face.

* The very simple fact is that you're reading this blog on a computer made of plastics, glass, silicon, silver, etc. And all that stuff had to come from some place and be processed. And that takes energy. If you get sick, you'll need medicine and hospital care, and that takes energy. You need to be warm, and that takes energy. And so forth. We have to get that energy from somewhere.

* Finally, and probably most importantly, I think that you question whether or not MA Audubon offered support for the project because of potential future (or even existing) contracts with Cape Wind... The following speaks volumes:
http://www.biofuels.coop/windblog/?p=50

As I said in the beginning of this reply Ms. Durkin, I try to stay out of hard core politics here. We are after all a backyard bird supply company. Still, for many on Cape Cod, their backyard birds are water birds and migratory birds, so there you go. But I'm also an engineer, and I know this country had better get its energy act together pronto.

Thanks again for your thoughtful comments, and honestly look forward to more in the future.}

CapeCodAlen:

My respectful suggestion is that "hard core" politics cannot be avoided if one is to defend the interest of the voiceless, avian life and wildlife, from the proliferation of wind turbines in their habitats, flyways, nesting, and breeding areas.

Good science and best management practices should be mandated when it comes to siting wind turbines.

George Wallace, PhD Vice President for International Programs American Bird Conservancy to Chairwoman Bordello of Fisheries Oceans and Wildlife at full Subcommittee Hearing:

"Going, Going, Gone? An Assessment of the Global Decline in Bird Populations" on July 10, 2008:

"Last year, my colleague at ABC, Dr. Michael Fry presented testimony to the full Committee on the ongoing impact of commercial wind energy production. While the actual number of birds killed by wind turbines is unknown, estimates have been made in the range of 30,000 to 60,000 birds per year at the current level of wind development."

"ABC recommends that any renewal of the production tax credit by Congress include provisions that require minimizing bird and bat kills by wind projects, and require developers to follow standard Best Management Practices in avoiding and minimizing bird and wildlife impacts in order to qualify for the full, taxpayer-provided subsidy."

Donald Michael Fry, PhD Director, Pesticides and Birds Program of the American Bird Conservancy to Chairwoman Bordello of Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans Subcommittee on May 1, 2007; Oversight Hearing on: "Gone with the Wind: Impacts of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats." :

"The Fish and Wildlife Service developed an interim series of voluntary siting guidelines in 2003, and revised them after a prolonged comment period in 2005. Federal guidelines must be required rather than voluntary. The wind industry has provided ample evidence that voluntary guidelines are regarded as unimportant and are thus summarily dismissed"

The Department of the Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for siting wind towers in 2003:

"--Avoid placing turbines in documented locations of any species of wildlife, fish, or plant protected under the ESA.

-- Avoid locating turbines in known local bird-migration pathways or in areas where birds are highly concentrated, unless mortality risk is low (e.g., birds rarely enter the rotor-swept area). Examples of high-concentration areas for birds are wetlands, state or federal refuges, private duck clubs, staging areas, rookeries, roosts, riparian areas along streams, and landfills.

-- Avoid known daily-movement flyways (e.g., between roosting and feeding areas) and areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, low cloud ceilings, and low visibility."

Avoid siting Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound, in other words.

From avian expert Mark Duchamp of Spain:

"The following compilation of scientific reports provides compelling evidence of significant bird mortality at windfarms. Its cumulative effect with other causes of bird deaths may bring many species to extinction - especially as captivity-bred specimens will be lacking turbine-free habitats where they can be released safely."

http://www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=1875

www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=3686

'Fatal Attraction: Birds and Wind Turbines" with Dr. Shawn Smallwood- KQED QUEST'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtgBWNKwBkE&feature=related

Thank you for your hospitality and time.

{CCA replies: Hi Ms. Durkin...

Thanks again for your comment.

I'm pretty sure I made my own personal opinion known back on November 18, '08. (http://www.ebirdseed.com/blog/2008/11/wind_farm_off_of_cape_cod.html)

Back then I wrote:

"Are windmills more damaging to the overall environment than coal mining and burning? Speaking as an engineer and a person who's spent way too much time outdoors, I'd say, 'No.'"

Tragically, those words proved to be prophetic... On December 22, 2009, a coal ash dam failed in Kingston TN, releasing a billion gallons of a witches brew consisting of lead, mercury, and arsenic. ABC News is saying that this may be the Exxon Valdez horror multiplied by 50. (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Story?id=6614157&page=1)

Are there perfect solutions for the "voiceless, avian life and wildlife,"? No. But then again, perfect solutions are few and far between.

If you would care to read more about this and comment on more "hard-core" politics, email me at capecodalan@ebirdseed.com and I'll give you the link to my own blog, and we can debate further.

Aside from that, this blog shall remain "politics light" and "backyard birds heavy".

Thanks again for your comment!

CCA}

Interesting website=) I will definitely come back again..

I think they have done an adequate and thorough job of reviewing the potential environmental impacts with regard to avian life.

I finally decided to write a comment on your blog. I just wanted to say good job. I really enjoy reading your posts.
Wind energy is the best alternative than any other energy resource. It gives pollution free and endless energy.