New Wind Energy Guidelines: Audubon Q & A


Dear Chapter Conservation Chair, President or Executive Director,
Mike Daulton, Audubon’s VP for Government Relations, and I have worked up a Q&A to help our chapters more fully understand how these historic wind guidelines came about and how they’ll be implemented. We’ve also tried to gently address the legitimate difference of opinion with ABC.

Please let us know if you have questions, comments or suggestions.

Sincerely,

David Yarnold
President, CEO

——————–

New Federal Guidelines Issued to Reduce Impacts of Wind Development on Birds
Frequently Asked Questions

Q. Audubon says the new guidelines are a “step forward for bird-friendly wind development.”  Why do you think that?

A. The Federal Advisory Committee advising the Secretary of the Interior on the guidelines (on which Audubon served) worked over three years to produce a consensus document. Participants included the Fish and Wildlife Service, state wildlife agencies, the conservation community and the wind industry.  We think the product of that expertise and that enormous effort has value and real potential for improving bird protection.

The voluntary guidelines will set nationwide standards for study protocols, recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts, and post-construction monitoring.  Audubon also worked hard to incorporate language related to habitat fragmentation — cooperating wind companies will be expected to analyze (and avoid, minimize and mitigate) habitat impacts under this regime.

Q. Why is Audubon supporting voluntary guidelines instead of mandatory guidelines?

A. Because we think advocating for strong voluntary guidelines will yield the best result for birds and for the build-out of renewable energy sources.

We believe there is little appetite for mandatory guidelines in Washington, DC, as evidenced by the Interior Department’s rejection last week of a petition asking for mandatory guidelines.

On the other hand, the voluntary guidelines will put in place an important new industry-wide standard for how wind development will be planned and how impacts on birds will be avoided, minimized, and mitigated.  If the Interior Department follows through with strong enforcement, we could see really meaningful change.  “Voluntary” is also a bit of a misnomer. In fact, virtually every major wind company in the U.S. is on record having voluntarily pledged to comply with these guidelines. That’s why Audubon, and nearly every other national conservation group (including TNC, Defenders of Wildlife and many others), supports the guidelines as an important step forward.

Q.  Why did the Interior Department reject the petition for mandatory guidelines?

A. The Department of the Interior does not believe the Migratory Bird Treaty Act can be used in a practical, implementable way to regulate activities like wind development.  That is because the MBTA would require setting “take thresholds” for more than 1,000 species of protected migratory birds at every project.  It just would not be workable in practice and would likely result in bureaucratic paralysis.

In addition, it is not clear that DOI could issue mandatory regulations for wind power without also addressing many other activities that harm birds — like construction of tall buildings, construction of cell towers, or approval of pesticide applications. So, from Interior’s perspective, a mandatory permitting process could quickly become enormously complex and burdensome on an underfunded agency.

Q. What do the new guidelines mean for endangered birds like California Condor and Whooping Crane that are threatened by wind development?

A. The guidelines include explicit language directing wind developers to obtain all necessary permits under federal wildlife law, including any permits that may be required under the Endangered Species Act.  The guidelines do nothing to change regulatory requirements under the Endangered Species Act, so the condors and cranes remain well protected.

Q.  Are the voluntary guidelines enforceable?

A.  The guidelines have explicit ties to federal wildlife law.  However, the Fish and Wildlife Service has not prosecuted a wind company under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.  The success of the framework will depend on strong enforcement of wildlife law and a high standard for assessing adherence to the guidelines going forward.  That’s why we are spearheading a letter to the Interior Department that urges strong enforcement of the guidelines (to which more than 60 groups, including dozens of Audubon chapters, have already signed on). To add your voice to the letter, contact Sean Saville, Audubon’s National Field Director, at ssaville@audubon.org by April 6. Read a copy of the letter here: http://chapterservices.audubon.org/sites/default/files/documents/letter_to_doi_re_wind_guidelines_implementation.pdf

Advertisements
This entry was posted in life. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s