Published on February 25, 2004

MONTPELIER — Scientific concern over the impact on migratory birds may derail the East Mountain wind tower hearings that are scheduled to go before the Public Service Board (PSB) on March 29.

The Vermont chapter of The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has petitioned the PSB to put off the hearings until a more detailed study can be conducted.

“TNC believes that pre-construction, spring and fall bird migration studies must be conducted before hearings are held in this matter,” says a motion filed with the board earlier this month.

“The present schedule does not allow for these studies to be conducted.”

The request for more time by TNC closely follows a petition from the Agency of Natural Resources asking the board for additional time to review the plan to put four 330-foot wind towers on the summit of East Mountain, the site of a former radar base in East Haven.

Noting it was not aware of the depth of the issues, ANR says the issues “are unique and represent decisions that will likely be relevant to future windfarm proposals throughout Vermont.”

The request could set the hearings back by a least six months, and most likely delay a final decision on the project until spring 2005.

East Haven Windfarm developer Dave Rapaport was not available for comment Tuesday, but his company already has filed an objection with the board.

So far it is unclear whether oral arguments would be held on the requests.

A spokeswoman at the PSB said Tuesday that a hearing officer usually rules on such motions and turns his decision over to the three-member board for final approval.

She said it was rare for the board to hear oral argument on motions asking for more time.

TNC filed its request after a review concluded that a migratory bird study paid for by the developer, East Haven Windfarms of Montpelier, was inadequate.

“All parties need at least one full season of detailed information collection to make an informed decision about the relative risks and benefits of this project,” says a memorandum prepared under the direction of John Roe, TNC’s director of conservation programs.

“It’s important to have an opportunity to study both spring and fall migrations before a decision is made,” noted Alan Parker, who serves the Conservancy as its director of communications and government relations.

In the bird study prepared for the developer, biologist Paul Kerlinger found that the towers would have no adverse impact on migrating birds and bats.

“The habitat at the East Haven Windfarm site was not suitable for migrating waterbirds, shorebirds, or raptors, so it is unlikely that these birds with gather at the site,” he wrote.

As for bats, Dr. Kerlinger found that the “high elevation habitat at the top of East Mountain suggest that large number of bats are not likely to use the project site.” Consequently, he concluded that the small wind farm proposed for the mountain would not constitute a “biologically significant risk to bats.”

The report qualifies its conclusions by noting that few studies on the risks to birds poised by wind turbines have been done in forested sites. Dr. Kerlinger did the bird study for the wind farm at Searsburg, which, according to his testimony, “is the only site where forest nesting birds impacts have been studied.”

The most glaring uncertainty to emerge from the Kerlinger East Mountain study is what kind of impact the towers will have on the Bicknell Thrush, “a Vermont species of concern.”

After noting their presence, Dr. Kerlinger suggested that “they will tolerate the new structures or habituate to the presence of a turbines within a short time of construction."

The review prepared by TNC called that recommendation reckless.

East Mountain, according to the TNC memorandum, is one of the best breeding grounds in the state for the Bicknell Thrush, and may be the only one for the northeast region.

The memorandum goes on to say that “determining risk by measuring post-construction effects appears to be a judgment by the applicant that there will be no harm, rather than trying to scientifically quantify the likelihood of that harm as part of a pre-construction study.”

In calling for more detailed studies of bird and bat patterns on East Mountain, TNC argues in its memorandum that wildlife in this project should get the same treatment as the towers.

“Because this is a demonstration project, it also should be a demonstration on how to truly look at potential impacts,” says its memorandum.