Ducks Unlimited Canada Newsletter EASTERN REGION(Ontario)
Volume 31,Number 4, 2010
Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) is in support of environmentally sustainable sources of energy that reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. DUC recognizes, however, that all forms of power generation entail environmental trade-offs, and that there are drawbacks to alternatives including wind turbine developments. Our organization is concerned about our sustainability of such developments and that they are implemented in geographic locations and in a manner that does not negatively impact waterfowl populations and the wetland and upland habitats on which they depend.
DUC has significant concerns with the means by which, and the rate at which, renewable energy projects are being implemented in and adjacent to critical, continentally significant staging habitat for waterfowl and migratory birds. Research has shown that direct impacts on waterfowl (mortality from flying into wind turbines) is generally minimal, but there is a lack of science investigating both the indirect impacts (disturbance, habitat fragmentation, etc.) and the cumulative impacts of multiple wind farms on the waterfowl and their habitat. DUC has encouraged the Province of Ontario to address this uncertainty by conducting the necessary sound science that will concentrate on these issue.
Understanding when and where wind developments are planned can be a challenge. As a result, DUC also recommends that the Province enhance the transparency of the regulatory process including the development of an improved method of engaging the public in consultations and being more responsive to the comments expressed.
DUC strongly believes that the approval process and scientific monitoring associated with wind turbine developments must be enhanced and as such, DUC will continue to promote and partner in relevant research initiatives to strengthen our knowledge and understanding of the impacts of wind turbines on waterfowl. However, until the impacts on waterfowl are better understood, DUC is calling on the Province to establish a moratorium on all wind turbines and renewable energy projects in areas providing continentally significant staging habitat for waterfowl and migratory birds.
I live near Rideau Ferry on the Big Rideau and have hunted ducks here for 70 years. Wet fields, Beaver ponds and streams were once alive with migrating both in Spring and Autumn. Over the last 10 – 15 years this has noticeably diminished to the point of non-existence over the last 4 or 5 years. The Rideau was always a main migratory corridor from Kingston to Ottawa; but no longer. I own a sizeable wetland near Westport with a large DU project on it which, until about 8 years ago, served as an undisturbed night roost until early November for approximately (based on an actual count) 4000 Mallards and probably 500 – 1000 Wood Ducks.
This no longer occurs and I cannot help but wonder if the windmill farms at Kingston have ruptured this flyway. Are you aware of any studies of the effect of these windmills on migrating waterfowl have ever occurred?
There is zero question that biological level impacts are happening, although it’s hard to determine data, because for the largest part, it is hidden from the public. Please see this excellent review of these problems here: https://docs.wind-watch.org/stelling-petrie-policy-guidance-document-final.pdf
In the essay, Keith Stelling and Scott Petrie, a wildfowl expert, have done an excellent job of reviewing the potholes in the road:
The 120 metre setback from Significant Wildlife Habitat (compared to 550
metres from human habitations) is not biologically defensible. The
regulations even allow proponents to place developments within Significant
Wildlife Habitats when they claim they can “mitigate” adverse effects.
The “Bird Habitat Assessment Process” requires post construction monitoring
of avian mortality but does not require an adequate assessment of wildlife
displacement.
Cumulative impacts of onshore and offshore industrial wind turbines
(including those being proposed for American waters) are not being
considered.
Guidelines don’t consider bird mortality to be significant until 18
birds/turbine/year are killed. This is 7.2 times the NA average and is not
biologically defensible.
Guidelines don’t consider the mortality of raptors of provincial conservation
concern (i.e. Bald Eagles) to be significant unless 0.2 raptors/ turbine/year
are killed. Therefore, a development with 100 turbines that killed 19 Bald
Eagles per year would not require mitigation.
Community consultation (a requirement of the Green Energy Act) has been a
dismal failure with proponents ignoring and evading community concerns
and refusing to hold public consultation meetings in preference for open
house product showcases.
There is zero question that your wetlands have been impacted. No one is tabulating these losses, to our knowledge. Thank you so much. You have raised our ire, and our renewed interest. Stay tuned.
Thanks, JB WILLSON. I can assure you that many reports (anecdotal) are abundant regarding loss of flyway species such as you mention. Studies? That is I’m sorry to say, laughable. They do not do studies, of any meaning and substance. The ones they conduct are shams, and useless, and lies. They say about 5% of the reported mortality is mentioned. Then add in the loss of flyway and other life producing habitat. What we have going on is a disaster of Biblical proportions. Many thanks for your observations. I am going to ask MNR for their opinions.