Wind turbines are the world’s new ‘apex predators’, wiping out buzzards, hawks and other carnivorous birds at the top of the food chain, say scientists.
A study of wind farms in India found that predatory bird numbers drop by three quarters in areas around the turbines.
This is having a ‘ripple effect’ across the food chain, with small mammals and reptiles adjusting their behaviour as their natural predators disappear from the skies.
Birds and bats were assumed to be most vulnerable to the rise of the landscape-blotting machines.
But their impact is reverberating across species, experts warned, upsetting nature’s delicate balance.
Wind turbines are the world’s new ‘apex predators’, wiping out eagles, hawks and other carnivorous birds at the top of the food chain, say scientists
Researchers at the Indian Institute of Science in Bengaluru studied lizard and bird populations at three wind turbine sites in the Western Ghats.
They found almost four times fewer buzzards, hawks and kites in areas with wind farms – a loss of about 75 per cent.
In areas without turbines around 19 birds were spotted every three hours, while nearer to the machines this number dropped to around five.
This led to an abundance of the fan-throated lizard, a species only found on the Indian sub continent and a favourite snack of the predatory birds.
The reptile also had lower levels of the stress hormone corticosterone and this changed how it lived.
For instance, humans were able to get much closer than usual before they ran off, as without predatory birds around, they had become less fearful.
The analysis has implications for wind farms all over the globe – including Britain, where the top predators include many birds of prey such as owls and eagles.
Study coauthor Professor Maria Thaker said: ‘We have known from many studies that wind farms affect birds and bats.
‘They kill them and disrupt their movement. But we took that one step further and discovered that it affects lizards too.
‘Every time a top predator is removed or added, unexpected effects trickle through the ecosystem.
‘What is actually happening here is the wind-turbines are akin to adding a top predator to the ecosystem.’
The study published in Nature Ecology and Evolution compared populations of raptors and lizards on a plateau that has had a wind farm for around 20 years to an adjacent valley that has no turbines.
It also took blood samples from 144 lizards captured on the two locations in the northern area of the mountain range.
Wind turbines are known to kill large birds, such as golden eagles.
A recent study by an international team of scientists found the decline of apex predators is ‘arguably humankind’s most pervasive influence on the natural world.’
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The solution to this problem is very easy; construct the towers supporting the wind turbines to look just like
oil derricks.
The greenies will appear from nowhere and agitate to shut down the fowl killing devices.
Millions of birds will be saved.
Texas black and turkey vultures, along with rarer Mexican Eagles, (Caracaras), hawks and others have been subjected over the years to rising speed limits. Despite occasional carcasses apparently struck when failing to move rapidly enough and/or in the wrong direction off their roadkill there seem to be a lot around. The large windfarms north of Corpus Christi are on agricultural lands where they have sometimes seemed less common, but lots of migratory birds must have historically flown through the area. Increasing numbers of whooping cranes going south and windfarms going north are getting closer together. Lots of questions I would ask.
These are ‘Apex Predator Facilitators,’ just like whoever hit the hog I saw Saturday beside the road. Scavengers aren’t usually mechanically predators. Also “…upsetting nature’s delicate balance” not so much delicate balance, something else gets it. Gargoyles come out at night when the wind dies and modelers are busy. Ecosystems are messy. Paper paywalled, journal articles shown don’t have titles. Curious to know about the research elsewhere, is there funding available? Herpetologists used to write papers on roadkill, not sure about bird people.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-018-0707-z
Don’t they put the windmills in the windiest places, exactly in the path chosen by migratory birds? Check out Wolf Island at the east end of Lake Ontario. There are studies, but not made public.
Nearby Amherst Island, Ontario also has a wind turbine project under construction. Similar concerns about bird mortality rates as this project is in the same bird migratory path as the Wolfe Island, Ontario wind project is.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
North American Migratory Bird Flyways. Includes map.
The 4 Flyways are: Atlantic, Mississippi, Central and Pacific.
Includes: U.S., Canada and Mexico.
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/flyways.php
I’ve got no time for these fickle windmills sans storage but I’m not buying the bird chopper slaughter meme because I’ve been around a few and I haven’t seen all these dead birds which is not to say the odd bird strike can’t happen. Birds aren’t silly and that’s the reason they keep their distance from these strange noisy things that can harm them and that’s what creates the sanctuary for the ground dwelling prey and they in turn will bunch up there for lack of overhead predators.
Same as sharks. When Orcas hit a Great White over at Port Lincoln shark cage watching area in South Australia that finished their business for over 3 months as the sharks vamoosed and the reverse is true of the Whitsundays now where 3 shark attacks on tourists snorkelling off the same beach stop indicates the reverse. That’s what drum lines and mesh nets are all about. You don’t have to nail all the predators just scare them off with an unaccustomed demise occasionally and they avoid the bad karma. Same with crocs in the NT when my parents would shoot them around populated areas and we as kids could swim safely on any of Darwin’s beaches.
Wolf Island has a documented dead bird and bat count. It converts the reports into birds per kW. It is likely too light because uncounted dead aviators are eaten by other grounded predators.
observa
Again, fair point. But where do those displaced birds of prey go?
They stray into other areas of the same species and get killed/or kill because they are trespassing. There goes a part of the population.
They don’t need to be directly killed by the turbines, nature will take care of them.
Golden Eagles have a massive area of operation and guard their territory jealously, that’s why there are so few in Scotland. Lose just a few to wind turbines, directly or otherwise, and a small population is severely compromised.
“Finger lickin’ good!”
No, no – that’s Ivanhoe.
☀🔥🦅🦉🔥☀
Oh, forgot the 🍗🍗s…
Ask the Indonesian tourism investors how they fared after the Bali bombing although there must be some invisible mesh nets around the investment haven of Dubai by all accounts 😉
Wolf Island has a documented dead bird and bat count. It converts the reports into birds per kW. It is likely too light because uncounted dead aviators are eaten by other grounded predators.
Birds per KW is like CO2 per capita. It skews the figures horribly.
Birds per turbine is far better
Is there a link to the actual study anywhere?
https://www.transalta.com/sites/default/files/PCFP_Report5_Dec2011.pdf
Easily Googled…
CNW, c.Feb., 2012
Some Amherst Island, Ontario wind turbine project history. However, this project met with delays and now under construction.
http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/algonquin-power–utilities-corp-announces-power-purchase-contract-award-for-amherst-island-wind-project-507747371.html
But, but, but, it’s “for the planet”, so that makes it OK.
It really is a freeing philosophy, isn’t it? ANYTHING you do in the name of the cause is okay.
Even when it undermines the very cause they claim to be doing it for! 😮
Well I am gobsmacked.
I would have thought that by this time in the thread (64 thoughts) some pro wind turbine fanatic would have spouted their typical nonsense regarding Cats and Bird Kills for outnumbering anything wind turbines are responsible for. So in advance of such nonsense…
EXPOSURE RATES
A bird is far more likely to encounter a Cat or a Building Window or a Car that they are to encounter a wind turbine at present. <0.1%
Jimminy Christmas, I missed Duanes comment
Bryan A
Offshore wind turbine bird death counts can’t be accurately assessed because bird carcasses either float off or sink.
I have witnessed several birds fly into my kitchen window, they all shook it off and flew off. Not one carcass so far
Environmental issues normally put a stop to any worthwhile project but when it comes to wind and solar energy, they get a pass. Even killing “endangered” species doesn’t get them put out of business. When it is their pet ideas they very conveniently change their standards so the project can move forward. Isn’t this how tyranny work?
Who’s in charge of hiding the evidence? Send in the kite chasers in between ambulance chasing.
The rats win! again
As a skeptic, I have to ask, where are the pictures of the carcasses ?
I think a study into the return on investment (ROI), of these monstrosities, would be enough to end any furtherance of their blight.
The future is nuclear, or at least something like it.
Planned obsolescence will lead to a monstrous end to all the windmills as they contribute toward the entropy death of the universe all at once. Don’t worry, be happy.
“Don’t worry, be happy.”
========================
Prescribe me some of those really good “happy pills”, and maybe….
Otherwise, I’m stuck here.
I’d like to know how this study distinguishes between birds avoiding the concentrations of wind farms, and birds killed by the wind turbines.
As far as I can tell it makes no attempt to quantify bird deaths.
So, how did we get to this headline?
“Wind Farms Kill Off 75% Of Buzzards, Hawks And Kites That Live Nearby”
??
Do the wind farms have anything to do with the reported decrease in the insect populations?
It’s behind a pay wall, but the linked story implies shoddy science.
“compared populations on a plateau with wind turbines to populations in a valley with no wind turbines – over a 20 year period”
Perhaps they just moved.
Furthermore, many of the figures (accessible in front of the paywall) show no statistically significant differences between such things as body condition, corticosterone levels, etc.
OK, I have to admit I’m like just about everyone else — I find it easiest to get my information cut down to size and pre-digested. That usually means it’s 2nd or 3rd hand so you are at the mercy of those who are feeding you. Hands up those who looked at the full article that is quoted here…originally written for the Daily Mail in UK. The author of that was one Harry Pettit. Presumably he is the one responsible for the headline “..Blades kill off 75% of buzzards, hawks and kites that live nearby, study shows”. WOW, I thought, a real body blow for wind turbines. Now hands up those who spent some of their valuable time trying to track down what the scientists actually found … and said. I’m guessing there aren’t very many hands going up on this one. I found the paper written by the scientists – it wasn’t easy as none of the leads I followed (except The Guardian) actually provided a reference. It was published in the journal “Nature Ecology & Evolution” on 5 November 2018. What the scientist authors actually did was estimate the abundance of predatory birds in 6 study sites of .5 square km (50 ha) each which were 1-2 km apart on the same plateau. Three of the sites had wind turbines and three did not. They did observe fewer predatory birds and more of a certain species of lizard in the sites with wind turbines. They also observed that there were fewer attacks on ground-dwelling prey by predatory birds in areas with turbines – not a big surprise given that the birds were less abundant in areas with turbines.
Nowhere do the authors suggest that the turbines had “killed off 75% of Buzzards, Hawks and Kites that live nearby”. Now if I was a bird of prey that hunts by flying overhead and searching for animals on the ground I would probably rather hunt a safe distance from wind turbines so I could keep both eyes on the ground all the time instead of having to keep one eye on the spinning blades. Does that mean I’ve been killed if I don’t hunt near the turbines? The study also mentioned there are lots of people and cattle active on the plateau where the study areas are located – it’s used as a grazing area. If the scientists had found only a quarter as many people and cattle wondering around in areas with turbines as areas without, Mr. Pettit’s logic would conclude the turbines had killed 75% of the people and cattle that live nearby. The Daily Mail article also states in its byline that “numbers of certain small animals are growing unchecked” – clearly a statement intended to alarm the reader. Presumably this is a reference to the increased number of lizards in the areas with wind turbines. Interestingly the scientists never stated or suggested that any animal population in the study area was growing “unchecked”, just that some had increased due to decreased predation by the birds. Neither did the scientists say there was a “devastating ripple effect across the food chain” – another Daily Mail byline cooked up using an alarmist word.
Obviously this and other wind farms are not completely benign – no technology is. The question is whether wind farms are an appropriate way to meet this region’s energy needs. A simple question asked everywhere but there is almost never a simple answer given the complexities involved. Sadly, Mr. Watts has just parroted the article written by Harry Pettit for the Daily Mail, including its misleading headline. From his language Mr. Pettit is obviously a wind farm hater and he’s written his article accordingly. I would encourage everyone to take to heart the words of the scientists who conducted the study: “Wind farms are a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels for mitigating the effects of climate change, but they also have complex ecological consequences… There is thus a strong need for an ecosystem-wide view when aligning green-energy goals with environment protection”
Now you know this article is Kool Aid. Drink it if you wish.
Looked specifically for this diclofenc post to reference to. That wonderful antibiotic used in Indian cattle (which baffles me as you can’t eat Indian cattle so was it used in buffalo?) that followed the removal of fresh rape seed oil ground in situ and its substitution by preserved dead vegetable oil on the grocery shelves, and now the co-opting of the Indian farmer’s rented land for chicken raising, all sources of that fabulous ‘new market’ myth of capitalism, doomed to destroy India, in spite of having the greatest coal reserves.
Any research in coal burning?
Actually wind farms have an even bigger problem, they ‘rob’ the down stream of air. Wait for that shocker to come in.
@kate
“they rob the downstream of air”
If they operated at the theoretical maximum, they would decrease the velocity of the wind in the swept area by 59%, (Betz Limit) but they don’t get anywhere near that — and that only applies to the area swept by the blades
Furthermore, If you just take a volumetric analysis of the tiny (relative to reality) rectangle formed by distance from ground to hub height plus blade radius, by 2* radius (for an 80 meter blade at 110 meter hub height) = 30,400 square meters
versus the swept area of pi*r squared = 20,000 — you get a theoretical maximum of the wind decreased in that little sliver of area of .59*.66 = or 40% — since true efficiencies are about 30% of braking force the actual decrease of that small window is about 15%, turbulence and laminar flow from above resolve the wind speed downstream in about 500 meters.
I live in the Columbia River Gorge, half of which is in Oregon and the other half of which is in Washington State. I know some people who work on the turbines, and they tell me that there aren’t a lot of bird kills. (Mind you, the Gorge is pretty much raptor central. Bald eagles, hawks, Osprey, turkey vultures, and some golden eagles are plentiful around here.)
I don’t like wind turbines. They are a blight on the landscape. But I am also a fact-based guy. The wind turbine operators study bird kills. Turns out that they actually — get this — buy dead birds to attract raptors, some of which get killed by the wind turbines.
Be careful what you believe, especially when you are being told what you want to hear.
Anthony I would update the article if I were you
Your title is just quoting the Daily Mail tile without the quotation marks
“Blades kill off 75% of buzzards, hawks and kites that live nearby, study shows”
..and of course that is a clickbait title
Cos as commenters above say the study doesn’t say that 75% DIED
A better title “Indian study finds 75% less buzzards, hawks and kites living in turbine areas”
Are there any moderators listening?
“Study: Wind Farms Kill Off 75% Of Buzzards, Hawks And Kites That Live Nearby”
Quote from author of study:
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-farm-predator-effect-ecosystems.html
“”They trigger changes to the balance of animals in an ecosystem as if they were top predators,” she said.
“They are the ‘predators’ of raptors—not in the sense of killing them, but by reducing the presence of raptors in those areas.” ”
–
So, is the headline and article going to be corrected, and the false and misleading claims removed?