Kevin Kilty
A large wind energy plant being built for PacifiCorp unit Rocky Mountain Power in Carbon and Albany Counties, Wyoming has encountered a small hiccup in its efforts to tie the energy plant to Aeolus substation near Medicine Bow, Wyoming. A Laramie resident, who is also a wildlife researcher, and a local advocacy group for wildlife and historical preservation filed suit against The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for their decision to allow the Gen Tie line for the project to cross BLM ground without either proper environmental review or adequate public input. BLM has remanded their decision without vacatur for further review. The press release can be found here.
Background
Rock Creek I and II is a proposed 590MW (nameplate) wind plant spread across 43,000 acres of private land. Permission to build the project had been granted by County Commissioners in June 2022, but the project has suffered significant delays in terms of delivery dates of components. While the project itself is on private land, the Gen Tie line crossed BLM ground in at least one place (see Figure 1 drawn from the only map known from permit applications).
Figure 1. Map showing a portion of Rock Creek I and II projects with arrows to Gen Tie and collector lines. Above ground collection lines and Gen Tie lines are as great a hazard to eagles as wind turbines themselves.
The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) seems pretty clear about such a situation. From the Citizen’s Guide to the NEPA:
“…NEPA’s procedural requirements apply to a federal agency’s decisions for actions, including financing, assisting, conducting, or approving projects or programs; agency rules, regulations, plans, policies, or procedures; and legislative proposals. NEPA applies when a federal agency has discretion to choose among one or more alternative means of accomplishing a particular goal…”
“…When a company applies for a permit (for example, for crossing federal lands or impacting waters of the United States) the agency that is being asked to issue the permit must evaluate the environmental effects of the permit decision under NEPA….”
Certainly the Gen Tie line crossing BLM ground is “assisting” a project because the wind plant would be inoperable without it. Thus it would seem that BLM would have had adequate justification for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Since no EIA or EIS was performed for the Rock Creek I and II, the importance of missing analyses and public input can only be explained by reference to the EIA done by BLM for a neighboring project – the Two Rivers Wind Plant.
Figure 2, from the BLM EIA, shows the Two Rivers and Rock Creek wind plants in context. The two circles in the figure show what constitutes the local area for Bald and Golden Eagle populations – the Local Area Populations (LAP). Just for the readers’ information, the two circles encompass areas that are between one-fourth and one-third of the State of Wyoming in size and enclose more than 1,000 square miles of active, permitted and contemplated wind energy plants.
Figure 2. From the EIA for Two Rivers project. Note the proximity of Two Rivers and Rock Creek to one another. The local areas are for populations of Bald Eagles (Blue) and Golden Eagles (Brown). Numerous other wind energy projects are displayed, but this map is not up to date.
The BLM generated EIA from the Two Rivers project stated the following:
“…The LAP of Bald Eagles for the Project is approximately 52 Bald Eagles, and the annual 1% and 5% benchmarks for this LAP are about one and three Bald Eagles. Currently, there are six operational projects within this LAP for which take of Bald Eagles is authorized (Seven Mile, Dunlap, Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Phase 1, Pioneer, Glenrock/Rolling Hills, and Top of the World wind projects). Taken together, this Project’s take and the overlapping take of the other projects could result in a total annual take of 14.8 Bald Eagles (or 28.2% of the LAP). This is above the 5% benchmark; however, the North American Breeding Bird Survey population trend (1966-2019) estimate for Bald Eagles in Wyoming and Project LAP is 9.9% and 18.4%, respectively (Sauer et al. 2017; USGS-PWRC 2020). Analyses conducted by the USFWS showed that over most of the U.S., Bald Eagle populations are growing at a rate of approximately 5% per year (USFWS 2016b)…It is reasonable to assume that the Bald Eagle population in the Project vicinity is increasing and the conservative take estimate at the Project would not contribute to declines in the overall Bald Eagle population in the EMU….”
Similar peril is indicated for Golden Eagle populations. Notice that the estimate of Bald Eagle take for this project and six others presently holding take permits is already a staggering 28% of the LAP per year. It stands to reason that another eleven operating projects within the local areas would add to this already unsustainable burden. In fact, one project in the soutzheastern quadrant of the local area, NextEra’s RoundHouse I and II, paid a substantial fine for taking eagles without a permit. The contemplated Rock Creek I and II projects are in addition to these seventeen projects.
Things to Watch
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is presently updating its Bald and Golden Eagle Take Permit regulations which should be available in draft form for public comment by spring of 2024. We will report back to WUWT on any significant developments.
Whack them birds, they just use oxygen we could use, and expel that nasty CO2
Does anyone think that the new eagle Reg’s won’t allow taking as many as you want as long as you claim to be saving the planet
Take it easy, it’s only the Eagles
But if they ‘take’ Jalen Hurts, isn’t that racist?
A couple of years ago I found a large feather from a raptor in my suburban back yard.
I took it inside and went online to try to identify it.
Then I found out I could be fined for possessing it.
So I scanned it and put it back.
I could be fined for just having a raptor feather yet they get a pass for killing the whole bird?
PS Tip to tip, it’s about 11 inches long.
Small matter.
Since my time began, it was essential for a map to have a title block.
Essential items in the block: North point or compass; title of map; scale of map, usually as a distance bar plus measure like 1:250,000; responsible author; contact details.
Desirable but optional items: Map projection type; colour code; Revision number; source of other revisions.
Specialist cartographers might comment.
The maps above take a lot of digging to make sense. Maybe that was a feature, not a bug. Geoff S
The Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska borders should be enough of a clue for proper orientation.
a m
How and why? I live 20 hours away by commercial airliners.
Maps have a formal function, to avoid guesswork and local knowledge assumptions.
We once did a project for the Shah of Persia that produced about 10,000 maps. No map reliance on triple county borders there.
Geoff S
I’m from the UK and, while interested in the article, your comments are of no help whatsoever.
Criticism noted. Is it a map intended to aid people in navigating, or is it a graphic meant only to make a point? That is a question worth arguing, perhaps, but Figure 2 is only meant to show the cluster of wind plants, the relation of one without EIA to one that did have an EIA, and to demonstrate the size of these local areas. I think both graphics served their purposes without being official maps. The text also states this is in Carbon and ALbany Counties, Wyoming.
On the left side of the first map is the notation “T18N – R78W”, i.e. Township 18 North and Range 78 West.
Notations that identify the source map as BLM.
The colored portions and other additions were likely from a map used for external presentation and understanding.
The maps serve their purpose in highlighting and backing up the writing.
Ah, no.
I went with my official USGS topographic maps to a BLM station in Utah to ask a question.
The customer counter employees were clueless.
I had to wait until a supervisor returned from lunch. When he returned, he couldn’t identify the relevant BLM map.
Instead we had to wait for a specific employee knowledgeable in that area to have free time.
Once freed up, that employee took over an hour to identify the correct BLM map. An hour that we pulled map after map from a rack or drawers to compare with the USGS maps.
That employee also explained how the BLM identify map locations and maps themselves. I was still confused an hour later.
That visit completely shot my rock hounding that day. I arrived at the BLM station around 11 AM and left after 5PM.
All because I wanted to identify active BLM mine stakes in the region. Status that isn’t a BLM function, though they did have annual printouts of owners who paid their Federal fees.
The next day, I had to visit the local government center to learn which BLM stakes paid their state and local fees.
That visit was much easier than my visit to the BLM office. I learned which mining stakes were currently legal in about 45 minutes total with most of that time spent learning the local practice for people paying their annual fees.
.I recently tried to have a conversation with an avid amateur astronomer, who has an off-grid cabin here in the high desert which he’d visits 3or 4 times a year, about the number of raptors being killed by wind generators. He denied that it was a problem because he had heard nothing about it in the MSM!
Sooo, I went to YouTube to see what was readily available from a probable left leaning entity. What I found was disheartening; there are countless videos of birdwatchers filming raptors as they fly around these giant bird choppers, hunting prey; only to become buzzard food when they inadvertently fly through the path of the blades! One PBS program from the SF Bay Area about the upgrading of wind generators to larger output models touched briefly on the problems with raptor kills. They claimed that ONE generator at in the Altamont Pass “farm” was responsible for one eagle death a year; for 35 years! That’s only one of the thousands across the nation; how many others have a record just as bad!?
Needless to say, my outrage grew even greater at this revelation from a very pro-ruinable energy public broadcaster. I long for the day when the public can start removing these monstrosities from the environment and legally go after the politicians and their rich cronies who foisted the whole Climate Ponzi Scheme on the taxpayers
The wind turbine apologists have always grossly understated the avian death toll from wind turbines. My experience of the wind lobby in Scotland is that I have never met a bigger bunch of lying scumbags in my life.
This link shows bird mortality per turbine in various countries.
Spain: 333-1000 birds/bats per year
Germany: 309 birds per year.
Sweden: 895 birds per year.
https://windmillskill.com/blog/spanish-wind-farms-kill-6-18-million-birds-bats-year
Assuming that the average wind turbine kills 500 birds per year, the USA’s 70,000 wind turbines are killing 35 million birds per year.
Somebody has to do it; in 2008/9 Syncrude was fined $3 million for the deaths of 1606 ducks that landed in one of their ponds. A private member of the Sierra Club filed suit; judges ignored Syncrude’s arguments that they didn’t take the pond to the ducks, the ducks came to their pond–unlike Windfarm operators definitely taking their windmills to the eagles. Duck defenders of course scoffed at that argument. If the ruling is accepted, that puts a value of C$1868/duck (in 2009 dollars).
Now it’s hard to put a value on the average bird whacked by a mincemill, as surely they range from sparrows to eagles, but let’s say duck value is a reasonable average considering that the fine for an eagle kill is quite high–the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act in the US is quite clear on the matter and skews the cost/bird a fair bit–
A violation of the Act can result in a fine of $100,000 ($200,000 for organizations), imprisonment for one year, or both, for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for additional offenses, and a second violation of this Act is a felony.
So 35 million birds per year?–that number comes to US$47 Billion annually (2009 dollars), judging by the judgement for the ducks and you don’t try to duck judgement because you’re ‘saving the planet’. And any windmill that whacks 2 eagles is a felon and should be spending a year (per eagle) in prison. This will become a serious burden if it is ruled that the tower and concrete base must also be incarcerated.
Then we have to look at the aerial frier, Ivanpah…
Duck a l’orange just got far more expensive, I’ll have the lobster instead, thanks.
A study I linked to a year or two ago between UK and Scandinavian universities stated, with some evidence, that all bird deaths due to wind turbines are being intentionally under-reported by about a factor of 10. That figure doesn’t include raptors where the females are more likely to range further looking for better feeding or breeding grounds – each female raptor death means 3-5 less raptors in subsequent years.
Four birds per day per windmill is a good number for preliminary estimates. 500 per year is definitely low side. Prime windmill land is often on migratory bird routes which can spike the numbers at some times/locations.
My state Department of Transportation fielded a crew that matched Federal Government liars.
I was also surprised by how many people, especially lobbyists, taped their discussions with state and Federal employees.
Let them eat bugs and they won’t need so many fibre clothes when we fix the weather-
National Farmers’ Federation President David Jochinke issues grim warning that too much of Australia’s ‘prime agricultural land’ is being lost to renewables projects (msn.com)
The truth will out, the rate of destruction of already endangered and rare raptors can not be kept secret for much longer.
Authorities simply gifting eagle kill permits to the big Green movement, must stop. Questions must be asked and soon or we will definitely reach a tipping point for the survival of important wildlife.
I see that my link to the non-profit which filed suit against BLM vanished, people can read the press release here
https://www.albanycountyconservancy.org/
Greenwire is the only environmental news site that has picked up this story of remand whereas a large number picked up the story when the suit was first filed. Perhaps a remand without vacatur seems like not a big deal, but I think making people play by the rules of clearly identifying and costing the externalities of projects is right and just.
They have to kill raptors to get return on their investment – that’s what really matters. “Saving the planet” is just code for lining their pockets no matter what.
Long enough. someone had to post it
IF THIS BIRD WAS COVERED WITH OIL THIS PICTURE WOULD BE EVERYWHERE – iFunny
Who knew that saving the planet comes at such a cost to the planet that the eco-fascists are supposed to be saving.