appendix vi bird assessment

8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment

1/38

Assessment of the potential effects ofWind Farm Urirama, Aruba, on birds

An assessment following the Equator Principles

J. van der WindenM.P. Collier


2/38


3/38

Assessment of the potential effects of Wind Farm Urirama, Aruba, on birds

An assessment following the Equator Principles

J. van der WindenM.P. Collier

commissioned by: KEMA, The Netherlands

16 April 2012report nr 12-057


4/38

2

Status: draft report

Report nr.: 12-057

Date of publication: 16 April 2012

Title: Assessment of the potential effects of Wind Farm Urirama, Aruba,on birds

Subtitle: An assessment following the Equator Principles

Authors: Drs. J. van der WindenM.P. Collier MSc.

Number of pages incl. appendices: 036

Project nr: 12-079

Project manager: Drs. J. van der Winden

Name & address client: KEMA Nederland BV; P.O. BOx 9035; 6800 ET Arnhem

Reference client: E-mail 13 March 2012

Signed for publication: Adjunct-director Bureau Waardenburg bvdrs. S. Dirksen

Initials:

Bureau Waardenburg bv is not liable for any resulting damage, nor for damage which results from applying results ofwork or other data obtained from Bureau Waardenburg bv; client indemnifies Bureau Waardenburg bv against third-party liability in relation to these applications.

Bureau Waardenburg bv / KEMA Nederland BV

This report is produced at the request of the client mentioned above and is his property. All rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted and/or publicized in any form or by anymeans, electronic, electrical, chemical, mechanical, optical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior writtenpermission of the client mentioned above and Bureau Waardenburg bv, nor may it without such a permission be usedfor any other purpose than for which it has been produced.

The Quality Management System of Bureau Waardenburg bv has been certified by CERTIKED according to ISO9001:2008.


5/38

3

Preface

KEMA Nederland bv has commissioned Bureau Waardenburg to provide expertise as

to the possible ecological effects of a proposed wind farm in Aruba on birds. KEMA is

undertaking a Social and Environmental Assessment following the Equator Principles,

which includes an assessment on nature and ecology. As part of this study Bureau

Waardenburg has assessed the possible effects on birds. As well as gathering

information from published sources a field visit was undertaken to assess the area

and its birds.

This report reviews the known effects of wind turbines on birds, the key bird species

of Aruba and the sites recognised as being important for birds. Based on available

knowledge and impressions gained during a site visit, an assessment of the potential

effects on birds of the proposed wind farm was made according to the Equator

Principles.

This project was lead by Jan van der Winden and the report written by Jan van der

Winden and Mark Collier, both of Bureau Waardenburg. During the Field visit, mr H.

Hutting gave information on the location of the initiated project. Mr. G. Peterson

(Birdlife Aruba) kindly explained the situation regarding birds in Aruba and showed

important bird areas on the island. S. Dirksen and xxxx provided valuable comments

on previous drafts of this report. The authors thank everyone who has contributed to

this report.


6/38

4


7/38

5

Table of contents

Preface...............................................................................................................................................3 Summary ...........................................................................................................................................7Nederlandse samenvatting..............................................................................................................91 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 11

1.1 Aruba............................................................................................................................ 111.2 Urirama wind farm ...................................................................................................... 11

2 Birds and wind farms.............................................................................................................. 132.1 Collisions..................................................................................................................... 132.2 Disturbance ................................................................................................................ 142.3 Barrier effects ............................................................................................................. 15

3 Birds on Aruba ........................................................................................................................ 173.1 Breeding and resident species..................................................................................173.2 Migrant and vagrant species..................................................................................... 18

4 Legislation and important bird areas..................................................................................... 194.1 Legislation.................................................................................................................... 194.2 Important Bird Areas .................................................................................................. 19

5 Methods of assessment......................................................................................................... 216 Results Urirama ...................................................................................................................... 23

6.1 Impacts on birds......................................................................................................... 247 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 278 Literature.................................................................................................................................. 29Appendix 1. Field visit Aruba 2012 .............................................................................................. 33


8/38

6


9/38

7

Summary

As part of a proposed wind farm development on the northeast coast of the island of

Aruba, KEMA is undertaking a Social and Environmental Assessment following the

Equator Principles. This includes an assessment on nature and ecology. As part of

this study Bureau Waardenburg has assessed the possible effects on birds of the

proposed wind farm.

As well as gathering information from published sources a field visit was undertaken

to assess the area and its birds. The known effects of wind turbines on birds, the key

bird species of Aruba and the sites recognised as being important for birds were

reviewed. Based on available knowledge and impressions gained during a site visit,

an assessment of the potential effects on birds of the proposed wind farm was made

according to the Equator Principles.

Wind farms are known to have three main effects on birds: collisions, displacement or

habitat loss and barrier effects. The scale of the effect depends not only on the size

and layout of the wind farm but also on the location. Wind farms located in areas with

high densities of birds and a high level of flight activity having a greater effect than

similar wind farms in areas with few or no birds.

Aruba holds one species that is listed as near threatened, the Caribbean coot Fulica

caribaea. Further, the island holds several aggregations of breeding waterbirds.These breeding colonies and nearby feeding areas are located on the southwest

shores.

According to the equator principle, the effects of the proposed wind farm at Urirama is

categorised as low (category C). The effects of disturbance and barrier effects are

even zero. Effects of collision for local birds are about zero and for seasonal migrants

minimal. No regional or local (Aruban) endangered birds species will be affected at

population level by the proposed wind farm.


10/38

8


11/38

9

Nederlandse samenvatting

is dit wenselijk?


12/38

10


13/38

11

1 Introduction

1.1 Aruba

Aruba is a Caribbean island within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The island lies

around 25 km north of the Paraguan Peninsula on Venezuelas north coast and

around 75 km west north west of Curacao. North of Aruba lies the Caribbean Sea and

the Dominican Republic is some 600 km away. The island is around 30 km long and 8

km wide with the axis lying northwest/southeast (figure 1).

The prevailing north-easterly winds influence Arubas semi-arid climate. Average

temperatures area around 28oC with seasonal variations of only several degrees.

Rainfall averages around 400-500 mm per year, mostly between October and January

(van Belle et al. 2003; Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008).

Aruba is largely flat with some hills inland, the highest of which is 188 m above sea

level. Vegetation is sparse and dominated by cactus and scrub. Most of Arubas urban

development is on the leeward shores. Tourism is a key industry and supplements the

resident population of just over one hundred thousand people.

1.2 Urirama wind farm

The location for the proposed Urirama wind farm is close to the northern tip of Aruba

on the northeast coast. The proposed wind farm consists of ten 3MW turbines located

parallel to the coast (KEMA 2012) (figure 1.). The locations and specifications of the

ten turbines are detailed in KEMA (2012). This report also qualitatively assesses the

potential effects for birds if the proposed wind farm were located several hundred

metres to the north or south. It is assumed in this report that in each situation the

turbines will be located close to the seashore.

The habitat of the area is limited to scrub and low bushes. The vegetation is heavily

influenced by the strong wind, salt spray and arid conditions. Further inland a few

semi-permanent pools are present (see appendix 1.)


14/38

12

Figure 1. Aruba, showing the general location of the proposed Urirama wind farm(red line) and key urban areas.


15/38

13

2 Birds and wind farms

Research into the effects of wind turbines on birds has revealed three types of effects

on birds, namely the collisions of flying birds, habitat loss and disturbance, and barrier

effects on flying birds.

2.1 Collisions

Direct mortality of birds can result from injuries sustained during collisions with the

rotors, tower or from the turbulence behind the moving rotors. The numbers of

collisions are related to the collision risk and the intensity of bird flights through the

area.

Collision risk

The collision risk is chance of collision with a wind turbine for a bird passing through a

specified wind farm. Collision risk is thought to be dependent on a number of factors

including the location and configuration of the wind farm, dimensions and

characteristics of the turbines, characteristics of the surrounding landscape, visibility

conditions and weather, and the behaviour and morphology of the species concerned.

Winkelman (1992b) estimated a collision risk of 0.09% for all passing birds and of

0.17% for species performing nocturnal behaviour. Recent research however, has

shown that relatively many victims are diurnal and mostly local birds (Thelanderet al.

2003; Grnkorn et al. 2005; Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Krijgsveld & Beuker 2009), possiblydue to their foraging behaviour (Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Martin 2011). Furthermore,

many species fly at greater heights during migration, whereas local birds usually fly at

lower altitudes, often at the heights of turbines. An individual that makes numerous

flights through a wind farm (largely local birds) increases its cumulative collision

probability.

Flight intensity

The numbers of collision victims is strongly related to the number of flights through the

area and thus varies greatly between sites. It can be expected that fewer birds would

collide with a wind turbine in an area with a low numbers of flight movements than in

an area with a high level of flight activity. Relatively high numbers of victims can befound during migratory periods, when large numbers of birds pass through an area.

Alternatively, also in areas with a high level of local flight movements can local birds

fall victim to collisions.

Numbers of collisions

The documented average numbers of collision victims is between 3.7 and 58 birds per

turbine per year, with a maximum of 125 recorded (Winkelman 1989, 1992a; Still et al.

1996; Everaert et al. 2002; Thelander et al. 2003; Everaert & Stienen 2007). An

average of 11.1 birds per MW per year has been estimated at terrestrial wind farms in

North America (Smallwood 2011). These studies have controlled for the probability of

finding victims through the search efficiency of observers and through disappearance


16/38

14

through predation. Studies of larger modern turbines (1.5 MW) have revealed that

the numbers of victims are comparable to at smaller turbines (Everaert 2003; Barclay

et al. 2007; Krijgsveld et al. 2009). This means that an increase in rotor surface area(up to 5 times larger) does not necessarily lead to an increase in the numbers of

collisions; larger turbines are typically higher and placed further from each other

meaning that it is easier for birds to fly between or underneath.

Effect at the population level

For most species evidence is lacking that collision-related mortality has a general

effect on the population level (Poot et al. 2011; Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Krijgsveld &

Beuker 2009). Exceptions are for relatively high numbers of victims in slowly

reproducing species, examples of which include seabirds (Stienen et al. 2007),

vultures (Janss 2000; Lekuona 2001) and raptors such as eagles (Hunt et al. 1998;

Thelanderet al. 2003; May et al. 2010). So effects at the population level could only

be expected when a wind farm is located in an area with high level of movements of

species vulnerable to collision with restricted population size.

2.2 Disturbance

Disturbance responses in birds can include changes in physiology, behaviour and

location choice. For example, as a result of the noise and movement of a turbine,

birds may use the area around the turbine less or leave the area altogether.

Disturbance can also influence reproduction and survival, which can eventually lead

to changes at the population level. Disturbance has the potential to influence moreindividuals than collisions, although the effects have been studied less.

Key factors

The distance and the extent to which birds are disturbed varies with species, season,

location and function of the area as well as the size of the wind farm. For most

species outside of the breeding season it is assumed that the distance at which birds

can be disturbed increases with wind farm size, such as is true for some species of

waterbirds (Htkeret al. 2006). Some studies have revealed that birds can habituate

to wind turbines (Kruckenberg & Jaene 1999; Madsen & Boertmann 2008), while

other studies show no recovery in bird numbers (Htkeret al. 2006). Turbine size is

thought to have little affect on the level of disturbance; a study by Schekkerman et al.(2003) showed no difference in the levels of disturbance between 1MW turbines and

smaller turbines. According to recent data more disturbance may occur during

installation than during subsequent operation (BirdLife Europe 2011).

Breeding birds

There is less evidence for disturbance effects on breeding birds than for non-breeding

birds, however, this is possibly as these birds are more attracted to their breeding

area than foraging or resting areas, especially if they have a nest with eggs or young.

In general, distances at which breeding birds can be disturbed have been estimated

at 100-200 m. These studies have only covered a short period after the turbines were


17/38

15

operational (see Winkelman et al. 2008). For breeding passerines there has been little

or no evidence to suggest disturbance


18/38

16


19/38

17

3 Birds on Aruba

Figures given for the total number of bird species recorded on Aruba vary from 207 to

214 (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008; Lepage 2012). This variation likely comes from

the fact that the majority of these species are migrant or vagrants. Nevertheless, the

relatively recent discovery that the American oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus

breeds on the island suggests that more is still being learned about local and breeding

birds (van Belle et al. 2003; Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Nevertheless, the key

species and areas for birds are generally known and are details in the following

chapter. Although no species is restricted in its distribution to Aruba, two endemic

sub-species occur on the island. The Aruban burrowing owl Athene cunicularia

arubensis and Aruban brown-throated parakeet Aratinga pertinax arubensis have

distinct forms that occur on the island.

3.1 Breeding and resident species

Wege & Anadon-Irizarry (2008) suggest that up to 70 species breed, or have bred, on

the island. Possibly the most noteworthy species is the Caribbean coot, which is

classified as near threatened and is the islands only globally threatened species.

Aruba supports around 280 individuals of Caribbean coot (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry

2008). The species occurs throughout the Caribbean region and although there are

no current total population estimates, between 5,000 and 10,000 are estimated in the

Dominican Republic alone (BirdLife 2012a).

Aruba also supports around 30,000 breeding terns (individuals), almost two thirds of

which are sooty terns Onychoprion fuscata and one-third Cayenne terns Thalassus

acuflavidus eurygnatha (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Other species include royal

Sterna maxima, roseate Sterna dougallii, common Sterna hirundo, least Sternula

antillarum and bridled terns Sterna anaethetus, which together comprise around one

thousand individuals (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Laughing gulls Larus atricilla

and brownAnous stolidus and black noddiesAnous minutus also breed on the island.

The main breeding colonies for these species are on the southwest shores of the

island (see chapter 4). The shallow waters and leeward position of this part of the

island provides ideal foraging habitats close to the breeding colonies, though largenumbers of these terns move to offshore feeding areas.

Wege & Anadon-Irizarry (2008) also mention the island as being important for the

bare-eyed pigeon Patagioenas corensis. Although described as fairly common, this

species is restricted in its range across northern South America (Birdlife 2012b). Van

Belle et al. (2003) describe the species as being fairly common on Aruba and was

mostly noted in gardens, orchards, scrub, urban areas and mangroves, the latter

being the key breeding habitat.

Van Belle et al. (2003) considered a total of 23 species to be vulnerable breeding

species. This assessment was based on species being:


20/38

18

- locally rare or declining (yellow oriole Icterus nigrogularis, black-whiskered vireo

Vireo altiloquus, mangrove warbler Setophaga petechia, brown-crested flycatcher

Myiarchus tyrannulus, brown-throated parakeet, burrowing owl, groove-billed aniCrotophaga sulcirostris, American oystercatcher, bridled tern, brown noddy, crested

bobwhite Colinus cristatus, brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis, crested caracara

Caracara cheriway, Cayenne tern, black-faced grassquit Tiaris bicolor and roseatetern)

- limited in range globally (white-tailed nightjarCaprimulgus cayennensis, bananaquit

Coereba flaveola, American kestrel Falco sparverius, tropical mockingbird Mimus

gilvus, southern scrub-flycatcher Sublegatus modestus, eared dove Zenaida

auriculata and rufous-collared sparrow Zonotrichia capensis).

This categorisation was made for sub-species and populations of birds and includes

species that are abundant or widespread in other parts of their range.

3.2 Migrant and vagrant species

The majority of bird species that have been recorded on Aruba are migrants or

vagrants (birds that occur irregularly). Most migrant species are nearctic-neotropical

passerines, which pass through the area to or from their North American breeding

grounds. A number of the species recorded on Aruba are South American species.

Furthermore a number of waterbirds are likely to pass through the area during

migration, such as shorebirds and ducks. Also a few species over-winter on Aruba.

Migration of passerines and other birds through the area is likely to be in relatively low

densities. Several migration flyways from North America are recognised. In general

birds from western North America follow the Central American landmass, birds from

central North America follow the east coast of Central America, while most birds

migrating from eastern North America take a more easterly route over the West Indies

before using the trade wind to end up in South America (Newton 2010). Birds passing

the southern Caribbean Sea are likely to be in relatively low densities across a wide

area and many of the species recorded on the Aruba are likely to represent a small

fraction of the total population. During northward migration many species possibly

take a more westerly route through Central America. Many species typically migrate

at altitudes with favourable conditions; this is typically from 1.5 km to over 3 km inaltitudes (Newton 2010).


21/38

19

4 Legislation and important bird areas

4.1 Legislation

In 1986 Aruba became a separate country under the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Island Ordinance of the Netherlands Antilles (Eilandenregeling Nederlandse

Antillen) states that environmental and nature management and nature conservation

are the responsibility of the Island of Aruba (Overheid.nl 2006). The island also

follows the Aruba, Curaao and St. Maarten Nature Ordinance, Framework act nature

Management and conservation BES (CMS Report 2011). Within the Kingdom of the

Netherlands, Aruba is a signatory to international treaties concerning the protection of

wildlife and natural areas, including the Bonn Convention, the Convention on

Biological Diversity and the Ramsar Convention.

The Bonn Convention, also known as the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS),

aims to improve the awareness and protection of migratory species (CMS 2012).

Aruba is a signatory to the Convention within the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The international treaty of the Ramsar Convention aims to highlight wetlands of

international importance with the aim of promoting the wise use of the resource

(Ramsar 2012). Aruba is a signatory to the Convention within the Kingdom of the

Netherlands. The Convention recognises one Ramsar site on Aruba, Het Spaans

Lagoen (figure 2). Located on the southwest coast between Oranjestad andSavaneta, this narrow coastal inlet is bordered by tidal mudflats and mangrove

swamps and provides a foraging and breeding area for waterbirds.

Arubas largest protected area is the Parke Nacional Arikok, which is located in the

southern half of the island and covers some 3,400 ha (figure 2). The park was

established in 2000 and includes part of the islands windward shoreline and large

areas of cactus scrub and inland hills. The park is funded by the Aruban Government

and administerd by the Arikok National Park Foundation (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry

2008; Arikok National Park Foundation 2012).

4.2 Important Bird Areas

Important Bird areas (IBAs) are areas recognised under the BirdLife International IBA

programme. These areas meet certain criteria, such as holding significant numbers of

a globally threatened species, a suite of range-restricted species or large assemblies

birds. The IBA programme provides no formal protection itself, although it aims to

highlight conservation priorities and can lead to site protection through local means.

A total of four Important Bird Areas have been recognised on Aruba: Bubali Wetlands;

Tierra del Sol Salina; Oranjestad Reef Islands; and San Nicolas Bay Reef Islands

(Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008) (figure 2). Two of these areas, Oranjestad Reef


22/38

20

Islands and San Nicolas Bay Reef Islands, are noted for colonial breeding birds,

particularly cayenne, common, royal, least, bridled and sooty terns, and brown and

black noddys. Both of these sites are located on the southwest shores of Aruba andtogether cover 557 ha of the islands 610 ha of IBAs. Bubali Wetlands is a state

owned nature reserve, which is situated on Arubas west coast, west of the city of

Noord and north of Oranjestad. This 53 ha wetland is largely covered with vegetation

and supports a breeding population of the near-threatened Caribbean coot. Other

species recorded at the site include Neotropic cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus

and the biome restricted bare-eyed pigeon. Tierra de Sol Salina is located close to the

northeast coast at the northern tip of the island. The site is privately owned and is

located within a golf course. This 2 ha area of semi-permanent wetland and scrub

holds a number of waterbirds including Caribbean coot, white-cheeked pintail Anas

bahamensis, roosting herons, egrets and terns, as well as migrant shorebirds. The

bare-eyed pigeon is also present in the area.

Figure 2. Aruba, showing the locations and names of the key areas identified for

birds (IBAs and Ramsar) and the national park.


23/38

21

5 Methods of assessment

In order to assess possible effects of the wind farm at Urirama, information has been

collected on bird numbers and distribution in the area. In general bird numbers and

distribution is based on available knowledge on bird concentrations and species

composition on the island (chapter 3). Additionally, the island of Aruba was visited

between 25 March and 28 March 2012 (appendix 1). This visit was used to get a

picture of the project area, the available habitat near the wind farm area and possible

bird communities and their movements. Apart from this, Mr G. Peterson has been

interviewed. He is an ornithologist at Aruba studying the birds of Aruba such as the

wetlands of the Northern part of the island, for many years (see http://www.lago-

colony.com/BIRD_LIFE_ARUBA/ARUBA%20BIRDLIFE/ARUBA_BIRDLIFE_PAGE.ht

m).

Based on the available information an assessment of the impacts has been made for

the subjects collision risks, disturbance and barrier effects (see chapter 2). In

conjunction with the Equator principles method (Kema 2012) the risks for birds are

categorised in A (high risk), B (moderate risk) and C (low risk). In this classification the

criteria to assess the risk as follows:

A: absolute high collision numbers or high collision numbers related to the relevant

population size, or comparable qualifications for the subjects disturbance or barrier

effects

B: as A, but moderate

C: as A but low

In order to judge the effect of the wind farm, the effects of the study site are compared

with potential wind farm locations slightly (less than 2 km) more to the north and

slightly more to the south of Urirama. This is a qualitative comparable assessment.

Voluntary guidelines have been released for use in assessing the potential effects of

land-based wind farms in North America (see www.fws.gov/windenergy). These

guidelines highlight migratory and threatened or endangered species of birds as

requiring attention and the stated potential impacts include collisions, habitat loss and

displacement. These factors have been assessed in this report (see chapter 2 and

above).


24/38

22


25/38

23

6 Results Urirama

6.1 Introduction

The assessment is based on general knowledge on bird (movements) and wind farms

(chapter 2), and the site visit in March 2012 (Appendix 1). The visit cannot be

regarded as a thorough research but in combination with general knowledge on bird

presence and movements, an assessment according to the equator principle can be

made.

It is clear that local bird densities around the proposed wind farm area are extremely

low. Daily bird movements are, apart from some incidents, lacking. The area has been

visited in March, a period with wintering birds still present as well as local breeding

birds. It is unlikely that during other parts of the year the situation is substantially

different in bird numbers and movements. The habitat is almost without vegetation

due to salt spray and strong onshore winds. Cliffs that can be used for gliding or

thermals are lacking. During the time of the visit the wetlands had relatively high water

levels so were optimal for birds. No regional or global birds species with a

conservation concern occur within the wind farm area. The only species categorised

as Near threatened is the Caribbean coot, which occurs on wetlands such as Tierra

del Sol and Bubali all at large distances from the wind farm area. This species does

not perform regular (nocturnal) flights over terrestrial habitat. Endemic (sub)species

like Aruba burrowing owl Athene cunicularia arubensis and Aruba brown-throatedparakeet Aratinga pertinax arubensis, do not occur within the proposed wind farm

area or its surroundings.

On one evening heron departure from the Tierra del Sol wetland had been recorded.

The migration of these herons (departure) was not northwards as expected

beforehand, but westwards. Probably the birds head for the Venezuelan coast or

stopovers in Central America. But anyway as expected based on the likely origin of

wintering birds (north America), not in the direction of the wind farm area (east to

southeast). In autumn, the arrival migration of ducks at Tierra del Sol wetlands from

the east has been observed by G. Peterson. As breeding ranges are to the north,

west and east, arrival will not be restricted to the eastern part of the island. Migrantwarblers and other birds (shorebirds, cuckoos) will be comparable as the breeding

ranges of these species are to the north and migration follows a broad front, the

arrival will be widespread from northern directions. In general densities of warblers

and shorebirds are low on the island, restricted to a few spots such as the temporary

ponds on the western and southern part of the island (shorebirds) and mangrove

forests or scrubs e.g. near Spanish Lagoon or Arikok National Park in the south. This

will all lead to broad front arrival and dispersal to the west or southern part of the

island.


26/38

24

6.2 Impacts on birds at Urirama

Following the method of effects (chapter 2) by disturbance (resting or feeding birds),

barrier effects (flying birds) or collision risks, the effects of the proposed wind farm at

Urirama are classified and judged. The effects of a wind farm situated a few hundred

metres to the north or south is qualitatively assessed. In this case it is assumed the

wind farm is situated close to the seashore in all hypothetical situations.

Disturbance

As bird densities around the wind farm area are almost zero, disturbance of local

feeding or resting or breeding birds is absent. Areas with higher densities are situated

more than 1,000 m from the wind farm (e.g. Tierra Del Sol wetland complex) or hold

very low bird numbers, e.g. the ponds near Boroncana (appendix A1, figure A2). The

effects at sites slightly more to the south will be comparable. Disturbance effects will

be minimal to zero. To the north (close to Tierra del Sol plains) minor disturbance

effects might be present if the turbines would be situated close to the wetland, such

as the beach near Druif.

Barrier effect

As local bird movements around the wind farm are almost absent and the wind farm

length is restricted giving the few passing birds enough space to reach their preferred

areas. This means that a barrier effect of the wind farm is for local birds is zero. Forbirds on season migration the wind farm is no barrier due to its restricted size and the

absence of corridor migration (routes) or a spot essential for migration like a thermal

soaring area. The site is within a broad front migration route and has no cliffs or other

specific soaring options. So for birds on seasonal migration the barrier effect is also

zero. For sites more to the south barrier effects for local birds and seasonal migration

will be comparable (zero). More to the north minor effects might be possible if turbines

would be situated near Druif as the beach and plains area might be used by

shorebirds moving to and from the Tierra del Sol wetland.

Collision risks

As local bird movements around the wind farm are almost absent, collision risks forlocal birds will be highly incidental. The wetlands and ponds are situated at relative

large distances and the wind farm takes no position between these wetlands and

roosts or other feeding areas. During seasonal migration (spring and autumn) birds

might pass the wind farm area. Since the breeding ranges are to the north (-east and

west), the migrants will arrive from all these directions and on a broad front. However

passage through the proposed wind farm area must be relative small as arrival

habitats are lacking. Spring departure in the direction of the wind farm is highly

unlikely as birds seldom depart against the wind (Newton 2010). Given these

considerations, it cannot be excluded that small numbers might pass the wind farm

area and this might lead to a few collisions on a yearly basis. The wind farm will be


27/38

25

based in a relative dark area (minor background light). This will mainly be the case for

migrants with large flyway populations such as blue-winged teal Anas discors and

warblers. In areas with high local bird numbers and intense seasonal migration anaverage numbers of victims per year can vary between 3.7 and 58 birds per turbine

per year (chapter 2). In such occasions light circumstances may be comparable but

weather conditions can be worse as on Aruba situation with poor visibility are absent.

So in the case of Aruba, local bird numbers are almost zero and numbers of migrants

are much lower so for the entire proposed wind farm (10 turbines), the average

number of collision victims will not exceed a several individuals on a yearly basis. As

no regional, or global threatened birds species live or fly near the wind farm area,

there is no risk for impacts on endangered species whatsoever. So effects on

population size of these species is zero. So the total effects of collision risks are

categorised as minimal with maximal a few collision victims on a yearly basis of

species with large flyway populations.

For a site located a bit more to the south the assessment is the same: minor risks for

seasonal migration with low numbers of collision. For a site more northwards the

collision numbers are expected to be low, but a bit higher than at the proposed

Urirama site. Local birds, such as killdeer Charadrius vociferus, exchange between

the wetland and the plains near Druif.


28/38

26


29/38

27

7 Conclusions

According to the equator principle, the effects of the proposed wind farm at Urirama is

categorised as low (category C). Effects of disturbance for feeding, resting and

breeding birds as well as barrier effects are even zero. Effects of collision for local

birds are about zero and for seasonal migrants minimal. No regional or local (Aruban)

endangered birds species will be affected at population level by the proposed wind

farm. Hypothetical sites a few hundred metres to the south are comparable in effects

as the Urirama site. Sites more to the north (near Tierra del Sol) will have somewhat

higher effects on birds than the Urirama site due to minor exchange of birds from the

plains and beaches near Druif with the Tierra del Sol area.


30/38

28


31/38

29

8 Literature

Arikok National Park Foundation, 2012. Arikok National Park Foundation, Aruba,www.arubanationalpark.org; accessed 12-4-2012.

Barclay, R. M. R., E. F. Baerwald & J. C. Gruver, 2007. Variation in bat and birdfatalities at wind energy facilities: assessing the effects of rotor size and towerheight. Canadian Journal of Zoology-Revue Canadienne De Zoologie 85(3): 381-387.

Bergen, F., 2001. Untersuchungen zum Einfluss der Errichtung und des Betriebs vonWindenergieanlagen auf Vgel im Binnenland. Dissertation. Ruhr UniversittBochum, Bochum.

BirdLife Europe, 2011. Meeting Europes Renewable Energy Targets in Harmony withNature. The RSPB, Sandy, UK.

BirdLife International, 2012a Species factsheet: Fulica caribaea.http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=2947; accessed 12-4-2012.

BirdLife International, 2012b Species factsheet: Patagioenas corensis.http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=2478; accessed 12-4-2012.

CMS, 2012. Convention on Migratory Species, the Bonn Convention. www.cms.int;accessed 12-4-2012.

CMS Report, 2011. The CMS Report for The Netherlands for 2011.http://www.cms.int/bodies/COP/cop10/national_report/059_netherlands_e.pdf;accessed 12-4-2012.

Devereux, C. L., M. J. H. Denny & M. J. Whittingham, 2008. Minimal effects of windturbines on the distribution of wintering farmland birds. Journal of AppliedEcology 45(6): 1689-1694.

Dirksen, S., A.L. Spaans & J. Van der Winden, 2007. Collision risks for diving ducks atsemi-offshore wind farms in freshwater lakes: A case study. In: M. deLucas,G.F.E. Janss &M. Ferrer (eds). Birds and wind farms. Risk Assessmentand Mitigation. Blz. 275. Quercus. Madrid, Spain.

Drewitt, A.L. & R.H.W. Langston, 2006. Assessing the impacts of wind farms on birds.Ibis 148(1): 29-42.

Everaert, J., 2003. Windturbines en vogels in Vlaanderen: voorlopigeonderzoeksresultaten en aanbevelingen. Oriolus(69): 145-155.

Everaert, J., K. Devos & E. Kuijken, 2002. Windturbines en vogels in Vlaanderen.Voorlopige onderzoeksresultaten en buitenlandse bevindingen. Rapport 2002.3.Instituut voor Natuurbehoud, Brussel.

Everaert, J. & E. Stienen, 2007. Impact of wind turbines on birds in Zeebrugge(Belgium). Significant effect on breeding tern colony due to collisions. Biodiversityand Conservation 16: 3345-3359.

Fijn, R.C., K.L. Krijgsveld, H.A.M. Prinsen, W. Tijsen & S. Dirksen, 2007. Effecten opzwanen en ganzen van het ECN windturbine testpark in de Wieringermeer.Aanvaringsrisicos en verstoring van foeragerende vogels. Rapport 07-094.Bureau Waardenburg, Culemborg.

Grnkorn, T., A. Diederichs, B. Stahl, D. Dorte & G. Nehls, 2005. Entwicklung einerMethode zur Abschtzung des Kollisions Risikos von Vgeln anWindenergieanlagen. Regport for Landesamt fr Natur und Umwelt Schleswig-Holstein,


32/38

30

http://www.umweltdaten.landsh.de/nuis/upool/gesamt/wea/voegel_wea.pdfaccessed 25-11-2010.

Htker, H., K.-M. Thomsen & H. Kster, 2006. Impacts on biodiversity of exploitationof renewable energy sources: the example of birds and bats. Facts, gaps inknowledge, demands for further research, and ornithological guidelines for thedevelopment of renewable energy exploitation. Michael-Otto-Institut im NABU,Bergenhusen.

Hunt, W.G., R.E. Jackman, T.L. Hunt, D.E. Driscoll & L. Culp, 1998. A populationstudy of golden eagles in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area: populationtrend analysis 1994-1997. NREL/SR-500-26092, Subcontract No. XAT-6-16459-01. Predatory Bird Research Group University of California, Santa Cruz,California.

Janss, G., 2000. Bird Behavior In and Near a Wind Farm at Tarifa, Spain:Management Considerations. PNAWPPM-III. Proceedings National Avian-Wind

Power Planning Meeting III, San Diego, California, May 1998. Blz. 110-114. LGLLtd., Environmental Research Associates. King City, Ontario Canada.

Kaatz, J., 2001. Zum Empfindlichkeit von singvgeln und Weistorch gegenberWindkraftanlagen. Voordracht op het symposium Windenergie und Vgel Ausma und Bewltigungen eines Konfliktes op 29/30-11-2001 in Berlijn

KEMA, 2012. Social and environmental assessment for Urirama wind farm, Aruba.2012. Kema report 74101509-PGR 12.Arnhem

Krijgsveld, K.L., K. Akershoek, F. Schenk, F. Dijk, H. Schekkerman & S. Dirksen,2009. Collision risk of birds with modern large wind turbines: reduced riskcompared to smaller turbines. Ardea 97(3): 357-366.

Krijgsveld, K.L. & D. Beuker, 2009. Vogelslachtoffers bij windpark Anna Vosdijk opTholen. Onderzoek naar aanvaringen onder trekkende steltlopers en

overwinterende smienten. Rapport 09-072. Bureau Waardenburg, Culemborg.

Krijgsveld, K.L., S.M.J. van Lieshout & M.J.M. Poot, 2003. Windturbines op hetHellegatsplein en mogelijke effecten op vogels. Een risicoanalyse op basis vanbestaande informatie en aanvullend veldonderzoek met radar. Rapport 03-037.Bureau Waardenburg bv, Culemborg.

Kruckenberg, H. & J. Jaene, 1999. Zum Einfluss eines Windparks auf die Verteilungweidender Blssgnse im Rheinland (Landkreis Leer, Niedersachsen). Natur undLandschaft(74): 420-424.

Langston, R.H.W. & J.D. Pullan, 2003. Windfarms and birds: an analysis of windfarmson birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selectionissues. RSPB/BirdLife report. BirdLife / Council of Europe, Strasbourg.

Larsen, J.K. & M. Guillemette, 2007. Effects of wind turbines on flight behaviour ofwintering common eiders: implications for habitat use and collision risk. Journalof Applied Ecology 44: 516-522.

Lekuona, J.M., 2001. Uso del espacio por la avifauna y control de la mortalidad deaves y murcilagos en los parques elicos de navarra durante un ciclo anual.Gobierno de Navarra, En Pamplona.

Lepage, D. 2012. Avibase, bird checklists for the whole world, Aruba.http://avibase.bsc-eoc.org/checklist.jsp?lang=NL&list=ioc&synlang=NL&region=ANaw&version=text; accessed 12-4-2012.

Madsen, J. & D. Boertmann, 2008. Animal behavioral adaptation to changinglandscapes: spring-staging geese habituate to wind farms. Landscape ecology23(9): 1007-1011.


33/38

31

Martin, G.R., 2011. Understanding bird collisions with man-made objects: a sensoryecology approach. Ibis 153(2): 239-254.

May, R. & Bevanger, K. (eds), 2011. Preceedings of Conference on Wind energy andWildlife impacts, 2-5 May 2011, Trondheim, Norway. NINA report 693, pp140.

May, R., P.H. Hoel, R. Langston, E.L. Dahl, K. Bevanger, O. Reitan, T. Nygard, H.C.Pedersen, E. Rskaft & B.G. Stokke, 2010. Collision risk in white-tailed eagles.Modelling collision risk using vantage point observations in Smla wind-powerplant. NINA, Trondheim.

Newton, I. 2010. Bird Migration. Collins, London, UK. ISBN 978-0-00-730732-6.pp598.

Overheid.nl, 2006. Koninklijk Besluit van 3 Maart 1951, houdende de eilandenregelingNederlandse Antillen. http://decentrale.regelgeving.overheid.nl/cvdr/XHTMLoutput/Historie/Nederlandse%20Antillen/7402/7402_1.html; accessed 12-4-2012.

Pearce-Higgins, J.W., L. Stephen, R.H.W. Langston, I.P. Bainbridge & R. Bullman,

2009. The distribution of breeding birds around upland wind farms. Journal ofApplied Ecology 46: 1323-1331.

Petersen, B.S. & H. Nhr, 1989. Konsekvenser for fuglelivet ved etableringen afmindre vindmller. Ornis Consult, Kopenhagen, Denmark.

Pettersson, J., 2005. The impact of offshore wind farms on bird life in SouthernKalmar Sound, Sweden. A final report based on studies 1999 2003. SwedishEnergy Agency, Lund University.

Poot, M.J.M., I. Tulp, L.M.J. van den Bergh, H. Schekkerman & J. van der Winden,2001. Effect van mist-situaties op vogelvlieggedrag bij het windparkEemmeerdijk. Zijn er aanwijzingen voor verhoogde aanvaringsrisico's? Rapport01-072. Bureau Waardenburg bv, Culemborg.

Ramsar, 2012. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. www.ramsar.org; accessed 12-4-2012.

Reichenbach, M., K.-M. Exo, C. Ketzenberg & M. Castor, 2000. Einflu vonWindkraftan-lagen auf Brutvgel Sanfte Energie im Konflikt mit demNaturschutz. Teilprojekt Brutvgel. Institut fr Vogelforschung "VogelwarteHelgoland" und ARSU GmbH, Wilhelmshaven und Oldenburg, Deutschland.

Reichenbach, M. & H. Steinborn, 2006. Windkraft, Vogel, Lebensraume Ergebnisse

einer funfjahrigen BACI-Studie zum Einfluss von Windkraft- anlagen und

Habitatparametern auf Wiesenvogel. Osnabrucker NaturwissenschaftlicheMitteilungen 32: 243-259.

Schekkerman, H., L.M.J. van den Bergh, K. Krijgsveld & S. Dirksen, 2003. Effectenvan moderne, grote windturbines op vogels. Onderzoek naar verstoring van

watervogels bij het windpark Eemmeerdijk. Alterra, Wageningen.Sinning, F., 1999. Ergebnisse von Brut- und Rastvogeluntersuchungen im Bereich

des Jade-Windparkes und DEWI-Testfeldes in Wilhelmshaven. Bremer Beitrgefr Naturkunde und Naturschutz, Band 4. Blz. 61-69. Bund Freunde der Erde,Landesverband Bremen. Bremen, Germany.

Smallwood, S. 2011. Comparing avian and bat fatality rate estimates amoung NorthAmerican wind energy projects. in May & Bevanger 2011.

Stienen, E.W.M., J. van Waeyenberge, E. Kuijken & J. Seys, 2007. Trapped within thecorridor of the Southern North Sea: The potential impact of offshore windfarmsand seabirds. M. de Lucas,G.F.E. Janss &M. Ferrer. Birds and wind farms. Riskassessment and mitigation. Quercus. Madrid.

Still, D., B. Little & S. Lawrence, 1996. The effect of wind turbines on the birdpopulation at blyth harbour. ETSU W/13/00394/REP. ETSU


34/38

32

Thelander, C.G., K.S. Smallwood & L. Rugge, 2003. Bird risk behaviors and fatalitiesat the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. National Renewable EnergyLaboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA.

Tulp, I., H. Schekkerman, J.K. Larsen, J. van der Winden, R.J.W. van de Haterd, P.W.van Horssen, S. Dirksen & A.L. Spaans, 1999. Nocturnal flight activity of seaducks near the wind park Tun Knob in the Kattegat. Rapport 99.64. BureauWaardenburg, Culemborg.

van Belle, J., A.J. Schilstra, D. Strijker & K. Bettels, 2003. Development of anenvironmental assessment method for Aruba. Part B, Inventarisatie TerrestrichMilieu van het Eiland Aruba. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, the Netherlands. pp104.

Walter, G. & H. Brux, 1999. Ergebnisse eines dreijhrigen Brut- undRastvogelmonitorings (1995 - 1997) im Einzugsbereich von zwei Windparks imLandkreis Cuxhaven. Bremer Beitrge fr Naturkunde und Naturschutz Band 4.Blz. 81 106. Bund Freunde der Erde, Landesverband Bremen. Bremen,

Germany.Wege, D.C. & Anadon-Irizarry, V. (Eds) 2008. Important Bird Areas in the Caribbean.

BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. ISBN 0946888655. 348pp.

Winkelman, J.E., 1989. Vogels en het windpark nabij Urk (NOP):aanvaringsslachtoffers en verstoring van pleisterende eenden ganzen enzwanen. RIN-rapp. 89/15. RIN, Arnhem.

Winkelman, J.E., 1992a. De invloed van de Sep-proefwindcentrale te Oosterbierum(Fr.) op vogels. 1. Aanvaringsslachtoffers. RIN-rapp. 92/2. IBN-DLO, Arnhem.

Winkelman, J.E., 1992b. De invloed van de Sep-proefwindcentrale te Oosterbierum(Fr.) op vogels. 2. Nachtelijke aanvaringskansen. RIN-rapp. 92/3. IBN-DLO,Arnhem.

Winkelman, J.E., F.H. Kistenkas & M.J. Epe, 2008. Ecologische ennatuurbeschermingsrechtelijke aspecten van windturbines op land. Alterra,Wageningen.


35/38

33

Appendix 1. Field visit Aruba 2012

As part of the impact assessment, Aruba was visited between the 25th

of March and

the 28th

of March. During this visit the wind farm project area at Urirama or the

surroundings were daily visited to get an impression of available habitats, bird

communities and movements. In table A1 the visits and study aims are presented.

The site visits were used to get an impression of local bird movements. As local bird

movements are most concentrated at dawn or dusk, as birds move to and from

roosts, the site was visited in the morning and late afternoon (table A1). During these

visits no bird movements were recorded apart from one osprey Pandion haliaetus at

16:35 on the 26th

of March. This raptor foraged shortly at sea and passed southwards

through the proposed wind farm area. Local breeding birds were absent apart from

some songbirds and one American oystercatcher feeding along the shore. The area is

scarcely vegetated due to salt spray and strong winds (figure A1). The landscape

therefore has low bird densities. Concentrations of birds (e.g. colonies) or daily

movements are lacking. The surrounding areas slightly more to the north and the

south are comparable. The coastal area near Tierra del Sol holds slightly higher bird

numbers.

Local daily bird movements are present between the wetlands of Tierra del Sol and

Bubali or the temporary waters at Westpunt and Rooi Santo. For example, tens of

Neotropic cormorants and herons (great egret Ardea alba and snowy egret Egrettathula) exchanged between these wetlands in the morning or evening. Among these

were also night herons and osprey. Along the west coast of Aruba birds are more

common with regular movements of terns, frigatebirds, pelicans and gulls. Near the

important tern colonies at the south point of the island, tern movements are intense.

The ponds of Boroncane were visited on the morning of the 28th

of March (figure A2).

These are situated at 500 to 600 m from the proposed wind farm area. Very few birds

were present. Just two blue-winged teals, a common gallinule and a killdeer were at

the ponds. All species without substantial daily (nocturnal) flight activity at larger

distances from the daily feeding areas.

During the evening (around sunset) of the 27th

of March, bird migration was studied

near the lighthouse at the north of the island. In that period, few small flocks of herons

departed from the Tierra del Sol wetland in a western direction. Based on the height

(> 300 m) migration take off was likely. These birds might profit from the eastern

winds to reach the Venezuelan coast instead of heading north.

During the visits at the proposed wind farm area, the ground surface around the

meteorological mast (metmast) was searched for possible bird victims on two

occasions. No carcasses, feathers or other remains were found. The area is dark with

little background light from the tourist centres of Palm Beach and Noord.


36/38

34

Interview with Mr G. Peterson

Mr. Peterson has good knowledge on birds occurring on Aruba. He visits the Tierra

del Sol wetlands on a regular basis and confirms a regular daily movement of herons,

egrets and cormorants between the wetlands at Aruba. No daily movements of birds

between the wetlands and sea at the east part of the island are known. He has also

observed duck (autumn) migration (arrivals in August-September) from an eastern

direction.

Table A1. Visits to Urirama wind farm project area and surroundings in March 2012

and study aims.

Date study aim

26th

of March morning habitat availability and general impression (figure A1);

bird victims search at the metmast

26th

of March evening possible evening movements of birds

27th

of March early morning visit to Tierra del Sol wetland to study local

movements

27th

of March evening visit to lighthouse to study migration of birds and light

conditions

28th of March early morning Bubali and ponds near Boroncane (figure A2) forearly morning bird movement; bird victims search at

the metmast


37/38

35

Figure A1. Sparse vegetation due to prevailing wind and salt spray in the area of theproposed wind farm.

Figure A2. Habitat and one of the ponds near to Boroncane, adjacent to the area of

the proposed wind farm and showing the metmast in the background.


38/38

appendix vi bird assessment

Documents