grand valley wind farms phase 3 wind project: year 1 post … · 2017-03-20 · grand valley wind...

Grand Valley Wind Farms Phase 3 Wind Project: Year 1 Post-construction Wildlife Monitoring Report (2016)

Prepared for: Grand Valley 2 Limited Partnership Suite 900, Livingston Place, South Tower 222 – 3rd Avenue S.W. Calgary AB T2P 0B4

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1 Guelph ON N1E 7B8 T: 519-836-6050 F: 519-836-2493

File No. 160961132 February 24, 2017

Sign-off Sheet

This document entitled Grand Valley Wind Farms Phase 3 Wind Project: Year 1 Post-construction Wildlife Monitoring Report (2016) was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Grand Valley 2 L.P. (the “Client”). Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in this document reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.

Prepared by

(signature) Anna Corrigan, B.Sc. Terrestrial Ecologist

Reviewed by

(signature) Andrew Taylor, B.Sc. Terrestrial Ecologist

Reviewed by

(signature) Nicole Kopysh, B.E.S Project Manager

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT: YEAR 1 POST-CONSTRUCTION WILDLIFE MONITORING REPORT (2016)

cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... I

ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................................... III

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1.1 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 1.1 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PROGRAM ............................................... 1.1

2.0 METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................2.1 2.1 MORTALITY MONITORING ............................................................................................. 2.1

2.1.1 Weekly Mortality Monitoring ...................................................................... 2.1 2.1.2 Raptor Mortality Monitoring ....................................................................... 2.3 2.1.3 Correction Factors ....................................................................................... 2.3 2.1.4 Estimate of Mortality .................................................................................... 2.7

3.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................3.1 3.1 MORTALITY MONITORING ............................................................................................. 3.1

3.1.1 Searcher Efficiency Trials ............................................................................ 3.1 3.1.2 Scavenger Trials ........................................................................................... 3.1 3.1.3 Proportion of Area Searched ..................................................................... 3.2 3.1.4 Mortality ........................................................................................................ 3.2 3.1.5 Notifications .................................................................................................. 3.4 3.1.6 Summary ....................................................................................................... 3.5

4.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................4.1 4.1 MORTALITY MONITORING ............................................................................................. 4.1

4.1.1 Searcher Efficiency Trials ............................................................................ 4.1 4.1.2 Scavenger Trials ........................................................................................... 4.1 4.1.3 Proportion of Area Searched ..................................................................... 4.1 4.1.4 Bird Mortality ................................................................................................. 4.2 4.1.5 Bat Mortality ................................................................................................. 4.4

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................5.1

6.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................6.1

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Figures Appendix B: Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan Appendix C: Tables Appendix D: Mortality Data (CD) Appendix E: Field Forms (CD) Appendix F: Notifications


cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-

pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx

LIST OF FIGURES – APPENDIX A Figure 1: Mortality Monitoring Subset Figure 2: Fatalities by Date, 2016 Figure 3: Fatalities by Turbine, 2016

LIST OF TABLES – APPENDIX C Table 2.1: Categories of Carcass Condition...................................................................... C.1 Table 2.2: Categories of Visibility Class ............................................................................... C.1 Table 3.1: Results of Searcher Efficiency Trials, 2016 ......................................................... C.2 Table 3.2: Weighted Search Efficiencies, 2016 .................................................................. C.2 Table 3.3: Scavenger Trials, 2016 ......................................................................................... C.2 Table 3.4: Average Monthly Percent Area Searched (Ps), 2016 .................................... C.3 Table 3.5: Uncorrected Raptor Fatalities from Weekly Monitoring, 2016 ....................... C.5 Table 3.6: Corrected Monthly Raptor Mortality Estimates, 2016 ..................................... C.5 Table 3.7: Uncorrected Monthly Bird1 Fatalities, 2016 ....................................................... C.6 Table 3.8: Bird Fatalities per Turbine .................................................................................... C.6 Table 3.9: Corrected Monthly Bird Mortality Estimates, 2016........................................... C.7 Table 3.10: Uncorrected Monthly Bat Fatalities, 2016 ........................................................ C.7 Table 3.11: Uncorrected Bat Fatalities by Turbine, 2016 .................................................... C.8 Table 3.12: Corrected Bat Mortality Estimates, 2016 .......................................................... C.8


cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx i

Executive Summary

Grand Valley 2 Limited Partnership (GV2LP), is operating the 40 megawatt (MW) capacity Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project (Grand Valley 3; the Project) in the town of Grand Valley, Ontario and Township of Amaranth, Dufferin County. The facility became operational in December 2015 and is comprised of sixteen (16) Siemens SWT-3.2-113 wind turbines, turbine access roads, a transformer station, existing operations and maintenance facilities, a microwave communication tower, and underground electrical collector lines comprise the extent of the Grand Valley 3 facility.

The Renewable Energy Approval (REA) for Grand Valley 3 was initially issued on October 15, 2015 under the Environmental Protection Act section 47.4 (REA No. 6457-9L6QLC), an amended on June 30, 2015 and December 14, 2015. Section J of the REA includes the post-construction monitoring requirements for the facility, reporting requirements and applicable performance measures (i.e. mortality thresholds).

2016 was the first year of the post-construction monitoring program for wildlife at Grand Valley 3. The results of this first year of monitoring are presented in this report.

An Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan for Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat (EEMP) was prepared for the Project (Stantec, 2013). The EEMP details the post-construction wildlife and wildlife habitat monitoring program for the Project. It included mortality monitoring for birds, bats and raptors using standard methodologies for mortality surveys, in accordance with Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011a), and Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011b). Twice weekly searches were conducted at 10 turbines from May- October, with monthly searches at all turbines for raptors. Weekly monitoring for raptors also occurred at all turbines through November.

Fatalities recorded during the 2016 May- October Twice weekly mortality monitoring program included 1 raptor fatality, 7 bird fatalities (5 species) and 19 bat fatalities (three species and one unidentifiable bat carcass). No species at risk were recovered during the twice weekly monitoring program in 2016.

Correcting for searcher efficiency, scavenger removal, and percent area searched, the following mortality rates occurred at Grand Valley 3 during the first year of monitoring:

• 4.58 bats/turbine/year

• 1.69 birds/turbine/year across the wind power project

− range of 0 – 7.59 birds/turbine at individual turbines

• 0.10 raptors/turbine/year


ii cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx

• 0 provincially tracked raptors/turbine/year

The maximum bird mortality during a single mortality monitoring survey was:

• 1 bird at any one turbine

• 3 birds (including raptors) at multiple turbines

No provincial mortality thresholds (as detailed in Section J5 of the REA) were reached or exceeded in the 2016 monitoring year and the facility was in compliance with the parameters detailed in Section J5 of its REA.

Based on the results of the 2016 monitoring program, no additional mitigation or adaptive management measures or further monitoring are recommended currently. Additional data from the subsequent years of mortality monitoring for the Project will be useful to further assess whether the results observed in the first year of operation (and monitoring) are representative of the facility over time.


cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx iii

Abbreviations

AWWI

BSC

EC

EEMP

GPS

GV2LP

MW

MNRF/MNR

NWCC

NAS

Ps

REA

UTM

Sc

Se

American Wind Wildlife Institute

Bird Studies Canada

Environment Canada

Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan

Global Positioning System

Grand Valley 2 Limited Partnership

Megawatt

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

National Wind Coordinating Collaborative

National Academy of Sciences

Percent of area surveyed

Renewable Energy Approval

Universal Transverse Mercator

Scavenger correction

Searcher efficiency


Introduction February 24, 2017

cn \\cd1220-f02\root\work_group\01609\active\60961132\reports\annual post-construction monitoring reports\2016\rpt_61132_gv3-pcm_year1_20170224_fin.docx 1.1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW

Grand Valley 2 Limited Partnership (GV2LP), is operating the 40 megawatt (MW) capacity Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project (Grand Valley 3; the Project) in the town of Grand Valley, Ontario and Township of Amaranth, Dufferin County. The Project Area is generally bordered on the north by Highway 89, on the west by East West Luther Townline, on the east by 10th Line, and on the south by Concession Road 2&3. The facility became operational in December 2015 and is comprised of sixteen (16) Siemens SWT-3.2-113 wind turbines, turbine access roads, a transformer station, existing operations and maintenance facilities, a microwave communication tower, and underground electrical collector lines comprise the extent of the Grand Valley 3 facility (Figure 1, Appendix A).

The Renewable Energy Approval (REA) for the Project was initially issued on October 15, 2014 under the Environmental Protection Act section 47.4 (REA Number 6457-9L6QLC), an amended on June 30, 2015 and December 14, 2015.

2016 was the first year the wind project was fully operational and was the first year of the post-construction monitoring program for wildlife.

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PROGRAM

An Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan for Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat (EEMP) (Stantec, 2013) was prepared in compliance with O. Reg. 359/09, Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (Ministry of Natural Resources [MNR], 2011a), and Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011b). The EEMP details the post-construction wildlife and wildlife habitat monitoring program for the Project and is provided in Appendix B.

The purpose of the EEMP (Stantec, 2013) is to identify performance objectives in respect of potential negative environmental effects, assess the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures and to identify contingency measures that will be implemented if performance objectives cannot be met. Accordingly, a comprehensive monitoring program is required to verify the accuracy of the predicted operational impacts and address concerns regarding possible negative effects for the wildlife. The EEMP for the Project includes mortality monitoring for birds, bats and raptors. These commitments were also included in the REA for the Project (Condition J).

The EEMP (Stantec, 2013) also provides thresholds for annual mortality rates of birds and bats, in accordance with the Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011a), and Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011b). The thresholds, as outlined in the EEMP and as included in the Project’s REA (Section J5), are:


Introduction February 24, 2017


• 10 bats/turbine/year (averaged across Project);

• 14 birds/turbine/year (at individual turbines or turbine groups);

• 0.2 raptors/turbine/year (averaged across the Project); and

• 0.1 provincially tracked raptors/turbine/year (averaged across the Project).

Or if bird mortality during a single mortality monitoring survey exceeds:

• 10 or more birds at any one turbine; or

• 33 or more birds (including raptors) at multiple turbines.


Methodology February 24, 2017


2.0 METHODOLOGY

Post-construction mortality monitoring was conducted for bats, birds and raptors. Standard methodologies for mortality surveys were used, in accordance with Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011a), and Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011b), as detailed in the EEMP (Stantec, 2013; Appendix B).

The purpose of the mortality monitoring program is to identify the number of birds, bats, and raptor fatalities on an annual per turbine basis, averaged across the Grand Valley 3 facility. An estimate of mortality is calculated based on the observed fatalities and adjusted for carcass removal, searcher efficiency and percent area searched.

2.1 MORTALITY MONITORING

A mortality monitoring program, as per the requirements of the EEMP (Stantec, 2013) and the REA, was conducted at Grand Valley 3 from May through November 2016. The mortality monitoring consisted of:

• weekly mortality monitoring

− monitoring at a subset of 10 turbines (>30% of the Project, minimum of 10)

− twenty-six weeks of twice-weekly monitoring for bats, birds and raptors from the beginning of May to the end of October

• monthly monitoring of all turbines in the Project for raptor mortality from May through October

• weekly monitoring for raptors at all turbines through November

• correction factor trials:

− searcher efficiency testing;

− scavenger trials

− percent area searched

2.1.1 Weekly Mortality Monitoring

Turbines included in the subset were selected via a stratified random sample to provide representative coverage of the habitats and layout of the Project area. It is in accordance with criteria outlined by the MNRF (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry; e.g., >30 % of the total number of turbines is included in the subset at a minimum 10 turbines; MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b). Also, turbine 105 was included in the 30% selection for mortality monitoring, as set out by Condition J4 in the REA. The selected turbine subset is shown on Figure 1, Appendix A.




Turbines 101 and 118 had originally been selected as part of the twice weekly search turbine set, however, flooded conditions within the survey area caused these two turbines to be difficult to search. After four survey dates (May 4 - May 13, 2016), the wet conditions did not improve, which led to an adjustment in the regularly searched turbine subset. Twice weekly searches at turbine 101 were replaced with searches at 102, while searches at turbine 118 were traded with searches at 115. This began on the fifth survey date (May 17, 2016).

Carcass searches were conducted at a subset of 10 turbines twice-weekly (i.e., at alternating three- and four-day intervals) for 26 weeks from the beginning of May through to the end of October for bats, birds and raptors. Searches continued weekly at all turbines for four weeks through November for raptors. Carcass searches were conducted within minimally-vegetated portions (i.e., Visibility Classes 1 and 2; MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b) of a 50-m search area radius. Concentric circles spaced 5- to 6-m apart were walked, allowing for a visual search of 2.5- to 3-m on each side of the observer. The 50-m search area radius and the radius of each concentric transects were determined using a Global Positioning System (GPS).

Weather parameters (temperature, wind speed and precipitation) were recorded on each day surveys were conducted. When a bird or bat carcass was discovered, the following information was recorded:

• searcher identification

• species

• turbine number

• date and time it was found

• sex (if possible to determine)

• forearm length (applicable only to bat fatalities)

• Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates

• state of decomposition (see Table 2.1, Appendix C)

• estimated days since death

• injury sustained (if applicable)

• distance and direction from the nearest turbine

• substrate upon which the carcass was found

• visibility class (see Table 2.2, Appendix C)

Carcasses found in the field were photographed and collected for confirmation of species, if necessary. Suitable carcasses (i.e., those in reasonable condition) were later used in searcher efficiency or scavenger trials, excluding species at risk (i.e., threatened or endangered federally or provincially). For bat specimens, a measurement of forearm length was taken using a digital




caliper and recorded in field forms. Forearm length was used to assist in confirmation of species identification.

2.1.2 Raptor Mortality Monitoring

For the purposes of the post-construction monitoring and reporting of results, “raptors” refers to hawks and eagles (members of the family Accipitridae), falcons (members of the family Falconidae) and vultures (members of the family Cathartidae). Raptors determined to be of conservation concern by the MNRF Natural Heritage Information Center are described as tracked raptors, which in the province of Ontario include: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), Rough-legged Hawk (Buteo lagopus), and Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus).

In addition to the weekly mortality monitoring program, supplementary raptor mortality monitoring was conducted at the 6 turbines that were not included in the regular mortality monitoring subset. Each turbine was searched once a month in May through October and once a week throughout November. Searches were conducted within 50-m of turbines involving walking in concentric circles.

During the month of November, in the absence of the twice weekly regular mortality monitoring, supplemental weekly surveys at the 10-turbine subset were conducted alongside the 6 additional turbines. The frequencies of these surveys were conducted in accordance with Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011b) to account for the potential continued presence of raptors passing through the area during migration.

2.1.3 Correction Factors

Data to calculate correction factors for searcher efficiency and scavenging rates were collected during the mortality monitoring program. Correction factors were calculated to account for carcasses that fell in areas that were not searched, for carcasses that were overlooked, and for carcasses that were removed by scavengers prior to the search.

2.1.3.1 Searcher Efficiency Trials

Searcher efficiency trials are designed to correct for carcasses that may be overlooked by searchers during the field surveys. The MNRF (MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b) provides guidance for determining searcher efficiency, expressed as a proportion of carcasses expected to be found by individual searchers.

Searcher efficiency trials consisted of blind tests, where a “tester” placed bird or bat carcasses within the 50-m radius circle under turbines prior to the carcass searches. Test carcasses were discretely marked with a unique identification (i.e. with thread, or small tags, always placed beneath the carcass and out of sight). The “searcher” was unaware when or where trial carcasses would be placed. Trial carcasses consisted of native birds or bats. Bats were used for




49% of trial carcasses (41 of a total of 83 placed). The locations of placed trial carcasses were checked at the end of the searcher monitoring surveys and any remaining carcasses were collected.

Trials adhered to and exceeded seasonality requirements detailed in the EEMP (Stantec, 2013) and MNRF (MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b) guidance with a minimum of 10 carcasses used for each searcher per visibility class per season within the spring and fall seasons. Best effort was made to follow these guidelines in the summer season. Although, due to unexpected turnover of staff at the beginning of August, slightly fewer than 20 carcasses used for each tester in summer (i.e. 17 and 18). No more than 3 carcasses were placed at any one time to avoid bias.

For each searcher efficiency trial, the following information was recorded per tester:

• tester and searcher

• turbine number

• date and time placed

• species

• UTM coordinates

• direction and distance from the nearest turbine

• marker type used

• carcass condition

• ground cover and visibility class

• carcass outcome (found, overlooked or scavenged)

• time when the carcass was recovered (if overlooked but not scavenged)

Individual searcher efficiencies (Se) were calculated using the following equation:

𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑓𝑓

(𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓) − (𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑠𝑠𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛𝑠𝑠𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓)

Where two or more surveyors conducted mortality monitoring during the same season, it was necessary to establish a weighted average that reflected the relative proportion of turbines that each technician surveyed.




The weighted average and overall Se was calculated as follows:

𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜 = 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆1 �𝑛𝑛1𝑇𝑇� + 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆2 �

𝑛𝑛2𝑇𝑇� + 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆3 �

𝑛𝑛3𝑇𝑇� + …

where: Se0 is the Overall Searcher Efficiency; Se1, 2, 3… are Individual Searcher Efficiency Ratings;

N1,2,3… are the number of turbines surveyed by each searcher; and T is the total number of turbines surveyed.

Searcher efficiency values are known to be much higher for large-bodied versus small-bodied birds (i.e. Erickson et al., 2003; Johnson et al., 2003). As a result, the Se for raptors and vultures is assumed to be 1.0. Raptor and vulture fatalities were corrected separately from other bird fatalities.

2.1.3.2 Scavenger Trials Scavenger trials are designed to correct for carcasses that are removed by scavengers before the search period. These trials involved the placement of carcasses at wind turbines followed by scheduled monitoring to determine the rate of removal. For each trial carcass placed, its distance and direction from the turbines was recorded so that it could be easily relocated during the monitoring. Trial carcasses were discretely marked to clearly differentiate them from turbine-related mortalities.

A scavenger trial was conducted each month in May through October. At least 10 carcasses were used each month, consisting of native birds or bats that were thawed at the time of placement. Bats were used for 50% (30 of 60) scavenger trial carcasses.

Five carcasses were placed at any one time, distributed at different turbines. The following information was recorded for each carcass placement:

• turbine number

• date scavenger carcass was placed

• UTM coordinates;

• direction and distance from turbine

• visibility class

• species

Monitoring of each scavenger trial carcass then took place during the regularly-scheduled twice weekly mortality monitoring for a 2-week period. During each monitoring event, the following records were taken:

• date

• weather conditions

• presence/absence of carcass




Separate scavenger corrections (Sc) were calculated for each season of the monitoring period, calculated as follows:

𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐 = 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 1 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 2 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 3 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 4 𝑛𝑛𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 1 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 2 + 𝑛𝑛𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 3

where: Sc is the proportion of carcasses not removed by scavengers over the survey period; nplaced is the total number of carcasses placed; and

nvisit1,2… are the number of carcasses remaining on visits 1 through 4

Scavenger rates for raptors are assumed to be 1.0 based on their longer persistence in the environment (Morrison 2002). Therefore, raptor mortality rates were corrected separately from other bird fatalities.

2.1.3.3 Proportion of Area Surveyed

In accordance with MNRF guidelines (MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b), a 50-m radius around the base of turbines was searched. This area represents the maximum recommended search area. However, due to thick or tall vegetation, it was not always possible to search the entire 50-m radius. Therefore, a correction factor was applied to account for portions of the 50-m radius not searched.

In the first year of the post-construction mortality monitoring program (2016), efforts to maximize the searchable area and visibility were undertaken by managing the search radius through mowing vegetation and clearing downed debris/biomass accumulation at the search turbines.

The 50-m search radius around each turbine in the weekly monitoring subset was mapped into visibility classes as defined in Table 2.2, Appendix C. Those areas in visibility class 1 and 2 (i.e. easy and moderate) were included in the carcass searches. Portions of the search radius in visibility classes 3 and 4 (i.e. difficult to very difficult) were not included in the weekly mortality monitoring. A GPS was used to delineate and measure the area (in meters squared) of visibility class 1 and 2 that was searched.

The percent of the area surveyed (Ps) varied by turbine and survey date and thus was recorded during each survey. The Ps for each turbine was calculated on a daily basis as follows:

𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡𝑥𝑥 = 𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑤𝑤𝑛𝑛 50 𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑓𝑓𝑤𝑤𝑛𝑛𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐𝑤𝑤𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑝𝑝𝑆𝑆

7854

Where: Ps = percent of area searched

X=turbine number.




The average monthly Ps for the entire Project (all 10 turbines) was calculated by averaging:

𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡1 + 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡2 + 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡3 + … + 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡10

10

Given the 55m turbine blade length at Grand Valley 3 consideration was given to carcasses that may fall beyond the 50m search radius. Field staff conducted a circular transect 55-m away from the turbine to consider any additional resulting fatalities. A dashed line around the search area grid represented whether this 55-m transect was considered searchable (visibility class 1 or 2; Table 2.2, Appendix C). Any mortalities found would be considered incidental, as set out by the MNRF guidelines (MNR, 2011a; MNR, 2011b).

2.1.4 Estimate of Mortality

There are numerous published and unpublished approaches to incorporating correction factors into an overall assessment of total bird and bat mortality.

Currently, MNRF recommends the following formula:

𝐶𝐶 = 𝑐𝑐

𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ∗ 𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐 ∗ 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡

where: C is the corrected number of bird or bat fatalities; c is the number of carcasses found;

Se is the proportion of carcasses expected to be found by searchers (searcher efficiency);

Sc is the proportion of carcasses not removed by scavengers over the survey period; and,

Ps is the percent of the area surveyed.

Bird and bat fatalities were estimated separately in each month from May through October to account for seasonal variability. The corrected estimates of bird and bat fatalities were summed over the monitoring period to obtain the estimated number of fatalities for the entire monitoring period. In accordance with provincial guidelines, raptor mortality rates were calculated separately from the bird fatality rate. Estimated mortality rates were expressed per turbine and per MW by dividing the corrected estimates of bird or bat fatalities by the number of turbines or MW in the monitoring subset (i.e., 10 turbines or 25 MW). When analyzing the data, all mortalities and correction factors gathered at turbines 101 and 118 within the first two weeks of the program were transferred to turbine 102 and 118, respectively.

In accordance to provincial guidelines, raptor mortality rates were calculated separately from the bird fatality rate. Estimated raptor mortality rates were based on the results of the May to October weekly mortality monitoring surveys. All raptors recovered during these weekly searches are included in calculating the corrected number of raptor fatalities/turbine/year. If applicable, tracked raptors (e.g., any Bald Eagle, Golden Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, or Rough-




legged Hawk) are separated from the remainder of the raptor fatalities to calculate the corrected number of tracked raptor fatalities/turbine/year. Results of the supplementary monthly raptor mortality monitoring are reported separately to identify individual or groups of turbines that may exceed the mortality thresholds. This is in accordance with provincial guidance and as such any raptor fatalities discovered incidentally or during the supplementary monitoring are not included in the raptor (all and tracked) corrected fatality calculations.

For the purposes of applying mortality thresholds, estimated mortality rates were calculated on a per turbine basis for birds. To facilitate this calculation, the average, monthly percent area searched was used for each individual turbine. Monthly searcher efficiency and scavenger rates were considered consistent across all turbines.


Results February 24, 2017


3.0 RESULTS


Results of the mortality monitoring for the 2016 field program are summarized in Tables 3.1-3.12, Appendix C. Raw data from the mortality monitoring is provided in Appendix D.

Regular bird and bat mortality monitoring took place between the beginning of May and the end of October, 2016. Monitoring continued through November for raptors. Appendix D1 provides the regular, twice-weekly monitoring schedule. Monitoring schedule of the monthly and weekly (November) raptor monitoring is provided in Appendix D2.

A complete summary of survey dates, times, and weather conditions during the carcass searches is provided in Appendix D1 and Appendix D2. Although all reasonable effort was made to conduct surveys as scheduled, surveys were not conducted if weather (e.g. lightning, severe fog) or site work presented safety concerns. Weather conditions were noted when surveys were not conducted as scheduled, and every attempt was made to complete the missed survey(s) as soon as possible. Appendix D3 and Appendix D4 summarizes instances where turbine searches were not conducted due to weather or other safety concerns, such as turbine maintenance, active farming, or access road maintenance.

Field forms for the mortality monitoring program, including correction factor trials, are provided in Appendix E1.

3.1.1 Searcher Efficiency Trials

In 2016, two searchers conducted most of the mortality search surveys. A third surveyor was brought in for one survey date (October 4, 2016) to accommodate for a sick staff member. Table 3.1, Appendix C, summarizes searcher efficiency rates for each individual, which ranged from 47% to 82%. The overall weighted searcher efficiency values for each season were: 68% (spring), 68% (summer) and 62% (fall) (see Table 3.2, Appendix C).

Raw data for the searcher efficiency trials are provided in Appendix D5 and summarized in Appendix D6 for Grand Valley 3. Raw data of the searcher efficiency trials that were conducted on the third surveyor (who worked at a different wind project in 2016) are provided in Appendix D7 and summarized in Appendix D8.

3.1.2 Scavenger Trials

The results of the seasonal scavenger trials are summarized in Table 3.3, Appendix C. The proportion of carcasses not removed by scavengers over the survey period was 79% (spring), 65% (summer) and 65% (fall).




Raw data for the scavenger trials are provided in Appendix D9 and summarized in Appendix D10.

3.1.3 Proportion of Area Searched

The proportion of the 50-m radius that was searched at each turbine is summarized by month in Table 3.4, Appendix C.

The average search area remained high throughout the mortality monitoring program, ranging from 90% in August to 100% in September and October, with an overall average rate of 97%.

Raw data for the proportion of area searched are provided in Appendix D11 and summarized in Appendix D12.

3.1.4 Mortality

Details of all recorded bird and bat fatalities identified during the regular weekly mortality monitoring program are provided in Appendix D13. Details of all raptor fatalities recovered during the monthly raptor mortality monitoring program are provided in Appendix D14 and incidental fatalities are documented in Appendix D15.

3.1.4.1 Raptor Mortality

One raptor mortality (Turkey Vulture, Cathartes aura) was recorded during the weekly mortality monitoring from May through October. This raptor fatality was recovered in the spring (June), as detailed in (Table 3.5, Appendix C).

The Turkey Vulture is ranked as S5 in Ontario, which indicates that these species are common, widespread and abundant in the province.

Correcting for searcher efficiency, scavenger removal, and percent area searched, the single recovered carcasses resulted in a corrected value of 0.10 raptor fatalities per turbine (0.04 per MW) per year (Table 3.6, Appendix C).

No tracked raptor fatalities were recorded as part of the regular mortality monitoring program.

Supplemental Raptor Monitoring Program Mortalities

No raptors were recorded during the supplementary raptor monitoring program.

Incidental Mortalities

One Turkey Vulture was recovered incidentally during the 2016 monitoring program. Incidental mortalities include those that were recovered outside established monitoring parameters and




protocols, such as outside the 50-m radius search area, at non-subset turbines outside the monthly monitoring program, or those recovered by maintenance staff. In the case of the single incidental raptor in 2016, it was found outside of the 50m search radius. No tracked raptors were found at the facility in 2016.

Raw data from incidental fatalities can be found in Appendix D15.

3.1.4.2 Bird Mortality

A total of 7 bird fatalities (not including raptors) of 5 species were recorded during the 26-week monitoring period from May through October, summarized in Table 3.7, Appendix C.

All species have provincial S-Ranks of (i.e., Secure – common, widespread and abundant in Ontario) during the breeding season.

Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa) and Red-eyed Vireo (Vireo olivaceus) were the most common species found (2 individuals each). Fatalities of each of the remaining 3 species (American Goldfinch, Spinus tristis; Magnolia Warbler, Setophaga magnolia; and Blackburnian Warbler, Setophaga fusca) were restricted to a single individual. The maximum number of bird mortalities at all turbines in any one day was 3 birds, which occurred on October 4, 2016. The bird mortalities on this date included: Golden-crowned Kinglet at turbine 105, a Red-eyed Vireo at turbine 115 and a Brown Creeper at turbine 106 (incidental fatality).

Bird fatalities occurred in low numbers and were recovered occasionally throughout the search period, predominately through the end of summer and beginning of fall (Figure 2, Appendix A).

Also, avian fatalities were low across the facility and were not concentrated in any one area or at any one or group of turbines (Table 3.8, Appendix C; Figure 3, Appendix A).

Correcting for searcher efficiency, scavenger removal, and percent area searched, the 7 recovered carcasses resulted in a corrected value of 1.69 bird fatalities per turbine (0.68 per MW) per year across the facility (Table 3.9, Appendix C). Corrected values per turbine ranged from 0 birds/turbine to 7.59 birds/turbine (at turbine 115). No individual turbines exceeded the provincial 14 birds/turbine/year threshold.


One additional bird fatality, a Brown Creeper (Certhia Americana), was recovered incidentally. This fatality was not included in the mortality calculations as it was recovered outside the regular mortality monitoring parameters. Details are provided in Appendix D15.




3.1.4.3 Bat Mortality

A total of 19 bat fatalities, representing 3 species, were recorded during the 26-week monitoring period from May through October, summarized in Table 3.10, Appendix C. Due to advanced decomposition, one bat carcass found could not be identified.

The distribution of bat fatalities over the monitoring period is shown on Figure 2, Appendix A. Bat fatalities were sporadic throughout the monitoring period but generally concentrated during late July and early October. August 9, August 12, August 23, September 9, and September 23 exhibited the highest number of daily fatalities with 2 individuals each (Figure 2, Appendix A).

Bat fatalities were highest at turbines 105 and 109 (4 fatalities each), followed by turbine 115 with 3 fatalities and turbine 102 and 106 with 2 fatalities each (Table 3.11, Appendix C; Figure 3 Appendix A).

Silver-haired Bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) was the most common species found, representing 42% of all bat fatalities. Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) was the next most abundant (37%), followed by Eastern Red Bat (Lasiurus borealis) (16%). The unidentified bat species made up 5% of the total bat species composition.

All species have provincial S-Ranks of S4 (Apparently Secure – uncommon but not rare) during the breeding season.

Correcting for searcher efficiency, scavenger removal, and percent area searched, the 97 recovered carcasses resulted in a corrected value of 4.58 bat fatalities per turbine (1.84 per MW) per year (Table 3.12, Appendix C).


Two Hoary Bats were recovered incidentally during the supplemental raptor monitoring program. These fatalities are not included in the mortality calculations as they were recovered outside the regular mortality monitoring parameters. Details are provided in Appendix D15.

3.1.5 Notifications

Two notifications for were made for raptor fatalities recovered during the 2016 monitoring program. Copies of each notification are provided in Appendix F.

Raptor notifications included the following:

• Turkey Vulture fatality on June 21, 2016 at turbine 160, sent on June 21, 2016

• Turkey Vulture fatality on July 12, 2016 at turbine 105, sent on July 12, 2016




3.1.6 Summary

The following mortality rates occurred at Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project during the first year of monitoring:







• 1 bird at any one turbine



Discussion February 24, 2017


4.0 DISCUSSION


Results of the first year of Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project post-construction monitoring program did not exceed any agency thresholds.

Discussion on search parameters, results and any observed fatality patterns are provided below.

4.1.1 Searcher Efficiency Trials

Two searchers conducted most the mortality surveys, which each conducting surveys for approximately half of the program. A third person conducted one survey in October to accommodate a sick staff member. The overall seasonal rate of recovery was highest in the spring and summer season (68%), and lowest in the fall season (62%).

Average rates in Canada for searcher efficiency are 64-70% (Bird Studies Canada [BSC] et al., 2016). While a bit lower, the Grand Valley 3 rates (62-68%) are consistent with this data (see Table 3.2, Appendix C). Factors that are thought to influence searcher rates may be vegetation height and thickness, ground visibility, individual observer variation, and size of birds (National Wind Coordinating Collaborative [NWCC], 2010).

4.1.2 Scavenger Trials

Rates of carcass removal were low in the spring of 2016 such that 79% of the carcasses remained after the trials. These rates were a bit higher throughout the summer and fall season, and had a carcass removal rate of 65% (see Table 3.3, Appendix C). These scavenger rates did not show wide variation in persistence and did not exhibit a strong seasonal influence.

The results found at Grand Valley 3 are comparable to an analysis of scavenger data from spring, summer and fall from wind projects across Canada. The results of this study show that scavenger removal rates were not strongly influenced by season (BSC et al., 2016).

4.1.3 Proportion of Area Searched

Turbine area searched remained high throughout the 2016 program. Throughout the monitoring period, the average monthly percent search areas ranged from 90% in August to 100% in September, and October (Table 3.4, Appendix C). On August 16th, the percent area searched value was very low due to safety concerns; the searcher could not safely walk in the majority of the survey area. Additionally, the slightly lower percent area searched in May is attributed to spring flooding; this was corrected by switching two turbines (as discussed in Section 2.1.1).




4.1.4 Bird Mortality

4.1.4.1 Background

During operation, direct mortality from collision with wind turbines is a potential effect. Each turbine that is installed has an impact by directly adding to mortality rates (Masden et al., 2010). From a conservation perspective, the critical issue is whether this source of mortality is sufficiently great to impact populations.

Various studies have been conducted throughout North America to document bird collisions at wind facilities and to determine why collisions may be occurring and the extent to which they occur. From a review of the available literature, it appears that most avian collisions are of nocturnal migratory songbirds (Kingsley and Whittam, 2007; Erickson et al., 2014), at least partly because they are the most abundant species at wind energy facilities (National Academy of Sciences [NAS], 2007). In an analysis of mortality monitoring results from 116 studies at more than 70 wind energy facilities, small passerines accounted for 62.5% of all bird fatalities, upland game birds for 8.2% and diurnal raptors for 7.8% (Erickson et al., 2014).

BSC et al. (2016) found similar results with raptors representing 8.5% of all bird fatalities in Ontario, with Turkey Vulture (2.65%) and Red-tailed Hawk (3.80%) found most commonly. Another recent study noted that raptor fatality rates exhibit high inter-annual variation (Smallwood, 2013). Considering raptor mortality alone, Strickland et al. (2011) reported raptor fatality rates ranging from 0 to 0.49 raptors per MW, with a median of 0.8 raptors per MW, at projects across North America that used modern, monopole turbines.

The most common species of small passerine reported across several North American studies are Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris), along with Red-eyed Vireo (Vireo olivaceus), and Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa; BSC et al., 2016; Erickson et al., 2014; Zimmerling et al., 2013). In Canada, the overall estimated mortality of these species represents less than 0.01% of their Canadian populations (Zimmerling et al., 2013).

Most fatalities at operational facilities have been found from May through October (Erickson et al. 2014; BSC et al. 2016), with the fall migration period (August to October) exhibiting the majority of all fatalities (Environment Canada [EC] et al., 2011; Erickson et al., 2014). A compilation of available bird mortality data from wind energy facilities in North America (Erickson et al., 2014) indicates a bias-corrected estimate of overall bird mortality rate between 2.10/MW/year and 3.35/MW/year. These values are within the range reported by American Wind Wildlife Institute (AWWI; 2016) of 3 to 5 birds/MW/year.

Zimmerling et al. (2013) report an average of 8.2 birds (+/- 1.4, 95% CI) killed per turbine per year at 43 wind farms in Canada. This study used a correction factor to increase the radius around turbine from the standard 50- to 85-m, based on results of an unpublished study by the authors.




The most recent Ontario data, compiled by BSC et al. (2016), indicate an average of 6.14 birds (+/- 0.31, 95% CI) killed per turbine per year based on data from 46 wind farms in Ontario. This compilation used a 50-m search radius in the mortality correction as this method is standard practice across many Canadian studies, and is the mandatory search radius for all projects currently being monitored in Ontario (BSC et al., 2016).

Bird mortality rates observed at operational facilities are considered low, with no evidence of large scale fatality events or significant population impacts in Ontario (Friesen, 2011; National Academy of Sciences [NAS], 2007). Monitoring results to date from operational facilities indicate that wind turbines are a small contributor to overall bird mortality when compared to other anthropogenic structures and industrial sectors (Arnett et al., 2007; Kingsley and Whittam, 2007; NAS, 2007; Kerlinger et al., 2011; Zimmerling et al., 2013) or other sources of anthropogenic mortality (Calvert et al., 2013). Because raptors have relatively low population densities and reproductive rates, population recovery from mortality effects can be slow (Kingsley and Whittam, 2007). As such, raptors may be more susceptible to population level impacts than other bird species (Manville, 2009, as referenced in Zimmerling et al., 2013).

Zimmerling et al. (2013) indicate that even a tenfold increase in total mortality from wind turbine operation in Canada would represent a mortality level that is orders of magnitude smaller than from many other sources of collision mortality in Canada. Less than 0.01% of the continent-wide population for most species is estimated to be killed annually by collisions with wind turbines (Erickson et al., 2014).

4.1.4.2 Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project

Raptor Mortality

A total of two raptor mortalities were reported during the first year of mortality monitoring at Grand Valley 3. Of those, one was identified during the regular mortality monitoring program, with the other observed incidentally outside the standard search area (i.e., >50-m).

All the recovered raptors were Turkey Vultures. This is one of the most common raptor species occurring in Ontario as well as one of the most common raptor species fatalities at wind power projects in Ontario, with Turkey Vulture comprising 2.65% of recovered carcasses (BSC et al., 2016).

Based on the one Turkey Vulture recovered during the regular mortality monitoring program, the calculated raptor mortality rate for Grand Valley 3 was 0.10 raptors/turbine/year. This is below the provincial threshold of 0.2 raptors/turbine/year and less than the current estimated provincial mortality rate of 0.20 raptors/turbine/year (+/- 0.01, 95% CI; BSC et al., 2016.). No tracked raptor fatalities were recorded during the regular mortality monitoring program and as such is below the provincial threshold of 0.1 tracked raptors/turbine/year.




It is uncertain whether the recorded raptor fatalities at Grand Valley 3 were resident or migratory birds, or a mixture of both, based on the species and dates of recovery. Both raptor fatalities were recovered late spring to early summer (June 21- July 12th, 2016).

The results of the first year of mortality monitoring at Grand Valley 3 demonstrated a low raptor fatality rate.

Small Bird Mortality

In 2016 the bird mortality rate at Grand Valley 3 was 1.69 birds/turbine/year. This is well below the Ontario threshold of 14 birds/turbine/year and is also lower than the current estimated provincial mortality rate of 6.14 birds/turbine/year (+/- 0.31, 95% CI; BSC et al., 2016.)

Golden-crowned Kinglet and Red-eyed Vireo were the most common species recovered at Grand Valley 3 with 2 fatalities each. This is consistent with the findings of other published studies that indicate these two species are among the most commonly recovered species at Canadian wind facilities (BSC et al., 2016; Zimmerling et al., 2013).

One bird fatality (excluding raptors) was recovered in the early spring, with the remaining fatalities occurring between late-summer and mid-fall, which generally corresponds to the fall migration period (Figure 2, Appendix A). Seasonality of avian fatalities, typically concentrated during the fall migration period (August to October) has been demonstrated elsewhere in the province (EC et al., 2011; BSC et al., 2014) and North America (Erickson et al., 2014).

Turbine specific fatality patterns were not drastically apparent. There was a small increase of small bird mortality in the southwestern portion of the project, with 57% of the bird mortalities occurring at Turbine 115 and 117 (Figure 3, Appendix A). Additional monitoring from 2017 and 2018 may provide additional data to further evaluate patterns and risk factors.

No fatalities of provincial or federal bird species at risk were found.

Overall, the results of the first year of mortality monitoring at Grand Valley 3 demonstrated low small bird fatality rates.

4.1.5 Bat Mortality

The direct impact to bats through collision with wind turbines has been documented in post-construction monitoring reports and peer reviewed literature. Overall bat mortality (of all species) has been reported in the range of 0.3 to 40 bats per MW per year in projects in North America (Arnett et al., 2007; Strickland et al., 2011). Bats, as a group, are generally more commonly observed fatalities than birds at operational wind project facilities (BSC et al., 2016; AWWI, 2016). In Canada, 75% of the causalities found were bats (6643 bats of 9 species found at 1889 turbines included in the monitoring results; BSC et al., 2016). In Ontario, 77% of the casualties found were bats (8 species found at 1489 turbines included in the monitoring results).




Comprehensive studies of bat mortality rates at wind-energy facilities throughout North America indicate that bat mortalities are highest during the fall migration period (July through September, peaking in August; BSC et al. 2014) with more than 50% of the bat mortalities occurring during August (Johnson, 2005; Kunz et al., 2007).

Smallwood et al. (2013) compared bat fatality rate estimates among 71 North American wind-energy projects with turbines from 18.5- to 90-m in height. Although results contain large, unadjusted biases and uncertainties in extrapolated data are high, they estimate an annual mortality of 651,000-888,000 bats in the U.S. (Smallwood et al., 2013). In Ontario, recent post-construction monitoring results indicate a total annual mortality of 42,656 bats (BSC et al., 2016). The most recent Ontario data, compiled by BSC et al. (2016), indicate an average of 18.52 bats (+/- 0.79, 95% CI) killed per turbine per year based on data from 46 wind farms in Ontario. Rates ranged from 1-120 bats per year (BSC et al., 2016). Population-level effects are not well understood, however (NAS, 2007). During a two-year study at a windfarm within an agriculture landscape in Minnesota, only an estimated small fraction (1.3%) of fall migrating bats present (more than 90,000) collided with wind turbines (Johnson et al., 2004).

4.1.5.1 Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project

The first year of bat monitoring at Grand Valley 3 identified a corrected mortality rate of 4.58 bats/turbine/year. This is below the provincial threshold of 10 bats/year/turbines and below the current provincial average of 18.52 bats/turbine/year (BSC et al., 2016).

Most bat mortalities occurred at Grand Valley 3 in late July to early October, with a distinct peak in the months of August and September (Figure 2, Appendix C). This corresponds with research elsewhere that documents increased bat fatalities during the fall migration period (July through September, peaking in August; BSC et al., 2014). This occurs as migratory tree bats (e.g., Hoary, Red, and Silver-haired Bats) move through the area.

Bat fatalities were highest at turbines 105 and 109 (4 fatalities each), followed by turbine 115 with 3 fatalities and turbine 102 and 106 with 2 fatalities each. The remaining turbines in the survey subset experienced 1 or no bat mortality event throughout the full 26-week monitoring period (Table 3.11, Appendix C; Figure 3, Appendix A). No clear pattern of bat fatalities is apparent based on turbine location and proximity to natural features.


Summary and Recommendations February 24, 2017


5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This report summarizes the results of the first year of post-construction mortality monitoring at the Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project.

Thresholds for bats, small birds, tracked raptors and single mortality events were not exceeded in the 2016 monitoring year. Mortality rates in 2016 were:







• 1 birds at any one turbine


Based on the results of the 2016 monitoring program no additional mitigation or adaptive management measures (as per the EEMP) are recommended at this time. Monitoring in 2017 will continue and will include mortality monitoring for raptors, birds and bats.

The 2016 post-construction monitoring program conducted at the Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Project fulfilled the requirements of the REA, Section J for the first year of operation of the facility.


References February 24, 2017


6.0 REFERENCES

Arnett, E. B., D. B. Inkley, D. H. Johnson, R. P. Larkin, S. Manes, A. M. Manville, J. R. Mason, M. L. Morrison, M. D. Strickland, and R. Thresher. 2007. Impacts of wind energy facilities on wildlife and wildlife habitat. Wildlife Society Technical Review 07-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

American Wind Wildlife Institute (AWWI). 2016. Wind Turbine interactions with wildlife and their habitats: a summary of research results and priority questions. Washington, DC. Available online at www.awwi.org

Bird Studies Canada, Canadian Wind Energy Association, Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2014. Wind energy Bird and Bat Monitoring Database Summary of the Findings from Post-construction Monitoring Reports. July 2014.

Bird Studies Canada, Canadian Wind Energy Association, Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2016. Wind energy Bird and Bat Monitoring Database Summary of the Findings from Post-construction Monitoring Reports. July 2016.

Calvert, A. M., C. A. Bishop, R. D. Elliot, E. A. Krebs, T. M. Kydd, C. S. Machtans, and G. J. Robertson. 2013. A synthesis of human-related avian mortality in Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 8(2): 11. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00581-080211

Environment Canada, the Canadian Wind Energy Association and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011. Wind Energy Bird and Bat Monitoring Database Summary of the Findings from Post-construction Monitoring Reports. November 2011. 17pp.

Erickson, Wally, Karen Kronner and Bob Gritski. 2003. Nine Canyon Wind Power Project Avian And Bat Monitoring Report: September 2002 – August 2003. Prepared For: Nine Canyon Technical Advisory Committee. October 2003.

Erickson, W.P., M.M. Wolfe, K.J. Bay, D.H. Johnson, and J.L. Gehring. 2014. A Comprehensive Analysis of Small-Passerine Fatalities from Collision with Turbines at Wind Energy Facilities. PLoS ONE 9(9): e107491.

Friesen, L. 2011. No evidence of large-scale fatality events at Ontario wind projects in Ontario Birds, Volume 29, No. 3, December 2011: pages 149- 155.

Johnson, Greg, Wally Erickson, Joe White and Randy McKinney. 2003. Avian and Bat Mortality During the First Year of Operation at the Klondike Phase I Wind Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Prepared for: Northwestern Wind Power. March 2003.




Johnson, G.D., M.K. Perlik, W.P. Erickson and M.D. Strickland. 2004. Bat activity, composition and collision mortality at a large wind plant in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32(4): 1278-1288.

Johnson, G.D., 2005. A review of bat mortality at wind-energy developments in the United States. Bat Research News 46(2): 45-49.

Kerlinger, P., Curry, R., Guarnaccia, J. 2011. Bird collision impacts at wind turbines in eastern North America LLC: from “harvesting wind energy on the Delmar Virginia peninsula”. <Presented September 14, 2011>.

Kingsley, A. and B. Whittam. 2007. Wind Turbines and Birds: A Background Review for Environmental Assessment. Prepared for the Canadian Wildlife Service. Draft April 2, 2007.

Kunz, T.H., E.B. Arnett, W.P. Erickson, A.R. Hoar, G.D. Johnson, R.P. Larkin, M.D. Strickland, R.W. Thresher and M.D. Tuttle. 2007. Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions, research needs, and hypotheses. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5(6): 315-324.

Masden, E.A., A.D. Fox, R.W. Furness, R. Bullman, and D.T. Haydon. 2010. Cumulative impact assessments and bird/wind farm interactions: developing a conceptual framework. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 30: 1–7.

Morrison, M. 2002. Searcher Bias and Scavenging Rates in Bird/Wind Energy Studies. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute. 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.

National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC). 2010. Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds, Bats, and their Habitats: A Summary of Research Results and Priority Questions. Spring 2010. 8p.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011a. Bats and Bat Habitats. Guidelines for Wind Power Projects. 24 pp. July, 2011.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011b. Birds and Bird Habitats. Guidelines for Wind Power Projects. 32 pp. December 2011.

Smallwood, S. 2013. Comparing Bird and Bat Fatality-Rate Estimates Among North American Wind-energy Projects. Wildlife Society bulletin 37 (1):19-33, 2013; DOI: 10.1002/wsb.260




Stantec Consulting Ltd., 2013. Grand Valley Wind Farms – Phase 3 Wind Project Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan: Post-construction Monitoring Program. Prepared for Grand Valley Wind Farms Inc. May, 2013.

Strickland, D., E. B. Arnett, W.P. Erickson, D.H. Johnson, G.D. Johnson, M.L. Morrison, J.A. Shaffer, W. Warren-Hicks. 2011. Comprehensive Guide to Studying Wind Energy/Wildlife Interactions. Prepared for the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative. Washington D.C., USA.

Zimmerling, J.R., A.C. Pomeroy, M.V. d’entremont, and C.M. Francis. 2013. Canadian estimate of bird mortality due to collisions and direct habitat loss associated with wind turbine developments, Avian conservation and Ecology XX(YY):ZZ. [online] URL: http://www.ace-eco.org/volXX/issYY/artZZ/


APPENDIX A: FIGURES

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Grand Valley

LutherMarsh

Luther LakeEast Bay

Grand River

Luther Lake

Black Creek

Luther Lake

LutherMarsh

KeldonSwamp

BowlingGreen

Swamp (AM1)

TOWNSHIP OFSOUTHGATE

TOWNSHIP OFMELANCTHON

TOWNSHIP OFAMARANTH

TOWNSHIP OFEAST LUTHER

GRAND VALLEY

TOWNSHIP OFWELLINGTON

NORTH

Highway 89

Amaranth East Luther Townline

Water Street

Sideroad 27 & 28

County Road 109

County Road 15

Leeson Street South

9Th Line

Sideroad 15

5 Sideroad

Southgate Road 04

4 Line

6 Line

Concession Road 2 & 3

County Road 25

Sideroad 15

13Th Line

Sideroad 28 & 29

County Road 10


25 Sideroad



15 Sideroad

20 Sideroad


Sideroad 27 & 28

30 Sideroad

County Road 25


2 Line

10Th Line



Grey Road 8

Sideroad 24 & 25

Sideroad 21 & 22

Sideroad 19 Southgate

8Th Line

Amaranth East Luther Townline

12 Line

Sideroad 13


Wellington 15 Road

Sideroad 21 & 22

Sideroad 24 & 25

East West Luther Townline


East West Luther Townline

500

495

490

480475

500495

495

490

490

485

495

485

490 485

475

485

470

495

490

490

485

495

490

495

490

485

495

495

490

490

485

485480

480

475

470

490

485

49048

5

490

490

485

485480

485

480

485

485 480

485

480

480475

480

465460

460

455

505

470

460

465

490

485

490

490

500

495

490

490

490

490

485

485

485

490

485

490

475

450

500

500

500

490495

495

495

495

495

495

490

495

490

490

485

490

485

485

485

485

490

485

485

485

490

490

490

490

490

490

485

490

490

490

490

490

485

485

480

480

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

480

480

485

480

485

48548

5

485

485

480

475

475

475

480

475

480

480

480

480

480

480

480

480

475

465

465

455

460

495

490

490

490

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

485

480

480

480

470

490

485

480475470

470

455

465

450

500495

490

500

495

500495

500

490

495

490

490485

495490

495490

495490

490

465

500495

490485

485

490485

49048

5

480

470

510

465

495

505

500

485

455

505

495

500

500

500

500

490

495

495

495

495

485

485

490

490485 490

490

490

480

485

485

485

485

485

480

475475

480

475

475

465

46046

0

455460

455

455

495 490

485

485

485

485

485

480

480

480 475

LutherMarsh

KeldonEsker

TarbertDrift

EgertonEsker

MountView Esker

103

105106

108

109

112

115

114

117

102

101

104

110

113

120

118

546000

546000

549000

549000

552000

552000

555000

555000

4860000

4860000

4863000

4863000

4866000

4866000

4869000

4869000

4872000

4872000

4875000

4875000

0 1 2km

1:55,000

W:\active\60960698\drawing\MXD\Terrestrial\Post_Con_Monitoring\160961132_Fig_1_EEMP_TurbineSubset_20170118.mxdRevised: 2017-01-18 By: dharvey

±

Ja nua ry 2017160961132

Client/Project

Gra nd V a lley 2 LPGra nd V a lley W ind Fa rm s – Pha se3 Project

Figure N o.1

Title

Post-constructionMonitoring EEMPTurbine Subset

Coordina te System : N AD 1983 U TM Zone 17NBa se fea tures produced under license with the Onta rio Ministry of N a tura l Resources © Queen's Printer for Onta rio, 2013.

Notes1.2.

Legend Pha se 3 Turb ine (Monitoring Sub set)

Pha se 3 Turb ine (Other)Access Roa d

Existing FeaturesRoa dContour Line 5m Interva ls (m eters ASL)

! ! Hydro LineRa ilwa yW a tercourseAN SI, Ea rth ScienceAN SI, Life Science

Municipa l Bounda ry Provincia lly Signific a nt W etla nd W a terb odyW ooded Area

Project Location

Lake Huron

Lake Erie

Lake Ontario

ONTARIO

QUEBEC

Draft

Figure 2: Fatalities by Date, 2016

0

1

2

3

05/0

4/16

05/0

6/16

05/1

0/16

05/1

3/16

05/1

7/16

05/2

0/16

05/2

4/16

05/2

7/16

05/3

1/16

06/0

3/16

06/0

7/16

06/1

0/16

06/1

4/16

06/1

7/16

06/2

1/16

06/2

4/16

06/2

7/16

06/3

0/16

07/0

5/16

07/0

8/16

07/1

2/16

07/1

5/16

07/1

9/16

07/2

3/16

07/2

6/16

07/2

9/16

08/0

1/16

08/0

4/16

08/0

9/16

08/1

0/16

08/1

2/16

08/1

6/16

08/1

9/16

08/2

3/16

08/2

6/16

08/3

0/16

09/0

2/16

09/0

6/16

09/0

9/16

09/1

3/16

09/1

6/16

09/2

0/16

09/2

3/16

09/2

7/16

10/0

4/16

10/0

7/16

10/1

1/16

10/1

4/16

10/1

8/16

10/2

1/16

10/2

5/16

10/2

8/16

Num

ber

of F

ata

litie

s

Date

Raptor

Bird

Bat

Figure 3: Fatalities by Turbine, 2016

0

1

2

3

4

5

102 103 105 106 108 112 109 114 115 117

Num

ber

of F

ata

litie

s

Turbine Number

Raptor

Bird

Bat


APPENDIX B: ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

MONITORING PLAN

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN

File Number: 160960698 May 2013 Prepared for: Grand Valley Wind Farms Inc. Suite 502, 216 Chrislea Road Woodbridge, ON, L4L 8S5 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Suite 1 - 70 Southgate Drive Guelph ON N1G 4P5

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN FOR WILDLIFE

i

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1.1

2.0 POST-CONSTRUCTION MONITORING PROGRAM ....................................................... 2.1 2.1 PURPOSE AND TIMING................................................................................................... 2.1 2.2 PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION – MORTALITY MONITORING ........................................ 2.2

2.2.1 Birds .................................................................................................................. 2.2 2.2.2 Bats ................................................................................................................... 2.5 2.2.3 Mortality Search Areas ...................................................................................... 2.6

2.3 PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION – POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL MONITORING PLAN COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................ 2.6 2.3.1 Significant Wildlife Habitat ................................................................................. 2.6

2.4 REPORTING AND REVIEW OF RESULTS ...................................................................... 2.7

3.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM .......................................................................... 3.1 3.1 MORTALITY MONITORING ............................................................................................. 3.1

3.1.1 Birds .................................................................................................................. 3.1 3.1.2 Bats ................................................................................................................... 3.2

3.2 CONTINGENCY PLAN ..................................................................................................... 3.3 3.2.1 Contingency Plan for Mass Mortality of Birds ..................................................... 3.3 3.2.2 Contingency Plan for Continued Significant Bat Mortality .................................. 3.3 3.2.3 Contingency Plan for Significant Wildlife Habitat ................................................ 3.4

4.0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ................................................................................ 4.1 4.1 DATA MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................... 4.1 4.2 WHITE-NOSE SYNDROME .............................................................................................. 4.1 4.3 BAT TISSUE SAMPLES ................................................................................................... 4.1

5.0 CLOSURE ........................................................................................................................ 5.1

6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 6.1

List of Appendices

Appendix A Table 1. Summary Of EEMP For Significant Natural Features Appendix B Post-Construction Monitoring Methods


1.1

1.0 Introduction

Grand Valley Wind Farms Inc. (GVWF) is proposing to develop, construct, operate and decommission the 40 megawatt (MW) Grand Valley Wind Farms - Phase 3 Wind Project (the Project) in the Town of Grand Valley and Township of Amaranth, Dufferin County in response to the Government of Ontario’s initiative to promote the development of renewable electricity in the province.

The Project Study Area is generally bordered on the north by Highway 89, on the south by County Road 109, on the east by 9th Line and on the west by East West Luther Townline. The proposed Project Location includes all parts of the land in, on or over which the Project is proposed (the ‘construction area’ for the Project).

The basic components of the Project include:

• Between 14 and 17 wind turbine generators (Siemens SWT-2.3-113 and/or SWT 3.0-113 turbine) with a total maximum installed nameplate capacity of 40MW. The turbine models are identical in structure, and would be ‘de-rated’, generating less electricity per turbine to meet the contract nameplate capacity. Noise Assessment Reports have been completed for both turbine models as part of the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process;

• A 34.5 kV underground power line collector system that would transport the electricity generated from the Project to the Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI) transmission system;

• Fibre optic cabling laid with the underground collector lines;

• Turbine access roads;

• Crane pads;

• One connection point to the existing HONI electrical transmission system;

• Existing operations and maintenance facilities to be leased by the Project (joining the current facilities for the operation of the Grand Valley Phase 1 and 2 Wind Projects). The currently municipally-serviced office facility is located at 35A Main Street South, Grand Valley and the currently unserviced warehouse facility is located at 27 Mill Street West, Grand Valley;

• Existing parking (owned) and gravel quarry (leased) sites to be used for employee parking and temporary construction trailer sites (174321 and 173395 County Road 25, Grand Valley);

• A 34.5 kV/230 kV 45 MVA transformer station; and,

• Meteorological equipment, including an approximately 100 m MET tower or a ground mounted SoDAR unit.

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN FOR WILDLIFE Introduction May 2013

1.2

Temporary components include:

• Work and storage areas during construction at the turbine locations and along the underground power line collector system; and,

• Office, parking and storage areas during construction for the work crews during the construction phase of the Project.

This Post-Construction Monitoring Program is one component of the Mitigation and Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan (EEMP) of the REA Application for the Project, and has been prepared in accordance with O. Reg. 359/09, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources’ (MNR’s) Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (September 2009), the Ministry of the Environment’s (MOE’s) Technical Guide to Renewable Energy Approvals (MOE 2012), MNR’s Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (July 2011) and MNR’s Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (December 2011).

As discussed in the Project’s Natural Heritage Assessment (NHA; Stantec, 2013), primary data was collected in the Project Study Area pre-construction. This data was augmented with secondary data from published and unpublished sources to generate a dataset from which to assess the potential effects of the Project.

All Project components, including all Turbines and blade sweeps, access roads and temporary construction areas, are located outside candidate wildlife habitat features as documented in Section 4.0 of the NHA (Stantec, 2013). Regardless of potential impacts, post-construction mortality surveys are required for all Class 3 and 4 wind power projects (MNR 2011a and b).

As indicated in the Environmental Impact Study (EIS; Stantec, 2013), prepared in accordance with section 38(2) of the Renewable Energy Approvals Regulation (O.Reg 359/09), the following wildlife habitat features will receive post-construction monitoring:

• Amphibian breeding habitat (wetland): ABWE-2

• Amphibian breeding habitat (woodland): ABWO-1 to ABWO-9, and ABWO-13 to ABWO-15

• Bat Maternity Colonies: BMC-1 and BMC-2

• Marsh breeding bird habitat: MBB-1

• Waterfowl nesting area: WNA-3 and WNA-4

Habitat use surveys are planned for 2013 in all wildlife habitats carried forward to the EIS to confirm or deny significance as per the Draft SWH Ecoregion 6E Criterion Schedule (MNR, 2012b).

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN FOR WILDLIFE Introduction May 2013

1.3

The purpose of this EEMP is to assess the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures and to verify compliance of the Project with applicable provincial and federal legislation and guidelines. This monitoring plan provides details on the post-construction wildlife monitoring program for mortality monitoring birds and bats, and all wildlife habitats carried forward to the EIS.


2.1

2.0 Post-Construction Monitoring Program

2.1 PURPOSE AND TIMING

The purpose of the wildlife post-construction monitoring program is to identify performance objectives, assess the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures and to identify contingency measures that will be implemented if performance objectives cannot be met. Furthermore, any unanticipated potentially significant adverse environmental effects discovered during the post-construction monitoring program will be mitigated as described in Section 3.0.

Post-construction monitoring for wildlife and wildlife habitat includes the following:

• mortality monitoring for birds and bats: twice weekly (3-4 day intervals) mortality monitoring at 10 turbines from May 1 to October 31, and weekly monitoring for raptors during November, for a period of three years. Searcher efficiency and scavenger trials will be conducted each year according to current guidance documents.

Additional monitoring may occur to address the following habitats, depending on findings of pre-construction surveys as described by the NHA (Section 5):

• potential disturbance to amphibian breeding habitat (wetland and woodland): pre-construction anuran call surveys will be conducted in April, May, and June to determine significance of thirteen features (ABWO-1 to ABWO-9, AWBO-13-15, and ABWE-2); surveys will continue for 1-3 years post-construction in any habitats confirmed as significant wildlife habitat, following the same protocols.

• potential disturbance to bat maternity colonies: pre-construction exit surveys will be conducted in June to determine significance of feature BMC-1; surveys will continue for 3 years post-construction in any habitats confirmed as significant wildlife habitat, following the same protocols.

• potential disturbance to waterfowl nesting areas: pre-construction surveys (areas searches and point counts) will be conducted (three rounds) in May-July to determine significance of two features (WNA-3 and WNA-4); surveys will continue for 1-3 years post-construction in any habitats confirmed as significant wildlife habitat, following the same protocols.

• potential disturbance to marsh breeding bird habitat: pre-construction surveys (point count) will be conducted (three rounds) in May-July to determine significance of feature MBB 1; surveys will continue for 1-3 years post-construction in any habitats confirmed as significant wildlife habitat, following the same protocols.

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN FOR WILDLIFE Post-Construction Monitoring Program May 2013

2.2

2.2 PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION – MORTALITY MONITORING

Detailed monitoring methods, including duration and frequency, are discussed below.

2.2.1 Birds

Background

Data from wind projects currently operating in Ontario and around the world indicates that very low numbers of bird fatalities occur as a result of wind power projects (MNR 2011a). Data from Ontario and the United States indicates that approximately two birds per year are killed by individual turbines, which is very low compared to other existing sources of human caused avian mortality (MNR 2011a). Birds can be killed through collisions with turbine blades and towers, guy wires, meteorological towers and maintenance vehicles. Mortality rates and patterns are affected by density and behavior of birds found in the area, the presence of landscape features such as ridges, valleys, peninsulas and shorelines and weather conditions.

Monitoring

Bird mortality monitoring will be conducted according to MNR’s Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (MNR, 2011a).

Mortality monitoring within minimally-vegetated portions (i.e., Visibility Classes 1 and 2 [MNR, 2011a and b]) of a 50 m search area radius from the base of ten wind turbines will be conducted twice-weekly (3-4 day intervals) between May 1 and October 31 for a period of three years. A weekly mortality survey will be conducted at all turbines in November to assess raptor mortality.

Although all reasonable effort will be made to conduct surveys as scheduled, surveys will not be conducted if weather (e.g. lightning, severe fog) presents safety concerns. Weather conditions will be noted when surveys were not conducted as scheduled, and every attempt will be made to complete the missed survey(s) as soon as possible.

Searcher efficiency and scavenger trials will be conducted in accordance with Environment Canada (EC) and MNR guidelines. Searcher efficiency trials will typically be conducted once in each of spring, summer and fall, but will be repeated if searchers change during the year. Searcher efficiency trials are designed to correct for carcasses that may be overlooked by surveyors during the survey periods. Searcher efficiency trials involve a “tester” that places bird and bat carcasses under turbines prior to the standard carcass searches to test the searcher’s detection rate. These trials are considered ‘blind’ trials; the testers are unaware when or where they are being tested. Each trial will consist of a minimum of 10 carcasses per searcher per visibility class. No more than three trial carcasses would be placed at any one time.

Searcher efficiency (Se) is calculated for each searcher as follows:

Se = number of test carcasses found number of test carcasses placed – number of test carcasses scavenged


2.3

A weighted average, or “overall Se”, will be calculated to account for varying survey effort between searchers. The overall Se will be calculated as follows:

Seo = Se1(n1/T) + Se2(n2/T) + Se3(n3/T) + Se4(n4/T)

where: Seo is the overall searcher efficiency;

Se1 –Se4 are individual searcher efficiency ratings;

n1 – n4 is quantity of search days completed by each searcher; and

T is the total number of search days completed by all searchers.

Scavenger trials will be conducted once a month (May-Oct) and will involve 10 carcasses of bird and bat turbine fatalities, if available, or dark-coloured poultry chicks. If available, at least one raptor carcass will be used for some trials. Test carcasses will be place out singly at turbines and distributed across the project area. . Scavenger trials are designed to correct for carcasses that are removed by predators before the search period. These trials involve the distribution of carcasses in habitat types being searched, at known locations at each wind turbine generator, followed by periodic checking to determine the rate of removal. Proportions of carcasses remaining after each search interval are pooled to calculate the overall scavenger correction factors:

Sc = nvisit1 + nvisit2 + nvisit3+ nvisit4,, where nvisit0 + nvisit1 + nvisit2+ nvisit3

Sc is the proportion of carcasses not removed by scavengers over the search period

nvisit0 is the total number of carcasses placed

nvisit1 – nvisit4 are the numbers of carcasses remaining on visits 1 through 4

There are numerous published and unpublished approaches to incorporating these corrective factors into an overall assessment of total bird and bat mortality. The estimated mortality will be calculated as follows:

C = c / (Seo x Sc x Ps), where

C is the corrected number of bird or bat fatalities

c is the number of carcasses found

Seo is the proportion of carcasses expected to be found by searchers (overall searcher efficiency)

Sc is the proportion of carcasses not removed by scavengers over the search period


2.4

Ps is the percent of the area searched.

Most birds and bats will fall within 50 m of the turbine base (MNR 2011a). This value will be used to determine the percent of area searched (Ps). When the entire 50 m radius search area is searched, Ps will equal 100%. If portions of the 50 m radius search area are impossible or futile to search due to site conditions, Ps will be adjusted accordingly based on the searchers’ ongoing estimates of the proportion of the search area that was physically searched. If feasible, a GPS will be used to delineate the search area and calculate the Ps.

The area searched will be determined for each turbine by mapping searchable areas on a grid (by visibility class) and counting the number of searched grid cells within 50 m. Maps of the varying search areas will be made available to review agencies. The summed area of those cells will be divided by the total area within a 50 m radius circle to determine the percent area searched for that turbine (Psx, where x is the turbine number).

Psx = area searched within 50 m radius circle 7854 m2

The overall Ps for the facility will be calculated as the average of Ps1 through Ps10.

Observed fatalities will be photographed, and the species, GPS coordinates, substrate, carcass conditions, possible injuries, sex (if possible) and distance and direction to the nearest turbine will be recorded along with the date, time, weather conditions and searcher. This approach to mortality monitoring will facilitate any potential correlation between mortality occurrences, turbine location, habitat/land use features, weather conditions and season.

Bird carcasses in good condition may be collected and stored in a freezer for future use in searcher efficiency and/or scavenger removal trials. Persons handling bird carcasses will take reasonable precautions (e.g. gloves, tools etc.) to protect their personal health. Bird carcasses will be placed in heavy-duty plastic bags and transported that day to a freezer, where they will be stored until required for the trials. Carcasses of any species covered under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (“ESA”) or the federal Species at Risk Act (“SARA”) will be collected in a manner consistent with the conditions of applicable permits (see below).

As of 30 June 2008, species that are extirpated, endangered, or threatened are protected under the ESA. Consequently, unless otherwise authorized, possession and transport of species at risk is prohibited under the ESA. Therefore, in order to carry out the various activities contemplated in this Plan, a permit under clause 17(2)b of the ESA is necessary to allow GVWF and its agents to collect, possess, and transport species at risk as obtained from the Project Study Area. Any conditions attached to the permit relating to handling of injured birds, including raptors and species at risk, will be adhered to.

Additionally, in support of the activities contemplated in this Plan, GVWF or its agents will apply for a scientific collector’s permit under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (“FWCA”) from the MNR that would allow the possession or transport of a species protected by this legislation.


2.5

Finally, GVWF or its agents will apply to EC (Canadian Wildlife Service) for a scientific collector’s permit under the Migratory Bird Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA) that would allow GVWF and its agents to collect, possess, and to utilize for scientific research purposes deceased specimens of migratory birds obtained from the study area.

Other permits, approvals, authorizations, etc., are not likely to be required from the MNR or EC to permit the monitoring activities contemplated in this Plan.

If an injured bird is found, the local MNR District will be contacted, and the injured bird will be brought to a near-by wildlife rehabilitation facility.

2.2.2 Bats

Background

Bat mortality has been documented at wind power facilities in a variety of habitats across North America. Nearly every monitored wind power facility in the United States and Canada has reported bat mortality with minimum annual mortality varying from < 1 to 50 bat fatalities/ turbine/year (MNR 2006). The majority of bat fatalities at wind power facilities occur in the late summer and fall, and the long-distance migratory bats (i.e., hoary bat, eastern red bat, silver-haired bat) appear to be most vulnerable to collisions with moving turbine blades. Specific factors causing bat mortality and affecting species vulnerability to wind turbine mortality remain unclear, although recent evidence from Alberta suggests that air pressure differences in the blade vortices may contribute to bat mortality. Ontario specific data is relatively sparse at this time. Current evidence from operating facilities in Ontario suggests that bat mortality is lowest in open farmland away from forests and major waterbodies (MNR 2011b).

Monitoring

Bat mortality monitoring will be conducted according to MNR’s Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (2011b). In general, the mortality monitoring requirements for bats will be captured in conjunction with bird mortality monitoring (described above).

• Bat mortality monitoring will be conducted twice-weekly (3-4 day intervals) within minimally-vegetated portions (i.e., Visibility Classes 1 and 2 [MNR, 2011b]) of a 50 m search area radius from the base of 10 turbines between May 1 and October 31st for a three-year period in accordance with MNR guidelines. This time period includes the core season when resident and migratory bats are active. Bat mortality monitoring will be conducted in conjunction with other monitoring activities (birds) for efficiency.

• Searcher efficiency trials will be conducted seasonally and carcass removal trials will be conducted monthly between May 1 and October 31st. Searcher efficiency and carcass removal rates are known to be more variable for bats than for birds throughout the year and depending on habitat (in part due to the relative size of the species).


2.6

As with birds, trial carcasses will be discreetly marked so they can be identified as study carcasses. Each trial will consist of a minimum of 10 carcasses per searcher per visibility class (for searcher efficiency trials) or per trial (for scavenger removal trials). At least one-third of the trial carcasses should be bats.

Bat carcasses in good condition may be collected and stored in a freezer for future use in searcher efficiency and/or scavenger removal trials. Persons handling bat carcasses will take reasonable precautions (e.g., gloves, tools etc.) to protect their personal health. All searchers will ensure they have updated rabies pre-exposure vaccinations. Biological material will be disposed of in a way to ensure that it does not pose a public or environmental health risk and in accordance with any applicable federal, provincial, and municipal laws.

If an injured bat is found, the local MNR District will be contacted, and the injured bat will be brought to a near-by wildlife rehabilitation facility.

2.2.3 Mortality Search Areas

Based on MNR guidelines and on industry standards, the search area will be 50 m from a wind turbine base. Since it may not always be possible to search the entire radius because of the presence of thick or tall vegetation, steep slopes, active cultivation, etc. the actual area searched during the mortality surveys will be calculated at each turbine, using a GPS. A map of the actual search area for each turbine searched, and a description of areas deemed to be unsearchable (e.g. vegetation height, type, slope, etc.), will be provided in the mortality report.

Given the proposed turbines have 55m blade length, consideration will be given to carcasses that may fall beyond the 50m search radius. Additional carcass searching will be conducted in a 10m wide search area (i.e. 50-60m from turbine base) to determine if and to what extend bird and bat carcasses fall beyond the 50m radius. The search area correction factor will be modified if required.

2.3 PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION – POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL MONITORING PLAN COMPONENTS

Detailed monitoring methods, including duration and frequency, for potential additional wildlife factors are discussed below.

2.3.1 Significant Wildlife Habitat

All wildlife habitat areas carried forward to the EIS are treated as significant and will be investigated prior to construction. Pre-construction surveys will document the baseline condition and determine if any features qualify as significant wildlife habitat as per evaluation methods described in the NHA (Section 5.0). Any confirmed areas of significant wildlife habitat may be subject to a post-construction monitoring program to assess any actual operational effects to wildlife use. The program will incorporate pre-construction methods and supplemental surveys


2.7

where appropriate. Table 1, Appendix A provides a summary of these potential monitoring components by feature type. Complete methods are provided in Appendix B.

MNR, along with the proponent and other relevant agencies, will collectively review the results of the post-construction monitoring to determine if an ecologically significant disturbance/ avoidance effect is occurring, and whether such an effect is attributable to the wind turbines and not external factors. These discussions will determine if and when contingency measures will be undertaken. The best available science and information should be considered when determining appropriate mitigation.

2.4 REPORTING AND REVIEW OF RESULTS

Annual post-construction monitoring reports will summarize and analyze the results of all wildlife surveys. Reports will be submitted to the MOE within three months of the conclusion of the November mortality monitoring.

The monitoring program will be reassessed by MNR and GVWF at the end of each monitoring year. Pending the reassessment results, the program methods, frequencies, and duration may be reasonably modified to better reflect the findings.


3.1

3.0 Adaptive Management Program

The adaptive management program described in this section outlines performance objectives, and contingency measures that will be implemented should the performance objectives not be met.

Contingency measures may include an adaptive management approach. An adaptive management program allows mitigation measures to be implemented in the event that unanticipated potentially significant adverse environmental effects are observed. Potentially significant adverse effects will be assessed through review of the annual report.

The following sections describe the procedures for notifications, reporting and adaptive management for mortality and disturbance effects monitoring. An additional section describes a contingency plan for both birds and bats if mass mortality occurs/continues after implementation of the mitigation measures discussed below.


All bird and bat mortality will be reported in the annual report submission. Mortality rate is expressed as the number of fatalities per turbine per year (e.g. from May 1 to November 30). Mortality of priority species in Bird Conservation Region (“BCR”) 13 and mortality of all species of conservation concern, such as raptors and declining woodland breeding bird species, will be highlighted in the annual post-construction monitoring reports. A threshold approach will be used to identify and mitigation potential negative effects resulting from the operation of wind turbines.

3.1.1 Birds

Post-construction mitigation, including operational controls, will be considered if annual mortality (e.g. from May 1 to November 30) of birds exceeds any of the following thresholds defined by the MNR (2011a):

• 14 birds/ turbine/year at individual turbines or turbine groups;

• 0.2 raptors /turbine/year across a wind power project; or

• 0.1 raptors of provincial conservation concern/turbine/year across a wind power project.

Or if bird mortality during a single mortality monitoring survey exceeds:

• 10 or more birds at any one turbine; or

• 33 or more birds (including raptors) at multiple turbines.

GRAND VALLEY WIND FARMS – PHASE 3 WIND PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MONITORING PLAN FOR WILDLIFE Adaptive Management Program May 2013

3.2

Mortality levels maintained below these thresholds are considered unlikely to affect bird populations (MNR 2011a).

Any and all observed mortality of species at risk (i.e., a species listed as Endangered, Threatened or Special Concern under Schedule 1 of the federal SARA or a species listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario list as Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern under the provincial ESA) that occurs will be reported immediately to EC and/or the MNR.

If with due consideration of seasonal abundance and species composition, annual mortality levels at turbines located outside 120 m of bird SWH exceed the thresholds noted above, two years of subsequent scoped mortality and cause and effects monitoring will be conducted. Following scoped monitoring, post-construction mitigation (e.g., operation mitigation) and effectiveness monitoring may be required at individual turbines where a mortality effect has been identified or significant annual mortality persists (MNR 2011a).

If significant annual mortality persists, MNR will be engaged to initiate an appropriate response plan as set out in the MNR’s Bird Guidelines (2011a). The response plan would include an analysis of the species, timing and distribution of fatalities to determine potential risk factors leading to mortality. The analysis may include an evaluation of the mortality data and/or behavioral studies to better refine when and where species are most at risk of collision. The results of this analysis will be used to develop mitigation measures, which may include some or all of the following mitigation measures (or alternate plan reasonably agreed to between GVWF and the MNR1):

• Periodic shut-down of select turbines at specific times of year (MNR 2011a)

• Blade feathering at specific times of year (MNR 2011a)

In the unlikely event of a mass mortality occurrence, a contingency plan is discussed below in Section 3.2.1.

3.1.2 Bats

Operational mitigation is required where annual post-construction mortality monitoring exceeds 10 bats per turbine per year (MNR, 2011b).

Operational mitigation to be implemented includes increasing cut-in speed to 5.5 m/s or feathering wind turbine blades when wind speeds are below 5.5 m/s between sunset and sunrise, from July 15 to September 30. This mitigation should continue for the duration of the project, as set out in the MNR’s Bat Guidelines (2011b).

1 An alternate plan maintains flexibility within the Plan to consider alternative response ideas that may arise over the course of the Plan (e.g., new technologies that may reduce bird or bat fatalities).


3.3

In the event of continued significant bat mortality occurrence, a contingency plan is discussed below in Section 3.3.2.

Where post-construction mitigation is applied for either birds or bats, an additional 3 years of effectiveness monitoring is required (MNR 2011b).

3.2 CONTINGENCY PLAN

3.2.1 Contingency Plan for Mass Mortality of Birds

To date, there have been no recorded events of mass mortality of birds at wind farms in Ontario. The various post-construction monitoring projects in Ontario typically record between 0 to 2 bird fatalities at individual turbines during any one survey, with only a single record of 3 birds fatalities observed at one turbine during a single visit (Friesen, 2011). As such, the risk of a mass mortality event for birds is anticipated to be very low.

In the event of a mass mortality event, defined as 10 or more bird fatalities at any one turbine, or 33 or more bird fatalities at multiple turbines on a single survey, the following steps will be implemented:

1. MNR will be notified of the event immediately and will be provided with any available details (e.g. species, number and distribution of turbines involved).

2. An emergency search of all turbines in the project will be conducted as soon as feasibly possible to determine the extent and the distribution of the mortality event.

3. An analysis of the results of the emergency search will be completed to identify potential risk factors (e.g., weather conditions, proximity to natural heritage features) leading to the mortality event.

4. Based on the risk factors identified, additional mitigation and scoped monitoring recommendations will be developed in conjunction with MNR with the goal of avoiding future mortality events.

3.2.2 Contingency Plan for Continued Significant Bat Mortality

Additional mitigation measures may be implemented in the event of continued significant bat mortality (i.e., more than 10 bats/turbine/year) after the mitigation measures outlined in Section 3.1.2 have been implemented. Should the cut-in speed mitigation be implemented and the bat mortality threshold continues to be exceeded, GVWF will work with the MNR to determine additional mitigation and scoped monitoring requirements.


3.4

3.2.3 Contingency Plan for Significant Wildlife Habitat

MNR along with the proponent will be asked to collectively review the results of the post-construction monitoring to determine if an ecologically significant disturbance/avoidance effect has occurred and whether such an effect is attributable to the wind turbines and not external factors.

Should performance objectives not be met for the potential additional monitoring components identified in Section 2.2.3, the following actions will be implemented:

• Compare declines to population trends noted through local or province-wide monitoring;

• Develop additional control/impact studies to assess whether decline is due to turbine disturbance, and determine extent of disturbance effect; and/or

• Investigate habitat management means to improve trend.

Additional monitoring and/or mitigation may be required where post-construction monitoring identifies ecologically significant disturbance/avoidance effects associated with the habitat. Mitigation techniques may include (but are not limited to) operational controls, such as periodic shut-down and/or blade feathering as per MNR’s Bird and Bird Habitat Guidelines (2011). Results will be reviewed collectively by the proponent, MNR and other relevant agencies to determine if and when additional monitoring and/or mitigation is required. The best available science and information should be considered when determining appropriate mitigation.

Contingency measures are summarized by features type in Table 1, Appendix A.


4.1

4.0 Best Management Practices

GVWF will include the following best management practices as part of the post-construction monitoring program (as outlined in MNR, 2011a and 2011b).

4.1 DATA MANAGEMENT

All pre- and post-construction data, collected in accordance with MNR guidance and reported to the MOE, will be submitted to the joint Canadian Wildlife Service – Canadian Wind Energy Association – Bird Studies Canada – Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wind Power and Birds Monitoring Database.

4.2 WHITE-NOSE SYNDROME

Carcasses of the following species found during bat mortality searches may be sent to the Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre for analysis of White-nose Syndrome and should not be used in carcass removal or searcher efficiency trials:

• Myotis septentrionalis

• Myotis lucifugus

• Myotis leibii

• Perimyotis subflavus

• Eptesicus fuscus

4.3 BAT TISSUE SAMPLES

Tissue samples from bat carcasses may be used in a number of DNA analyses to provide insight into population size and structure, as well as the geographic origin migrants. GVWF will contact the local MNR office prior to disposing bat carcasses, to determine if this type of research is occurring in the area.


5.1

5.0 Closure

This Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan for Wildlife for the Grand Valley Wind Farms - Phase 3 Wind Project has been prepared by Stantec for GVWF in accordance with Ontario Regulation 359/09.

This report has been prepared by Stantec for the sole benefit of GVWF, and may not be used by any third party without the express written consent of GVWF. The data presented in this report are in accordance with Stantec’s understanding of the Project as it was presented at the time of reporting.

STANTEC CONSULTING LTD.

Sean Spisani Senior Ecologist


6.1

6.0 References

Friesen, L. 2011. No evidence of large-scale fatality events at Ontario wind projects in Ontario Birds, Volume 29, No. 3, December 2011: pages 149- 155.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment. 2012. Technical Guide to Renewable Energy Approvals. 41 pp.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2006. Wind Turbines and Bats: Bat Ecology Background Information and Literature Review of Impacts. December 2006.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2009. Approval and Permitting Requirements Document

for Renewable Energy Projects. 200 pp. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011a. Birds And Bird Habitats: Guidelines For Wind

Power Projects. 32 pp.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011b. Bats And Bat Habitats: Guidelines For Wind Power Projects. 25 pp.


Appendix A

Table 1. Summary Of EEMP For Significant Natural Features

Table 1. Summary of the Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan for significant/provincially significant natural features

Unique Feature ID Potential Negative Environmental Effects

Performance Objective Mitigation Strategy


Contingency Measure Methodology Monitoring

Locations Frequency and

Duration of Sample Collection

Technical and Statistical Value

of Data Reporting Requirements

Significant Wetlands Potential disturbance effects to wetland hydrology and potential sedimentation.

Indirect impacts such as dust generation, sedimentation and erosion and spills, are mitigated via measures described in Table B8, Appendix B.

Maintain hydrological flows to significant wetlands.

Infrastructure sited outside of all candidate significant bat maternity colonies.

Installation of culverts to maintain hydrological conditions.

See Table BA, Appendix B for complete mitigation measures.

Inspection of culverts to ensure flow maintained.

The periphery of significant wetlands.

Hydrological conditions will be monitored once seasonally in each of spring and summer during the first year post-construction.

Determine if there is a disturbance to hydrological conditions that could impact provincially significant wetland features.

Notify MNR of hydrological issues and actions taken to resolve the issue. Any negative impacts that occurred to the provincially significant wetland will also be reported to MNR and where necessary will be restored.

Contingency measures will be determined in consultation with MNR.

Significant Woodlands

Indirect impacts related to infrastructure maintenance, such as dust generation, sedimentation and erosion, spills, accidental damage to trees, and noise/light disturbances to wildlife are mitigated via measures described in Table B8, Appendix B.

Minimize potential indirect impacts to the extent possible.


Implement mitigation strategies as described in Table B8, Appendix B.

Not required. Not required. Not required. Not required. Not required. Not required

Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Woodland and Wetland): ABWO-1 to ABWO-9, AWBO-13-15, and ABWE-2 (Pre-construction survey required to verify significance of these features. If significant the following mitigation measures, monitoring plan and contingency measures will be implemented)

Loss of species diversity and abundance though habitat damage.

Continued use of the habitat by breeding amphibians. No amphibian mortality on access roads.

Infrastructure sited outside of all candidate significant amphibian breeding habitats (woodland and wetlands)

Speed limit signage will be erected to restrict vehicle speeds to 30km/hr

Restrict vehicle traffic to daytime hours, and limit speeds to 30 km or less on roads near woodland amphibian breeding ponds (including signage). Limit maintenance activity within 120 m of significant amphibian habitats to daylight hours between March 15 and June 30 (for significant frog breeding habitats) to avoid excessive noise and vehicle caused mortality. See Table BA, Appendix B for complete mitigation measures.

Anuran call surveys in April, May, and June. Pre-construction monitoring protocol is detailed in the EIS. Call surveys will be conducted following Bird Studies Canada’s Marsh Monitoring Protocol (BSC 2003). See Section 5.3.3.1 of the report for full details. Post-construction monitoring will follow the same methods.

Within features listed. Post-construction monitoring locations will be the same as pre-construction monitoring locations.

Pre-construction Survey (baseline):

• Spring 2013 Post-construction Survey:

• Spring 2015 (for all significant features)

Post-construction Survey if required based on results of Spring 2015 survey and consultation with MNR:



Determine if there is a loss of species abundance through displacement or avoidance effect caused by infrastructure located in proximity to habitat.

Annual Reports submitted to MNR. Estimated Report Submission Dates:

1. Summer 2013 (preconstruction data)

2. Summer 2015 (yr 1 post-construction)

If required based on results of Spring 2015 survey and consultation with MNR:



Upon submission of annual post-construction monitoring reports to MNR it will be determined in consultation with MNR whether contingency measures are required and the contingency measures to be undertaken. Because no operational impacts to this habitat are anticipated, if no impacts are observed after one year of post-construction monitoring, monitoring will not continue after one year.

Bat Maternity Colonies (BMC-1 and BMC-2)

Habitat Avoidance/disturbance potentially caused by turbines within 120m:

Continued use of the habitat by the species (Little brown


All features deemed significant will be surveyed post-

A map illustrating selected survey

Exit surveys will be conducted in all significant bat maternity

Determine if there is a displacement or avoidance

Pre-construction: September 2013 (pre-

Upon submission of annual post-construction monitoring reports to MNR it will be










(Pre-construction survey required to verify significance of BMC-1. If significant the following mitigation measures, monitoring plan and contingency measures will be implemented). No access to BMC-2, assumed significant

T102 (BMC-1) T105 (BMC-2)

bat, Eastern Small-footed bat, Northern Long-eared bat, Tricolored Bat, or Silver-haired Bat) that currently inhabit the feature. White nose syndrome may have an impact on the abundance of bats, specifically Northern long-eared and Little Brown bats.

construction using the same methods (exit counts). See Section 5.3.3.2 of the report for full details.

trees within candidate significant bat maternity colony habitat will also be provided to MNR.

colony features for a period of 3 years beginning the first year of operation:

• Year 1 - June 2015



effect caused by turbines located within 120m of bat maternity colonies.

construction exit survey results)

Post-construction Reports:

1. Year 1 - September 2015

2. Year 2 – September 2016

3. Year 3 – September 2017

determined in consultation with MNR whether contingency measures are required and the contingency measures to be undertaken.

Waterfowl Nesting Areas (WNA-3 and WNA-4) (Pre-construction survey required to verify significance of these features. If significant the following mitigation measures, monitoring plan and contingency measures will be implemented)

Habitat Avoidance/disturbance potentially caused by turbines within 120m: T110 (WNA-3) T112 (WNA-4)

Continued use of the habitat by breeding waterfowl.

Infrastructure sited outside of all candidate significant waterfowl nesting habitats. See Table BA, Appendix B for complete mitigation measures.

All features deemed significant will be surveyed post-construction monitoring (brood rearing surveys) using the same methods. See Section 5.3.3.4 of the report for full details.
















Marsh Bird Breeding Habitat (MBB-1) (Pre-construction survey required to verify significance of these features. If significant the following mitigation measures, monitoring plan and contingency measures will be implemented)

Habitat Avoidance/disturbance potentially caused by turbines within 120m: T104 (MBB-1)

Continued use of the habitat by marsh breeding birds

Infrastructure sited outside of all candidate significant marsh bird breeding habitats. See Table BA, Appendix B for complete mitigation measures.

All features deemed significant will be surveyed post-construction monitoring (breeding bird surveys) using the same methods. See Section 5.3.3.3 of the report for full details.






• Spring 2016


















(for all significant features)



Appendix B

Post-Construction Monitoring Methods

Post-Construction Survey Methods: Anuran Call Surveys (ABWE2, AMBO1-9, and ABWO1-5)

Anuran call surveys will be conducted within all features, with evaluation methods to follow the ‘Marsh Monitoring Protocol’ (BSC, 2003). Amphibian call surveys will be conducted three times in 2013 between April, May, June. In some areas of the province, primarily southern Ontario, surveys may need to begin in March, with at least 15 days between each survey. Monitoring stations will be established a minimum of 500 m apart and 3 minute surveys were performed at each station, listening for all amphibian calls within a semi-circular sampling area. The locations of these surveys were be determined in the field where vernal pooling is present at the first survey, incorporating pre-construction survey locations described in the NHA (Stantec 2012) and on accompanying figures. The surveys will be conducted in the same locations for all three surveys. Surveying will begin one half-hour after sunset and end by midnight during evenings with little wind and minimum night air temperatures of 50C, 100C and 170C for each of the three respective survey periods. These temperature requirements are in place because amphibian calling intensity is strongly associated with season, time of day, and weather conditions.

Additional information that will be recorded on the appropriate data forms include:

• Weather conditions (temperature, wind speed (on a Beaufort scale), % cloud cover, and presence of any precipitation should be recorded).

• Date, time of day, and duration.

• Description of habitats or areas scanned during the surveys

• GPS coordinates of the call stations.

• Name of the observer(s) doing field work.

• Complete list of all amphibian species observed

Call abundance codes for each amphibian species detected as outlined below:

• Code 1: individual calls do not overlap and calling individuals can be discretely counted; NOTE: individual frogs need to be counted if Code 1 is assigned.

• Code 2: calls of individuals sometimes overlap, but numbers of individuals can still be estimated; NOTE: individual frogs need to be counted if Code 2 is assigned.

• Code 3: overlap among calls seems continuous (full chorus), and a count estimate is impossible; NOTE: individual frogs cannot be counted if Code 3 is assigned.

Post-Construction Survey Methods: Exit Surveys (BMC-1 and BMC-2)

Exit surveys will be conducted in the month of June within bat maternity colony BMC-1 (property access is not permitted to BMC-2). Each of a minimum 10 selected snag/cavity trees (i.e., BMC-1 is <10ha) will be monitored from 30 minutes before dusk until 60 minutes after dusk in

order to observe evidence of bats exiting the candidate snag/cavity tree. Each candidate roost tree will be monitored once.

Bat surveys and data analysis will be conducted by a biologist experienced in bat identification, monitoring. Acoustic analysis will also be conducted by experienced staff. A handheld GPS unit will be used to georeference trees where exit surveys are completed.

Candidate snag trees will incorporate trees identified during pre-construction surveys to the extent possible. The best candidate snag trees will be selected according to the following criteria (in order of importance):

• Tallest snag/cavity tree;

• Exhibits cavities or crevices most often originating as cracks, scars, knot holes or woodpecker cavities;

• Has the largest diameter breast height

• Is within the highest density of snags/cavity trees (e.g. clusters of snags);

• Has a large amount of loose, peeling bark;

• Cavity or crevice is high in snag/cavity tree (>10m);

• Tree species that provide good cavity habitat (e.g. white pine, maple, aspen, ash, oak);

• Canopy is more open (to determine canopy, determine the percentage of the ground covered by a vertical projection of the outermost perimeter of the natural spread of the foliage of trees) and

• Exhibits early stages of decay (decay class 1-3; refer to Watt and Caceres 1999)

Candidate roosts trees should be monitored for evidence of maternity colonies through exit surveys as follows:

• Observers should choose a viewing station with a clear aspect of cavity opening or crevice (multiple observers may be required if multiple openings are present in one snag)

• Surveys will be completed with the use of either human visual observation and/or the use of a low light, night-vision, or infrared video recorders. For the use of video recorders, viewing stations will be set-up prior to the exit survey timing window and will be conducted in the same habitat as where there are also human visual exit surveys being conducted. Once an evening’s monitoring is completed (60 minutes after sunset), the cameras will be collected by the field staff conducting visual surveys in the same habitat and the visual recordings for the each video recorder will be reviewed for evidence of significant bat roosting activity. After a suitable camera model has been identified, field staff will provide detailed camera specifications to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources prior to the onset of monitoring for confirmation that it will collect the information required.

• A bat detector should be used in conjunction with visual surveys to determine species. Microphones will be positioned to maximize bat detection (e.g. situated away from nearby obstacles to allow for maximum range detection, microphones angled slightly

away from the prevailing wind to minimize wind noise). The same broadband detector will be used throughout the survey. Information on the equipment used will be recorded, including information on all adjustable settings (e.g. gain level) and the position of the microphone. Audio data collected will be analyzed by biologists who are experienced in bat identification and monitoring.


• Weather conditions (temperature, wind speed (on a Beaufort scale), % cloud cover, and presence of any precipitation should be recorded);

• Date and time of day;

• GPS coordinates of the point location; and,

• Name of the observer doing field work

Post-Construction Survey Requirements: Breeding Bird Surveys (MBB-1)

Point count stations are located approximately 250 m apart throughout MBB1 as located in the NHA (Stantec 2012). Each station will be surveyed a minimum of 3 times: once early in the season (late May to early June); once in mid-season (mid to late June); and, once later in the season (July) with at least 10 days between surveys at a particular station. Each of the surveys will include a ten-minute point count at each location, conducted during the breeding season (May 1 to July 31). Point counts must be performed in the early morning, between dawn (one half hour before sunrise) and about 4 hours after sunrise. Surveys in late June and early July will be completed within 3 hours of sunrise. Surveys will be performed when the wind speed is 3 or less on the Beaufort scale and when there is no precipitation.

At each station, the surveyor will observe for ten minutes, recording all species seen or heard, along with an estimate of the number of individuals of each species and the highest level of breeding evidence observed. Surveyors will estimate the distance to each bird using a scale of 0–50 m, 50–100 m and further than 100 m. Birds that move during the survey will be recorded in the closest distance category that they entered during the survey. Data that will be reported are the number of birds of each species detected in each distance band. Birds that fly over without stopping should be recorded separately as ‘fly-overs’.

Playback surveys will supplement standard point counts to target less conspicuous species including Pied-billed Grebe, American Bittern, American Coot, Common Moorhen, and Virginia Rail. Playback surveys will immediately succeed 10 minute point counts at each station as follows:

• Surveys will play series of three calls (20 seconds) for each species, followed by 30 seconds of silence, documenting all species heard during periods of silence.

• A minimum of one minute of silence will occur between playback calls of different species.



• Date and time of day.

• GPS coordinates of each point location (same location is to be used for each survey).

• Name of the observer doing field work.

Post-Construction Survey Requirements: Brood Rearing Surveys (WNA-1 and WNA-3)

Area searches will be conducted at all open aquatic portions of the features using a combination of point counts and area searches. Surveyors will walk along routes specified in the NHA (Stantec 2012) to flush any occurring waterfowl, stopping at point counts and visually scanning open water for 10 minutes to observe swimming waterfowl.

Point count stations are located approximately 250 m apart throughout WNA-3 and WNA-4 to allow the entire open aquatic features to be observed. Each of the surveys will include a 10-minute point count at each location, conducted during the breeding season (May 1 to July 31). Each station will be surveyed a minimum of 3 times: once early in the season (May); once in mid-season (June); and, once later in the season (July) with at least 10 days between surveys at a particular station. Surveys must be performed during morning hours, between sunrise and about 6 hours after sunrise. Surveys will be performed when the wind speed is 4 or less on the Beaufort scale and when there is no precipitation.

At each station, the surveyor will observe for 10 minutes, recording all species seen or heard, along with an estimate of the number of individuals of each species, including estimates of brood size. Data that will be reported are the number of birds of each species detected during each the area search and point counts. Birds that fly over without stopping should be recorded separately as ‘fly-overs’. Additional information that will be recorded on the appropriate data forms include:


• Date and time of day.

• GPS coordinates of each point location (same location is to be used for each survey) and walking transect.

• Name of the observer doing field work.


APPENDIX C: TABLES


Appendix C - Tables February 24, 2017

C.1

TABLES Appendix C

Table 2.1: Categories of Carcass Condition

Code Category Description

I Injured. Individual still alive.

F Fresh Freshly dead with little or no decay or scavenging by insects; estimated 1 to 2 days.

E Early decomposition Recently dead but with early signs of decay or scavenging by insects; estimated 3 to 5 days.

M Moderate decomposition Noticeable signs of decay or scavenging by insects; estimated 6 to 7 days.

A Advanced decomposition Decomposed carcass, barely recognizable or not recognizable to species; estimated more than 7 days.

C Complete decomposition Residual remains, such as feathers, bones, other scraps of tissue.

S Scavenged Carcass is not intact.

Table 2.2: Categories of Visibility Class

Class % Vegetation Cover Vegetation Height

Class 1 (Easy) ≥ 90% bare ground ≤ 15cm tall

Class 2 (Moderate) ≥ 25% bare ground ≤ 15 cm tall

Class 3 (Difficult) ≤ 25% bare ground ≤ 25% > 30cm tall

Class 4 (Very difficult) Little to no bare ground ≥ 25% > 30cm tall

* Wind conditions expressed using Beaufort Scale: 0 – calm, <2km/hr 2 – light, 7-12 km/hr 4 – moderate, 20-30 km/hr 6 – strong, 41-51 km/hr 1 – light, 2-6 km/hr 3 – moderate, 13-19 km/hr 5 – fresh, 31-40 km/hr



C.2

Table 3.1: Results of Searcher Efficiency Trials, 2016

Month Searcher Placed Scavenged Found Individual SE (Sex) Spring AB 24 2 15 0.68

Summer AB 18 1 14 0.82

JC 17 0 8 0.47

Fall JC 24 3 13 0.62 SS 21 1 13 0.65

AB- Arianne Bohnert JC- Jing Chen SS- Sam Soehn

Table 3.2: Weighted Search Efficiencies, 2016

Surveyor Individual SE (Sex) No. Turb. Searched (nx)

Proportion Turb. Searched (nx / T)

Weighted Averages (Seo)

SPRING AB 0.68 176 1.00 0.68 SUMMER AB 0.82 98 0.61 0.50 JC 0.47 62 0.39 0.18 FALL JC 0.62 148 0.94 0.58 SS 0.65 10 0.04 0.04

AB- Arianne Bohnert JC- Jing Chen SS- Sam Soehn

Table 3.3: Scavenger Trials, 2016

Placed Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 4 Sc as a proportion

SPRING

# of Carcasses 20 17 14 11 7 0.79

SUMMER

# of Carcasses 20 15 9 4 3 0.65

FALL

# of Carcasses 20 17 9 5 2 0.65



C.3

Table 3.4: Average Monthly Percent Area Searched (Ps), 2016

Month Turbine Vegetation/Crop Ps (%) Average Ps (%)

May

102 Soy 0.63

0.94

103 Soy 1.00

105 Soy 1.00

106 Soy 0.83

108 Soy 0.99

109 Soy 1.00

112 Soy 1.00

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 1.00

117 Soy 1.00

June

102 Soy 1.00

0.98

103 Soy 1.00

105 Soy 1.00

106 Soy 1.00

108 Soy 0.97

109 Soy 1.00

112 Soy 0.82

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 1.00

117 Soy 1.00

July

102 Soy 1.00

0.99

103 Soy 1.00

105 Soy 0.97

106 Soy 1.00

108 Soy 1.00

109 Soy 1.00

112 Soy 0.97

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 1.00

117 Soy 1.00

August

102 Soy 0.89

0.90 103 Soy 0.90

105 Soy 0.86

106 Soy 0.87



C.4

Table 3.4: Average Monthly Percent Area Searched (Ps), 2016

Month Turbine Vegetation/Crop Ps (%) Average Ps (%) 108 Soy 0.88

109 Soy 0.88

112 Soy 0.86

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 0.86

117 Soy 1.00

September

102 Soy 1.00

1.00

103 Soy 1.00

105 Soy 0.96

106 Soy 1.00

108 Soy 1.00

109 Soy 1.00

112 Soy 1.00

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 1.00

117 Soy 1.00

October

102 Soy 1.00

1.00

103 Soy 1.00

105 Soy 0.96

106 Soy 1.00

108 Soy 1.00

109 Soy 1.00

112 Soy 1.00

114 Soy 1.00

115 Soy 1.00

117 Soy 1.00 Average % Searched 0.97



C.5

Table 3.5: Uncorrected Raptor Fatalities from Weekly Monitoring, 2016

Month Species Number of individuals Turbine Total per month May - - - 0

June Turkey Vulture 1 106 1

July - - - 0

August - - - 0

September - - - 0

October - - - 0

Total 1

Table 3.6: Corrected Monthly Raptor Mortality Estimates, 2016

Month c SE SC PS C C per MW C per Turbine

May 0 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00

June 1 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.02 0.04 0.10

July 0 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00

August 0 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00

September 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

October 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 1 1.02 0.04 0.10

c Number of small bird carcasses located (uncorrected)

Se Searcher Efficiency Trial Results

Sc Scavenger Trial Results

Ps Percent Area Surveyed

C Corrected Mortality Estimate

Per Turbine C Divided by Total Number of Turbines

Per MW C Divided by Total Number of MegaWatts



C.6

1- Does not include raptors

Table 3.8: Bird Fatalities per Turbine

Turbine May June July August September October Total

c C c C c C c C c C c C c C

102 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

103 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.48 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.48

105 1.00 1.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.58 2.00 4.44

106 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

108 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

109 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

112 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

114 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

115 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.63 0.00 0.00 2.00 4.96 3.00 7.59

117 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.26



Table 3.7: Uncorrected Monthly Bird1 Fatalities, 2016

Month Species Number of individuals Turbine Total per month May Golden-crowned Kinglet 1 105 1

June None n/a n/a 0

July None n/a n/a 0

August Red-eyed Vireo 1 115

2 Blackburnian Warbler 1 117

September American Goldfinch 1 103 1

October

Red-eyed Vireo 1 115

3 Golden-crowned Kinglet 1 105

Magnolia Warbler 1 115

Total 7



C.7

Table 3.9: Corrected Monthly Bird Mortality Estimates, 2016


May 1 0.68 0.79 0.94 1.98 0.08 0.20

June 0 0.68 0.79 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00

July 0 0.68 0.65 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00

August 2 0.68 0.65 0.90 5.00 0.20 0.50

September 1 0.62 0.65 1.00 2.48 0.10 0.25

October 3 0.62 0.65 1.00 7.44 0.30 0.79

TOTAL 7 16.90 0.68 1.69



Sc Scavenger Trial Results





Table 3.10: Uncorrected Monthly Bat Fatalities, 2016

Month Species Number of Individuals Turbine

May Silver-haired Bat 1 102

June Silver-haired Bat 1 105

July Eastern Red Bat 1 115

Hoary Bat 1 109

August

Eastern Red Bat 1 105

Hoary Bat 6 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 109

Silver-haired Bat 1 115

September

Bat Sp. 1 115

Eastern Red Bat 1 115

Silver-haired Bat 4 105, 106, 109, 117

October Silver-haired Bat 1 106

TOTAL 19



C.8

Table 3.11: Uncorrected Bat Fatalities by Turbine, 2016

Turbine Number of Individuals 102 2

103 1 105 4 106 2 108 1 109 4

112 0

114 1

115 3

117 1

Table 3.12: Corrected Bat Mortality Estimates, 2016


May 1 0.68 0.79 0.94 1.98 0.08 0.20

June 1 0.68 0.79 0.98 0.90 0.08 0.19

July 2 0.68 0.65 0.99 4.54 0.18 0.45

August 8 0.68 0.65 0.90 20.00 0.80 2.00

September 6 0.62 0.65 1.00 14.89 0.60 1.49

October 1 0.62 0.65 1.00 2.48 0.10 0.25

TOTAL 19 45.79 1.84 4.58

c Number of bat carcasses located (uncorrected)


Sc Scavenger Impact Trial Results







C.9

APPENDIX D: MORTALITY DATA

(CD)


APPENDIX E: FIELD FORMS

(CD)


APPENDIX F: NOTIFICATIONS

CONFIRMATION OF REGISTRATIONForm Name: Notice of Possession

Date Registration Filed: 06/21/2016

Confirmation ID: M-101-1135980984

Version Number: 001

Update Date:

70 Southgate DR , SUITE 1Guelph, ON N1G4H5

Dear Sir/Madam,


You have registered under section 2 or 3.2 of Ontario Regulation 666/98 under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act,1997 and/or subsection 23.15(6) of Ontario Regulation 242/08 under the Endangered Species Act, 2007.

Your Notice of Possession form has been received by the Ministry of Natural Resources for the possession of thefollowing:

Species Name: Turkey VultureCondition: WholeNumber Acquired: 1

You may be required to show this record for certain activities.

Registry and Approval Services CentreMinistry of Natural Resources300 Water StreetPeterborough, ON, K9J8M5Toll-free: 1-855-613-4256E-mail: [email protected]

Any questions related to this registration and/or the Natural Resources Registry should be directed to:

Please refer to Ontario Regulations 666/98 and/or 242/08 for requirements that apply to your activity.

CONFIRMATION OF REGISTRATIONForm Name: Notice of Possession

Date Registration Filed: 07/12/2016

Confirmation ID: M-101-9139522790

Version Number: 001

Update Date:

70 Southgate DR , SUITE 1Guelph, ON N1G4H5

Dear Sir/Madam,


You have registered under section 2 or 3.2 of Ontario Regulation 666/98 under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act,1997 and/or subsection 23.15(6) of Ontario Regulation 242/08 under the Endangered Species Act, 2007.

Your Notice of Possession form has been received by the Ministry of Natural Resources for the possession of thefollowing:

Species Name: Turkey VultureCondition: WholeNumber Acquired: 1

You may be required to show this record for certain activities.

Registry and Approval Services CentreMinistry of Natural Resources300 Water StreetPeterborough, ON, K9J8M5Toll-free: 1-855-613-4256E-mail: [email protected]

Any questions related to this registration and/or the Natural Resources Registry should be directed to:

Please refer to Ontario Regulations 666/98 and/or 242/08 for requirements that apply to your activity.

grand valley wind farms phase 3 wind project: year 1 post … · 2017-03-20 · grand valley wind...

Documents