8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
1/38
Assessment of the potential effects ofWind Farm Urirama, Aruba, on birds
An assessment following the Equator Principles
J. van der WindenM.P. Collier
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
2/38
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
3/38
Assessment of the potential effects of Wind Farm Urirama, Aruba, on birds
An assessment following the Equator Principles
J. van der WindenM.P. Collier
commissioned by: KEMA, The Netherlands
16 April 2012report nr 12-057
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
4/38
2
Status: draft report
Report nr.: 12-057
Date of publication: 16 April 2012
Title: Assessment of the potential effects of Wind Farm Urirama, Aruba,on birds
Subtitle: An assessment following the Equator Principles
Authors: Drs. J. van der WindenM.P. Collier MSc.
Number of pages incl. appendices: 036
Project nr: 12-079
Project manager: Drs. J. van der Winden
Name & address client: KEMA Nederland BV; P.O. BOx 9035; 6800 ET Arnhem
Reference client: E-mail 13 March 2012
Signed for publication: Adjunct-director Bureau Waardenburg bvdrs. S. Dirksen
Initials:
Bureau Waardenburg bv is not liable for any resulting damage, nor for damage which results from applying results ofwork or other data obtained from Bureau Waardenburg bv; client indemnifies Bureau Waardenburg bv against third-party liability in relation to these applications.
Bureau Waardenburg bv / KEMA Nederland BV
This report is produced at the request of the client mentioned above and is his property. All rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted and/or publicized in any form or by anymeans, electronic, electrical, chemical, mechanical, optical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior writtenpermission of the client mentioned above and Bureau Waardenburg bv, nor may it without such a permission be usedfor any other purpose than for which it has been produced.
The Quality Management System of Bureau Waardenburg bv has been certified by CERTIKED according to ISO9001:2008.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
5/38
3
Preface
KEMA Nederland bv has commissioned Bureau Waardenburg to provide expertise as
to the possible ecological effects of a proposed wind farm in Aruba on birds. KEMA is
undertaking a Social and Environmental Assessment following the Equator Principles,
which includes an assessment on nature and ecology. As part of this study Bureau
Waardenburg has assessed the possible effects on birds. As well as gathering
information from published sources a field visit was undertaken to assess the area
and its birds.
This report reviews the known effects of wind turbines on birds, the key bird species
of Aruba and the sites recognised as being important for birds. Based on available
knowledge and impressions gained during a site visit, an assessment of the potential
effects on birds of the proposed wind farm was made according to the Equator
Principles.
This project was lead by Jan van der Winden and the report written by Jan van der
Winden and Mark Collier, both of Bureau Waardenburg. During the Field visit, mr H.
Hutting gave information on the location of the initiated project. Mr. G. Peterson
(Birdlife Aruba) kindly explained the situation regarding birds in Aruba and showed
important bird areas on the island. S. Dirksen and xxxx provided valuable comments
on previous drafts of this report. The authors thank everyone who has contributed to
this report.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
6/38
4
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
7/38
5
Table of contents
Preface...............................................................................................................................................3 Summary ...........................................................................................................................................7Nederlandse samenvatting..............................................................................................................91 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 11
1.1 Aruba............................................................................................................................ 111.2 Urirama wind farm ...................................................................................................... 11
2 Birds and wind farms.............................................................................................................. 132.1 Collisions..................................................................................................................... 132.2 Disturbance ................................................................................................................ 142.3 Barrier effects ............................................................................................................. 15
3 Birds on Aruba ........................................................................................................................ 173.1 Breeding and resident species..................................................................................173.2 Migrant and vagrant species..................................................................................... 18
4 Legislation and important bird areas..................................................................................... 194.1 Legislation.................................................................................................................... 194.2 Important Bird Areas .................................................................................................. 19
5 Methods of assessment......................................................................................................... 216 Results Urirama ...................................................................................................................... 23
6.1 Impacts on birds......................................................................................................... 247 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 278 Literature.................................................................................................................................. 29Appendix 1. Field visit Aruba 2012 .............................................................................................. 33
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
8/38
6
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
9/38
7
Summary
As part of a proposed wind farm development on the northeast coast of the island of
Aruba, KEMA is undertaking a Social and Environmental Assessment following the
Equator Principles. This includes an assessment on nature and ecology. As part of
this study Bureau Waardenburg has assessed the possible effects on birds of the
proposed wind farm.
As well as gathering information from published sources a field visit was undertaken
to assess the area and its birds. The known effects of wind turbines on birds, the key
bird species of Aruba and the sites recognised as being important for birds were
reviewed. Based on available knowledge and impressions gained during a site visit,
an assessment of the potential effects on birds of the proposed wind farm was made
according to the Equator Principles.
Wind farms are known to have three main effects on birds: collisions, displacement or
habitat loss and barrier effects. The scale of the effect depends not only on the size
and layout of the wind farm but also on the location. Wind farms located in areas with
high densities of birds and a high level of flight activity having a greater effect than
similar wind farms in areas with few or no birds.
Aruba holds one species that is listed as near threatened, the Caribbean coot Fulica
caribaea. Further, the island holds several aggregations of breeding waterbirds.These breeding colonies and nearby feeding areas are located on the southwest
shores.
According to the equator principle, the effects of the proposed wind farm at Urirama is
categorised as low (category C). The effects of disturbance and barrier effects are
even zero. Effects of collision for local birds are about zero and for seasonal migrants
minimal. No regional or local (Aruban) endangered birds species will be affected at
population level by the proposed wind farm.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
10/38
8
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
11/38
9
Nederlandse samenvatting
is dit wenselijk?
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
12/38
10
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
13/38
11
1 Introduction
1.1 Aruba
Aruba is a Caribbean island within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The island lies
around 25 km north of the Paraguan Peninsula on Venezuelas north coast and
around 75 km west north west of Curacao. North of Aruba lies the Caribbean Sea and
the Dominican Republic is some 600 km away. The island is around 30 km long and 8
km wide with the axis lying northwest/southeast (figure 1).
The prevailing north-easterly winds influence Arubas semi-arid climate. Average
temperatures area around 28oC with seasonal variations of only several degrees.
Rainfall averages around 400-500 mm per year, mostly between October and January
(van Belle et al. 2003; Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008).
Aruba is largely flat with some hills inland, the highest of which is 188 m above sea
level. Vegetation is sparse and dominated by cactus and scrub. Most of Arubas urban
development is on the leeward shores. Tourism is a key industry and supplements the
resident population of just over one hundred thousand people.
1.2 Urirama wind farm
The location for the proposed Urirama wind farm is close to the northern tip of Aruba
on the northeast coast. The proposed wind farm consists of ten 3MW turbines located
parallel to the coast (KEMA 2012) (figure 1.). The locations and specifications of the
ten turbines are detailed in KEMA (2012). This report also qualitatively assesses the
potential effects for birds if the proposed wind farm were located several hundred
metres to the north or south. It is assumed in this report that in each situation the
turbines will be located close to the seashore.
The habitat of the area is limited to scrub and low bushes. The vegetation is heavily
influenced by the strong wind, salt spray and arid conditions. Further inland a few
semi-permanent pools are present (see appendix 1.)
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
14/38
12
Figure 1. Aruba, showing the general location of the proposed Urirama wind farm(red line) and key urban areas.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
15/38
13
2 Birds and wind farms
Research into the effects of wind turbines on birds has revealed three types of effects
on birds, namely the collisions of flying birds, habitat loss and disturbance, and barrier
effects on flying birds.
2.1 Collisions
Direct mortality of birds can result from injuries sustained during collisions with the
rotors, tower or from the turbulence behind the moving rotors. The numbers of
collisions are related to the collision risk and the intensity of bird flights through the
area.
Collision risk
The collision risk is chance of collision with a wind turbine for a bird passing through a
specified wind farm. Collision risk is thought to be dependent on a number of factors
including the location and configuration of the wind farm, dimensions and
characteristics of the turbines, characteristics of the surrounding landscape, visibility
conditions and weather, and the behaviour and morphology of the species concerned.
Winkelman (1992b) estimated a collision risk of 0.09% for all passing birds and of
0.17% for species performing nocturnal behaviour. Recent research however, has
shown that relatively many victims are diurnal and mostly local birds (Thelanderet al.
2003; Grnkorn et al. 2005; Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Krijgsveld & Beuker 2009), possiblydue to their foraging behaviour (Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Martin 2011). Furthermore,
many species fly at greater heights during migration, whereas local birds usually fly at
lower altitudes, often at the heights of turbines. An individual that makes numerous
flights through a wind farm (largely local birds) increases its cumulative collision
probability.
Flight intensity
The numbers of collision victims is strongly related to the number of flights through the
area and thus varies greatly between sites. It can be expected that fewer birds would
collide with a wind turbine in an area with a low numbers of flight movements than in
an area with a high level of flight activity. Relatively high numbers of victims can befound during migratory periods, when large numbers of birds pass through an area.
Alternatively, also in areas with a high level of local flight movements can local birds
fall victim to collisions.
Numbers of collisions
The documented average numbers of collision victims is between 3.7 and 58 birds per
turbine per year, with a maximum of 125 recorded (Winkelman 1989, 1992a; Still et al.
1996; Everaert et al. 2002; Thelander et al. 2003; Everaert & Stienen 2007). An
average of 11.1 birds per MW per year has been estimated at terrestrial wind farms in
North America (Smallwood 2011). These studies have controlled for the probability of
finding victims through the search efficiency of observers and through disappearance
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
16/38
14
through predation. Studies of larger modern turbines (1.5 MW) have revealed that
the numbers of victims are comparable to at smaller turbines (Everaert 2003; Barclay
et al. 2007; Krijgsveld et al. 2009). This means that an increase in rotor surface area(up to 5 times larger) does not necessarily lead to an increase in the numbers of
collisions; larger turbines are typically higher and placed further from each other
meaning that it is easier for birds to fly between or underneath.
Effect at the population level
For most species evidence is lacking that collision-related mortality has a general
effect on the population level (Poot et al. 2011; Krijgsveld et al. 2009; Krijgsveld &
Beuker 2009). Exceptions are for relatively high numbers of victims in slowly
reproducing species, examples of which include seabirds (Stienen et al. 2007),
vultures (Janss 2000; Lekuona 2001) and raptors such as eagles (Hunt et al. 1998;
Thelanderet al. 2003; May et al. 2010). So effects at the population level could only
be expected when a wind farm is located in an area with high level of movements of
species vulnerable to collision with restricted population size.
2.2 Disturbance
Disturbance responses in birds can include changes in physiology, behaviour and
location choice. For example, as a result of the noise and movement of a turbine,
birds may use the area around the turbine less or leave the area altogether.
Disturbance can also influence reproduction and survival, which can eventually lead
to changes at the population level. Disturbance has the potential to influence moreindividuals than collisions, although the effects have been studied less.
Key factors
The distance and the extent to which birds are disturbed varies with species, season,
location and function of the area as well as the size of the wind farm. For most
species outside of the breeding season it is assumed that the distance at which birds
can be disturbed increases with wind farm size, such as is true for some species of
waterbirds (Htkeret al. 2006). Some studies have revealed that birds can habituate
to wind turbines (Kruckenberg & Jaene 1999; Madsen & Boertmann 2008), while
other studies show no recovery in bird numbers (Htkeret al. 2006). Turbine size is
thought to have little affect on the level of disturbance; a study by Schekkerman et al.(2003) showed no difference in the levels of disturbance between 1MW turbines and
smaller turbines. According to recent data more disturbance may occur during
installation than during subsequent operation (BirdLife Europe 2011).
Breeding birds
There is less evidence for disturbance effects on breeding birds than for non-breeding
birds, however, this is possibly as these birds are more attracted to their breeding
area than foraging or resting areas, especially if they have a nest with eggs or young.
In general, distances at which breeding birds can be disturbed have been estimated
at 100-200 m. These studies have only covered a short period after the turbines were
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
17/38
15
operational (see Winkelman et al. 2008). For breeding passerines there has been little
or no evidence to suggest disturbance
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
18/38
16
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
19/38
17
3 Birds on Aruba
Figures given for the total number of bird species recorded on Aruba vary from 207 to
214 (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008; Lepage 2012). This variation likely comes from
the fact that the majority of these species are migrant or vagrants. Nevertheless, the
relatively recent discovery that the American oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus
breeds on the island suggests that more is still being learned about local and breeding
birds (van Belle et al. 2003; Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Nevertheless, the key
species and areas for birds are generally known and are details in the following
chapter. Although no species is restricted in its distribution to Aruba, two endemic
sub-species occur on the island. The Aruban burrowing owl Athene cunicularia
arubensis and Aruban brown-throated parakeet Aratinga pertinax arubensis have
distinct forms that occur on the island.
3.1 Breeding and resident species
Wege & Anadon-Irizarry (2008) suggest that up to 70 species breed, or have bred, on
the island. Possibly the most noteworthy species is the Caribbean coot, which is
classified as near threatened and is the islands only globally threatened species.
Aruba supports around 280 individuals of Caribbean coot (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry
2008). The species occurs throughout the Caribbean region and although there are
no current total population estimates, between 5,000 and 10,000 are estimated in the
Dominican Republic alone (BirdLife 2012a).
Aruba also supports around 30,000 breeding terns (individuals), almost two thirds of
which are sooty terns Onychoprion fuscata and one-third Cayenne terns Thalassus
acuflavidus eurygnatha (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Other species include royal
Sterna maxima, roseate Sterna dougallii, common Sterna hirundo, least Sternula
antillarum and bridled terns Sterna anaethetus, which together comprise around one
thousand individuals (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008). Laughing gulls Larus atricilla
and brownAnous stolidus and black noddiesAnous minutus also breed on the island.
The main breeding colonies for these species are on the southwest shores of the
island (see chapter 4). The shallow waters and leeward position of this part of the
island provides ideal foraging habitats close to the breeding colonies, though largenumbers of these terns move to offshore feeding areas.
Wege & Anadon-Irizarry (2008) also mention the island as being important for the
bare-eyed pigeon Patagioenas corensis. Although described as fairly common, this
species is restricted in its range across northern South America (Birdlife 2012b). Van
Belle et al. (2003) describe the species as being fairly common on Aruba and was
mostly noted in gardens, orchards, scrub, urban areas and mangroves, the latter
being the key breeding habitat.
Van Belle et al. (2003) considered a total of 23 species to be vulnerable breeding
species. This assessment was based on species being:
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
20/38
18
- locally rare or declining (yellow oriole Icterus nigrogularis, black-whiskered vireo
Vireo altiloquus, mangrove warbler Setophaga petechia, brown-crested flycatcher
Myiarchus tyrannulus, brown-throated parakeet, burrowing owl, groove-billed aniCrotophaga sulcirostris, American oystercatcher, bridled tern, brown noddy, crested
bobwhite Colinus cristatus, brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis, crested caracara
Caracara cheriway, Cayenne tern, black-faced grassquit Tiaris bicolor and roseatetern)
- limited in range globally (white-tailed nightjarCaprimulgus cayennensis, bananaquit
Coereba flaveola, American kestrel Falco sparverius, tropical mockingbird Mimus
gilvus, southern scrub-flycatcher Sublegatus modestus, eared dove Zenaida
auriculata and rufous-collared sparrow Zonotrichia capensis).
This categorisation was made for sub-species and populations of birds and includes
species that are abundant or widespread in other parts of their range.
3.2 Migrant and vagrant species
The majority of bird species that have been recorded on Aruba are migrants or
vagrants (birds that occur irregularly). Most migrant species are nearctic-neotropical
passerines, which pass through the area to or from their North American breeding
grounds. A number of the species recorded on Aruba are South American species.
Furthermore a number of waterbirds are likely to pass through the area during
migration, such as shorebirds and ducks. Also a few species over-winter on Aruba.
Migration of passerines and other birds through the area is likely to be in relatively low
densities. Several migration flyways from North America are recognised. In general
birds from western North America follow the Central American landmass, birds from
central North America follow the east coast of Central America, while most birds
migrating from eastern North America take a more easterly route over the West Indies
before using the trade wind to end up in South America (Newton 2010). Birds passing
the southern Caribbean Sea are likely to be in relatively low densities across a wide
area and many of the species recorded on the Aruba are likely to represent a small
fraction of the total population. During northward migration many species possibly
take a more westerly route through Central America. Many species typically migrate
at altitudes with favourable conditions; this is typically from 1.5 km to over 3 km inaltitudes (Newton 2010).
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
21/38
19
4 Legislation and important bird areas
4.1 Legislation
In 1986 Aruba became a separate country under the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The Island Ordinance of the Netherlands Antilles (Eilandenregeling Nederlandse
Antillen) states that environmental and nature management and nature conservation
are the responsibility of the Island of Aruba (Overheid.nl 2006). The island also
follows the Aruba, Curaao and St. Maarten Nature Ordinance, Framework act nature
Management and conservation BES (CMS Report 2011). Within the Kingdom of the
Netherlands, Aruba is a signatory to international treaties concerning the protection of
wildlife and natural areas, including the Bonn Convention, the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the Ramsar Convention.
The Bonn Convention, also known as the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS),
aims to improve the awareness and protection of migratory species (CMS 2012).
Aruba is a signatory to the Convention within the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The international treaty of the Ramsar Convention aims to highlight wetlands of
international importance with the aim of promoting the wise use of the resource
(Ramsar 2012). Aruba is a signatory to the Convention within the Kingdom of the
Netherlands. The Convention recognises one Ramsar site on Aruba, Het Spaans
Lagoen (figure 2). Located on the southwest coast between Oranjestad andSavaneta, this narrow coastal inlet is bordered by tidal mudflats and mangrove
swamps and provides a foraging and breeding area for waterbirds.
Arubas largest protected area is the Parke Nacional Arikok, which is located in the
southern half of the island and covers some 3,400 ha (figure 2). The park was
established in 2000 and includes part of the islands windward shoreline and large
areas of cactus scrub and inland hills. The park is funded by the Aruban Government
and administerd by the Arikok National Park Foundation (Wege & Anadon-Irizarry
2008; Arikok National Park Foundation 2012).
4.2 Important Bird Areas
Important Bird areas (IBAs) are areas recognised under the BirdLife International IBA
programme. These areas meet certain criteria, such as holding significant numbers of
a globally threatened species, a suite of range-restricted species or large assemblies
birds. The IBA programme provides no formal protection itself, although it aims to
highlight conservation priorities and can lead to site protection through local means.
A total of four Important Bird Areas have been recognised on Aruba: Bubali Wetlands;
Tierra del Sol Salina; Oranjestad Reef Islands; and San Nicolas Bay Reef Islands
(Wege & Anadon-Irizarry 2008) (figure 2). Two of these areas, Oranjestad Reef
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
22/38
20
Islands and San Nicolas Bay Reef Islands, are noted for colonial breeding birds,
particularly cayenne, common, royal, least, bridled and sooty terns, and brown and
black noddys. Both of these sites are located on the southwest shores of Aruba andtogether cover 557 ha of the islands 610 ha of IBAs. Bubali Wetlands is a state
owned nature reserve, which is situated on Arubas west coast, west of the city of
Noord and north of Oranjestad. This 53 ha wetland is largely covered with vegetation
and supports a breeding population of the near-threatened Caribbean coot. Other
species recorded at the site include Neotropic cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus
and the biome restricted bare-eyed pigeon. Tierra de Sol Salina is located close to the
northeast coast at the northern tip of the island. The site is privately owned and is
located within a golf course. This 2 ha area of semi-permanent wetland and scrub
holds a number of waterbirds including Caribbean coot, white-cheeked pintail Anas
bahamensis, roosting herons, egrets and terns, as well as migrant shorebirds. The
bare-eyed pigeon is also present in the area.
Figure 2. Aruba, showing the locations and names of the key areas identified for
birds (IBAs and Ramsar) and the national park.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
23/38
21
5 Methods of assessment
In order to assess possible effects of the wind farm at Urirama, information has been
collected on bird numbers and distribution in the area. In general bird numbers and
distribution is based on available knowledge on bird concentrations and species
composition on the island (chapter 3). Additionally, the island of Aruba was visited
between 25 March and 28 March 2012 (appendix 1). This visit was used to get a
picture of the project area, the available habitat near the wind farm area and possible
bird communities and their movements. Apart from this, Mr G. Peterson has been
interviewed. He is an ornithologist at Aruba studying the birds of Aruba such as the
wetlands of the Northern part of the island, for many years (see http://www.lago-
colony.com/BIRD_LIFE_ARUBA/ARUBA%20BIRDLIFE/ARUBA_BIRDLIFE_PAGE.ht
m).
Based on the available information an assessment of the impacts has been made for
the subjects collision risks, disturbance and barrier effects (see chapter 2). In
conjunction with the Equator principles method (Kema 2012) the risks for birds are
categorised in A (high risk), B (moderate risk) and C (low risk). In this classification the
criteria to assess the risk as follows:
A: absolute high collision numbers or high collision numbers related to the relevant
population size, or comparable qualifications for the subjects disturbance or barrier
effects
B: as A, but moderate
C: as A but low
In order to judge the effect of the wind farm, the effects of the study site are compared
with potential wind farm locations slightly (less than 2 km) more to the north and
slightly more to the south of Urirama. This is a qualitative comparable assessment.
Voluntary guidelines have been released for use in assessing the potential effects of
land-based wind farms in North America (see www.fws.gov/windenergy). These
guidelines highlight migratory and threatened or endangered species of birds as
requiring attention and the stated potential impacts include collisions, habitat loss and
displacement. These factors have been assessed in this report (see chapter 2 and
above).
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
24/38
22
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
25/38
23
6 Results Urirama
6.1 Introduction
The assessment is based on general knowledge on bird (movements) and wind farms
(chapter 2), and the site visit in March 2012 (Appendix 1). The visit cannot be
regarded as a thorough research but in combination with general knowledge on bird
presence and movements, an assessment according to the equator principle can be
made.
It is clear that local bird densities around the proposed wind farm area are extremely
low. Daily bird movements are, apart from some incidents, lacking. The area has been
visited in March, a period with wintering birds still present as well as local breeding
birds. It is unlikely that during other parts of the year the situation is substantially
different in bird numbers and movements. The habitat is almost without vegetation
due to salt spray and strong onshore winds. Cliffs that can be used for gliding or
thermals are lacking. During the time of the visit the wetlands had relatively high water
levels so were optimal for birds. No regional or global birds species with a
conservation concern occur within the wind farm area. The only species categorised
as Near threatened is the Caribbean coot, which occurs on wetlands such as Tierra
del Sol and Bubali all at large distances from the wind farm area. This species does
not perform regular (nocturnal) flights over terrestrial habitat. Endemic (sub)species
like Aruba burrowing owl Athene cunicularia arubensis and Aruba brown-throatedparakeet Aratinga pertinax arubensis, do not occur within the proposed wind farm
area or its surroundings.
On one evening heron departure from the Tierra del Sol wetland had been recorded.
The migration of these herons (departure) was not northwards as expected
beforehand, but westwards. Probably the birds head for the Venezuelan coast or
stopovers in Central America. But anyway as expected based on the likely origin of
wintering birds (north America), not in the direction of the wind farm area (east to
southeast). In autumn, the arrival migration of ducks at Tierra del Sol wetlands from
the east has been observed by G. Peterson. As breeding ranges are to the north,
west and east, arrival will not be restricted to the eastern part of the island. Migrantwarblers and other birds (shorebirds, cuckoos) will be comparable as the breeding
ranges of these species are to the north and migration follows a broad front, the
arrival will be widespread from northern directions. In general densities of warblers
and shorebirds are low on the island, restricted to a few spots such as the temporary
ponds on the western and southern part of the island (shorebirds) and mangrove
forests or scrubs e.g. near Spanish Lagoon or Arikok National Park in the south. This
will all lead to broad front arrival and dispersal to the west or southern part of the
island.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
26/38
24
6.2 Impacts on birds at Urirama
Following the method of effects (chapter 2) by disturbance (resting or feeding birds),
barrier effects (flying birds) or collision risks, the effects of the proposed wind farm at
Urirama are classified and judged. The effects of a wind farm situated a few hundred
metres to the north or south is qualitatively assessed. In this case it is assumed the
wind farm is situated close to the seashore in all hypothetical situations.
Disturbance
As bird densities around the wind farm area are almost zero, disturbance of local
feeding or resting or breeding birds is absent. Areas with higher densities are situated
more than 1,000 m from the wind farm (e.g. Tierra Del Sol wetland complex) or hold
very low bird numbers, e.g. the ponds near Boroncana (appendix A1, figure A2). The
effects at sites slightly more to the south will be comparable. Disturbance effects will
be minimal to zero. To the north (close to Tierra del Sol plains) minor disturbance
effects might be present if the turbines would be situated close to the wetland, such
as the beach near Druif.
Barrier effect
As local bird movements around the wind farm are almost absent and the wind farm
length is restricted giving the few passing birds enough space to reach their preferred
areas. This means that a barrier effect of the wind farm is for local birds is zero. Forbirds on season migration the wind farm is no barrier due to its restricted size and the
absence of corridor migration (routes) or a spot essential for migration like a thermal
soaring area. The site is within a broad front migration route and has no cliffs or other
specific soaring options. So for birds on seasonal migration the barrier effect is also
zero. For sites more to the south barrier effects for local birds and seasonal migration
will be comparable (zero). More to the north minor effects might be possible if turbines
would be situated near Druif as the beach and plains area might be used by
shorebirds moving to and from the Tierra del Sol wetland.
Collision risks
As local bird movements around the wind farm are almost absent, collision risks forlocal birds will be highly incidental. The wetlands and ponds are situated at relative
large distances and the wind farm takes no position between these wetlands and
roosts or other feeding areas. During seasonal migration (spring and autumn) birds
might pass the wind farm area. Since the breeding ranges are to the north (-east and
west), the migrants will arrive from all these directions and on a broad front. However
passage through the proposed wind farm area must be relative small as arrival
habitats are lacking. Spring departure in the direction of the wind farm is highly
unlikely as birds seldom depart against the wind (Newton 2010). Given these
considerations, it cannot be excluded that small numbers might pass the wind farm
area and this might lead to a few collisions on a yearly basis. The wind farm will be
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
27/38
25
based in a relative dark area (minor background light). This will mainly be the case for
migrants with large flyway populations such as blue-winged teal Anas discors and
warblers. In areas with high local bird numbers and intense seasonal migration anaverage numbers of victims per year can vary between 3.7 and 58 birds per turbine
per year (chapter 2). In such occasions light circumstances may be comparable but
weather conditions can be worse as on Aruba situation with poor visibility are absent.
So in the case of Aruba, local bird numbers are almost zero and numbers of migrants
are much lower so for the entire proposed wind farm (10 turbines), the average
number of collision victims will not exceed a several individuals on a yearly basis. As
no regional, or global threatened birds species live or fly near the wind farm area,
there is no risk for impacts on endangered species whatsoever. So effects on
population size of these species is zero. So the total effects of collision risks are
categorised as minimal with maximal a few collision victims on a yearly basis of
species with large flyway populations.
For a site located a bit more to the south the assessment is the same: minor risks for
seasonal migration with low numbers of collision. For a site more northwards the
collision numbers are expected to be low, but a bit higher than at the proposed
Urirama site. Local birds, such as killdeer Charadrius vociferus, exchange between
the wetland and the plains near Druif.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
28/38
26
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
29/38
27
7 Conclusions
According to the equator principle, the effects of the proposed wind farm at Urirama is
categorised as low (category C). Effects of disturbance for feeding, resting and
breeding birds as well as barrier effects are even zero. Effects of collision for local
birds are about zero and for seasonal migrants minimal. No regional or local (Aruban)
endangered birds species will be affected at population level by the proposed wind
farm. Hypothetical sites a few hundred metres to the south are comparable in effects
as the Urirama site. Sites more to the north (near Tierra del Sol) will have somewhat
higher effects on birds than the Urirama site due to minor exchange of birds from the
plains and beaches near Druif with the Tierra del Sol area.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
30/38
28
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
31/38
29
8 Literature
Arikok National Park Foundation, 2012. Arikok National Park Foundation, Aruba,www.arubanationalpark.org; accessed 12-4-2012.
Barclay, R. M. R., E. F. Baerwald & J. C. Gruver, 2007. Variation in bat and birdfatalities at wind energy facilities: assessing the effects of rotor size and towerheight. Canadian Journal of Zoology-Revue Canadienne De Zoologie 85(3): 381-387.
Bergen, F., 2001. Untersuchungen zum Einfluss der Errichtung und des Betriebs vonWindenergieanlagen auf Vgel im Binnenland. Dissertation. Ruhr UniversittBochum, Bochum.
BirdLife Europe, 2011. Meeting Europes Renewable Energy Targets in Harmony withNature. The RSPB, Sandy, UK.
BirdLife International, 2012a Species factsheet: Fulica caribaea.http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=2947; accessed 12-4-2012.
BirdLife International, 2012b Species factsheet: Patagioenas corensis.http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=2478; accessed 12-4-2012.
CMS, 2012. Convention on Migratory Species, the Bonn Convention. www.cms.int;accessed 12-4-2012.
CMS Report, 2011. The CMS Report for The Netherlands for 2011.http://www.cms.int/bodies/COP/cop10/national_report/059_netherlands_e.pdf;accessed 12-4-2012.
Devereux, C. L., M. J. H. Denny & M. J. Whittingham, 2008. Minimal effects of windturbines on the distribution of wintering farmland birds. Journal of AppliedEcology 45(6): 1689-1694.
Dirksen, S., A.L. Spaans & J. Van der Winden, 2007. Collision risks for diving ducks atsemi-offshore wind farms in freshwater lakes: A case study. In: M. deLucas,G.F.E. Janss &M. Ferrer (eds). Birds and wind farms. Risk Assessmentand Mitigation. Blz. 275. Quercus. Madrid, Spain.
Drewitt, A.L. & R.H.W. Langston, 2006. Assessing the impacts of wind farms on birds.Ibis 148(1): 29-42.
Everaert, J., 2003. Windturbines en vogels in Vlaanderen: voorlopigeonderzoeksresultaten en aanbevelingen. Oriolus(69): 145-155.
Everaert, J., K. Devos & E. Kuijken, 2002. Windturbines en vogels in Vlaanderen.Voorlopige onderzoeksresultaten en buitenlandse bevindingen. Rapport 2002.3.Instituut voor Natuurbehoud, Brussel.
Everaert, J. & E. Stienen, 2007. Impact of wind turbines on birds in Zeebrugge(Belgium). Significant effect on breeding tern colony due to collisions. Biodiversityand Conservation 16: 3345-3359.
Fijn, R.C., K.L. Krijgsveld, H.A.M. Prinsen, W. Tijsen & S. Dirksen, 2007. Effecten opzwanen en ganzen van het ECN windturbine testpark in de Wieringermeer.Aanvaringsrisicos en verstoring van foeragerende vogels. Rapport 07-094.Bureau Waardenburg, Culemborg.
Grnkorn, T., A. Diederichs, B. Stahl, D. Dorte & G. Nehls, 2005. Entwicklung einerMethode zur Abschtzung des Kollisions Risikos von Vgeln anWindenergieanlagen. Regport for Landesamt fr Natur und Umwelt Schleswig-Holstein,
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
32/38
30
http://www.umweltdaten.landsh.de/nuis/upool/gesamt/wea/voegel_wea.pdfaccessed 25-11-2010.
Htker, H., K.-M. Thomsen & H. Kster, 2006. Impacts on biodiversity of exploitationof renewable energy sources: the example of birds and bats. Facts, gaps inknowledge, demands for further research, and ornithological guidelines for thedevelopment of renewable energy exploitation. Michael-Otto-Institut im NABU,Bergenhusen.
Hunt, W.G., R.E. Jackman, T.L. Hunt, D.E. Driscoll & L. Culp, 1998. A populationstudy of golden eagles in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area: populationtrend analysis 1994-1997. NREL/SR-500-26092, Subcontract No. XAT-6-16459-01. Predatory Bird Research Group University of California, Santa Cruz,California.
Janss, G., 2000. Bird Behavior In and Near a Wind Farm at Tarifa, Spain:Management Considerations. PNAWPPM-III. Proceedings National Avian-Wind
Power Planning Meeting III, San Diego, California, May 1998. Blz. 110-114. LGLLtd., Environmental Research Associates. King City, Ontario Canada.
Kaatz, J., 2001. Zum Empfindlichkeit von singvgeln und Weistorch gegenberWindkraftanlagen. Voordracht op het symposium Windenergie und Vgel Ausma und Bewltigungen eines Konfliktes op 29/30-11-2001 in Berlijn
KEMA, 2012. Social and environmental assessment for Urirama wind farm, Aruba.2012. Kema report 74101509-PGR 12.Arnhem
Krijgsveld, K.L., K. Akershoek, F. Schenk, F. Dijk, H. Schekkerman & S. Dirksen,2009. Collision risk of birds with modern large wind turbines: reduced riskcompared to smaller turbines. Ardea 97(3): 357-366.
Krijgsveld, K.L. & D. Beuker, 2009. Vogelslachtoffers bij windpark Anna Vosdijk opTholen. Onderzoek naar aanvaringen onder trekkende steltlopers en
overwinterende smienten. Rapport 09-072. Bureau Waardenburg, Culemborg.
Krijgsveld, K.L., S.M.J. van Lieshout & M.J.M. Poot, 2003. Windturbines op hetHellegatsplein en mogelijke effecten op vogels. Een risicoanalyse op basis vanbestaande informatie en aanvullend veldonderzoek met radar. Rapport 03-037.Bureau Waardenburg bv, Culemborg.
Kruckenberg, H. & J. Jaene, 1999. Zum Einfluss eines Windparks auf die Verteilungweidender Blssgnse im Rheinland (Landkreis Leer, Niedersachsen). Natur undLandschaft(74): 420-424.
Langston, R.H.W. & J.D. Pullan, 2003. Windfarms and birds: an analysis of windfarmson birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selectionissues. RSPB/BirdLife report. BirdLife / Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Larsen, J.K. & M. Guillemette, 2007. Effects of wind turbines on flight behaviour ofwintering common eiders: implications for habitat use and collision risk. Journalof Applied Ecology 44: 516-522.
Lekuona, J.M., 2001. Uso del espacio por la avifauna y control de la mortalidad deaves y murcilagos en los parques elicos de navarra durante un ciclo anual.Gobierno de Navarra, En Pamplona.
Lepage, D. 2012. Avibase, bird checklists for the whole world, Aruba.http://avibase.bsc-eoc.org/checklist.jsp?lang=NL&list=ioc&synlang=NL®ion=ANaw&version=text; accessed 12-4-2012.
Madsen, J. & D. Boertmann, 2008. Animal behavioral adaptation to changinglandscapes: spring-staging geese habituate to wind farms. Landscape ecology23(9): 1007-1011.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
33/38
31
Martin, G.R., 2011. Understanding bird collisions with man-made objects: a sensoryecology approach. Ibis 153(2): 239-254.
May, R. & Bevanger, K. (eds), 2011. Preceedings of Conference on Wind energy andWildlife impacts, 2-5 May 2011, Trondheim, Norway. NINA report 693, pp140.
May, R., P.H. Hoel, R. Langston, E.L. Dahl, K. Bevanger, O. Reitan, T. Nygard, H.C.Pedersen, E. Rskaft & B.G. Stokke, 2010. Collision risk in white-tailed eagles.Modelling collision risk using vantage point observations in Smla wind-powerplant. NINA, Trondheim.
Newton, I. 2010. Bird Migration. Collins, London, UK. ISBN 978-0-00-730732-6.pp598.
Overheid.nl, 2006. Koninklijk Besluit van 3 Maart 1951, houdende de eilandenregelingNederlandse Antillen. http://decentrale.regelgeving.overheid.nl/cvdr/XHTMLoutput/Historie/Nederlandse%20Antillen/7402/7402_1.html; accessed 12-4-2012.
Pearce-Higgins, J.W., L. Stephen, R.H.W. Langston, I.P. Bainbridge & R. Bullman,
2009. The distribution of breeding birds around upland wind farms. Journal ofApplied Ecology 46: 1323-1331.
Petersen, B.S. & H. Nhr, 1989. Konsekvenser for fuglelivet ved etableringen afmindre vindmller. Ornis Consult, Kopenhagen, Denmark.
Pettersson, J., 2005. The impact of offshore wind farms on bird life in SouthernKalmar Sound, Sweden. A final report based on studies 1999 2003. SwedishEnergy Agency, Lund University.
Poot, M.J.M., I. Tulp, L.M.J. van den Bergh, H. Schekkerman & J. van der Winden,2001. Effect van mist-situaties op vogelvlieggedrag bij het windparkEemmeerdijk. Zijn er aanwijzingen voor verhoogde aanvaringsrisico's? Rapport01-072. Bureau Waardenburg bv, Culemborg.
Ramsar, 2012. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. www.ramsar.org; accessed 12-4-2012.
Reichenbach, M., K.-M. Exo, C. Ketzenberg & M. Castor, 2000. Einflu vonWindkraftan-lagen auf Brutvgel Sanfte Energie im Konflikt mit demNaturschutz. Teilprojekt Brutvgel. Institut fr Vogelforschung "VogelwarteHelgoland" und ARSU GmbH, Wilhelmshaven und Oldenburg, Deutschland.
Reichenbach, M. & H. Steinborn, 2006. Windkraft, Vogel, Lebensraume Ergebnisse
einer funfjahrigen BACI-Studie zum Einfluss von Windkraft- anlagen und
Habitatparametern auf Wiesenvogel. Osnabrucker NaturwissenschaftlicheMitteilungen 32: 243-259.
Schekkerman, H., L.M.J. van den Bergh, K. Krijgsveld & S. Dirksen, 2003. Effectenvan moderne, grote windturbines op vogels. Onderzoek naar verstoring van
watervogels bij het windpark Eemmeerdijk. Alterra, Wageningen.Sinning, F., 1999. Ergebnisse von Brut- und Rastvogeluntersuchungen im Bereich
des Jade-Windparkes und DEWI-Testfeldes in Wilhelmshaven. Bremer Beitrgefr Naturkunde und Naturschutz, Band 4. Blz. 61-69. Bund Freunde der Erde,Landesverband Bremen. Bremen, Germany.
Smallwood, S. 2011. Comparing avian and bat fatality rate estimates amoung NorthAmerican wind energy projects. in May & Bevanger 2011.
Stienen, E.W.M., J. van Waeyenberge, E. Kuijken & J. Seys, 2007. Trapped within thecorridor of the Southern North Sea: The potential impact of offshore windfarmsand seabirds. M. de Lucas,G.F.E. Janss &M. Ferrer. Birds and wind farms. Riskassessment and mitigation. Quercus. Madrid.
Still, D., B. Little & S. Lawrence, 1996. The effect of wind turbines on the birdpopulation at blyth harbour. ETSU W/13/00394/REP. ETSU
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
34/38
32
Thelander, C.G., K.S. Smallwood & L. Rugge, 2003. Bird risk behaviors and fatalitiesat the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. National Renewable EnergyLaboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA.
Tulp, I., H. Schekkerman, J.K. Larsen, J. van der Winden, R.J.W. van de Haterd, P.W.van Horssen, S. Dirksen & A.L. Spaans, 1999. Nocturnal flight activity of seaducks near the wind park Tun Knob in the Kattegat. Rapport 99.64. BureauWaardenburg, Culemborg.
van Belle, J., A.J. Schilstra, D. Strijker & K. Bettels, 2003. Development of anenvironmental assessment method for Aruba. Part B, Inventarisatie TerrestrichMilieu van het Eiland Aruba. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, the Netherlands. pp104.
Walter, G. & H. Brux, 1999. Ergebnisse eines dreijhrigen Brut- undRastvogelmonitorings (1995 - 1997) im Einzugsbereich von zwei Windparks imLandkreis Cuxhaven. Bremer Beitrge fr Naturkunde und Naturschutz Band 4.Blz. 81 106. Bund Freunde der Erde, Landesverband Bremen. Bremen,
Germany.Wege, D.C. & Anadon-Irizarry, V. (Eds) 2008. Important Bird Areas in the Caribbean.
BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. ISBN 0946888655. 348pp.
Winkelman, J.E., 1989. Vogels en het windpark nabij Urk (NOP):aanvaringsslachtoffers en verstoring van pleisterende eenden ganzen enzwanen. RIN-rapp. 89/15. RIN, Arnhem.
Winkelman, J.E., 1992a. De invloed van de Sep-proefwindcentrale te Oosterbierum(Fr.) op vogels. 1. Aanvaringsslachtoffers. RIN-rapp. 92/2. IBN-DLO, Arnhem.
Winkelman, J.E., 1992b. De invloed van de Sep-proefwindcentrale te Oosterbierum(Fr.) op vogels. 2. Nachtelijke aanvaringskansen. RIN-rapp. 92/3. IBN-DLO,Arnhem.
Winkelman, J.E., F.H. Kistenkas & M.J. Epe, 2008. Ecologische ennatuurbeschermingsrechtelijke aspecten van windturbines op land. Alterra,Wageningen.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
35/38
33
Appendix 1. Field visit Aruba 2012
As part of the impact assessment, Aruba was visited between the 25th
of March and
the 28th
of March. During this visit the wind farm project area at Urirama or the
surroundings were daily visited to get an impression of available habitats, bird
communities and movements. In table A1 the visits and study aims are presented.
The site visits were used to get an impression of local bird movements. As local bird
movements are most concentrated at dawn or dusk, as birds move to and from
roosts, the site was visited in the morning and late afternoon (table A1). During these
visits no bird movements were recorded apart from one osprey Pandion haliaetus at
16:35 on the 26th
of March. This raptor foraged shortly at sea and passed southwards
through the proposed wind farm area. Local breeding birds were absent apart from
some songbirds and one American oystercatcher feeding along the shore. The area is
scarcely vegetated due to salt spray and strong winds (figure A1). The landscape
therefore has low bird densities. Concentrations of birds (e.g. colonies) or daily
movements are lacking. The surrounding areas slightly more to the north and the
south are comparable. The coastal area near Tierra del Sol holds slightly higher bird
numbers.
Local daily bird movements are present between the wetlands of Tierra del Sol and
Bubali or the temporary waters at Westpunt and Rooi Santo. For example, tens of
Neotropic cormorants and herons (great egret Ardea alba and snowy egret Egrettathula) exchanged between these wetlands in the morning or evening. Among these
were also night herons and osprey. Along the west coast of Aruba birds are more
common with regular movements of terns, frigatebirds, pelicans and gulls. Near the
important tern colonies at the south point of the island, tern movements are intense.
The ponds of Boroncane were visited on the morning of the 28th
of March (figure A2).
These are situated at 500 to 600 m from the proposed wind farm area. Very few birds
were present. Just two blue-winged teals, a common gallinule and a killdeer were at
the ponds. All species without substantial daily (nocturnal) flight activity at larger
distances from the daily feeding areas.
During the evening (around sunset) of the 27th
of March, bird migration was studied
near the lighthouse at the north of the island. In that period, few small flocks of herons
departed from the Tierra del Sol wetland in a western direction. Based on the height
(> 300 m) migration take off was likely. These birds might profit from the eastern
winds to reach the Venezuelan coast instead of heading north.
During the visits at the proposed wind farm area, the ground surface around the
meteorological mast (metmast) was searched for possible bird victims on two
occasions. No carcasses, feathers or other remains were found. The area is dark with
little background light from the tourist centres of Palm Beach and Noord.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
36/38
34
Interview with Mr G. Peterson
Mr. Peterson has good knowledge on birds occurring on Aruba. He visits the Tierra
del Sol wetlands on a regular basis and confirms a regular daily movement of herons,
egrets and cormorants between the wetlands at Aruba. No daily movements of birds
between the wetlands and sea at the east part of the island are known. He has also
observed duck (autumn) migration (arrivals in August-September) from an eastern
direction.
Table A1. Visits to Urirama wind farm project area and surroundings in March 2012
and study aims.
Date study aim
26th
of March morning habitat availability and general impression (figure A1);
bird victims search at the metmast
26th
of March evening possible evening movements of birds
27th
of March early morning visit to Tierra del Sol wetland to study local
movements
27th
of March evening visit to lighthouse to study migration of birds and light
conditions
28th of March early morning Bubali and ponds near Boroncane (figure A2) forearly morning bird movement; bird victims search at
the metmast
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
37/38
35
Figure A1. Sparse vegetation due to prevailing wind and salt spray in the area of theproposed wind farm.
Figure A2. Habitat and one of the ponds near to Boroncane, adjacent to the area of
the proposed wind farm and showing the metmast in the background.
8/1/2019 Appendix VI Bird Assessment
38/38
Top Related