See Special Reports from Conservation Chair, Bob Berghier

• The Status of Large Mammals & Some Selected Birds in North America

  What is Shade-grown Coffee & Why it should be important to North American Bird Watchers

So, What's Up With wind Turbines ?
Comments on U.S. Department of Energy Frey Farm Landfill Wind Energy Project

Kim Van Fleet
Important Bird Area Coordinator and Staff Biologist
Audubon Pennsylvania

Current concerns about global warming resulting from centuries of dumping CO2 emissions into the atmosphere has brought about a renewed interest in alternative forms of energy that don’t directly contribute additional CO2 to the atmosphere. Many states including Pennsylvania as well as numerous countries in the global community have or are in the process developing renewable energy portfolio standards as one way of dealing with the issue. Although wind energy is being touted as the panacea to global climate change it is but one type of alternative energy and likely one of the least efficient ways to deal with the bigger issu e including offsetting carbon emissions. There are pros and cons to the development and use of any form of energy whether conventional or alternative. Every type of energy production has associated environmental impacts that need to be thoroughly explored and assessed to assure minimal ecological damage. Industrial scale wind should not be exempt from this. Additionally all parties involved should be held fully accountable for any and all environmental impacts.

Large scale wind project developers have primarily turned their attention to Pennsylvania’s ridge tops to locate their massive industrial scale wind turbine complexes where stronger winds tend to occur under certain weather conditions. However more recently due to federal stimulus money, subsidies, state grants and the federal Production Tax Credits (PTCs) companies small and large are taking advantage of the subsidies both before and after the turbines go into operation. However the deadline/s associated with applying for and acquiring any of the above mentioned sources of funding should not be an excuse for irresponsible actions such as not conducting multi-season studies recommended by qualified personnel employed by state and federal agencies whose purpose is to manage and protect wildlife and natural resources nor should comment periods be shorten for the same reason .

In recent years wind energy developers have descended upon Pennsylvania. A number of industrial wind facilities are already in operation across the state and many more projects are being explored, planned, or are currently under construction. To date most of the industrial scale wind facilities in Pennsylvania have involved minimal pre-construction environmental assessments relative to impacts on species or ecological systems including the biotic (animal and plant populations) and abiotic (non-living components like air, water, geology etc.) factors. Sadly, seldom if ever have any peer reviewed science based post-construction studies been conducted by developers or operators of these same facilities.

Recent research studies and critical peer reviews of current scientific literature pertaining to birds and turbines have repeatedly revealed that inappropriately sited industrial scale wind facilities (large and small) and their associated structures can and do negatively impact birds, bird communities, bird populations as well as numerous other organisms and their habitats. Two categories of concern, relative to birds, collisions and ecosystem impacts repeatedly show up in research and literature reviews (Manville 2009, NRC Report of the National Academies 2007, DeWitt and Langston 2006, Madders and Whitfield 2006, Keil 2005, and Percival 2003). According to documents by National Research Council of the National Academies (2007), the GAO report Wind Power: Impacts on Wildlife and government responsibilities for Regulating Development and Protecting Wildlife (2005), and the USFWS voluntary interim guidelines (2003), areas to be avoided relative to industrial scale wind development should include ridgelines that are major raptor migration corridors, migration staging and stopover areas, coastlines, and areas of high bird concentrations Additional documents providing supporting evidence can be found in peer reviewed articles by Drewitt, A.L., and R.H.W Langston (2006), Keil, M. (2005), Barrios and Rodriguez (2004), and Percival (2003).

Short-term impacts like collisions can be subdivided into two categories; actual collisions often resulting in direct mortality of birds and collision risk which refers to the potential for collisions to occur at a site. There is agreement among many researchers and reviewers that the inappropriate siting of industrial scale wind facilities especially in areas of high bird concentrations, like migration corridors and stopover/staging areas, greatly contributes to the increase of collision risk and actual collision mortality (Everaert and Kuijken 2007). In addition, bird behavior in and around these areas needs to be studied thoroughly since it is also a contributing factor. Thirdly weather events can contribute to episodic mortality events (Johnson et al. 2002).

Although short term impacts can be more readily assessed, long term impacts on many species populations (plant and animal) are lesser known. Even though aesthetic issues come into play it is concerns about these impacts that have made the inappropriate siting of industrial scale wind facilities in Pennsylvania a contentious issue. Finally in order to insure that industrial scale wind facilities are properly sited in Pennsylvania and elsewhere it is important for industry and others to take a more proactive approach in selection and assessment of sites. It is extremely important to conduct comprehensive wildlife and environmental impact assessments concerning the site and site use by all species to insure appropriate siting of a facility resulting in minimal wildlife and environmental impacts.

For Reference Material

Conjohela Flats

Trim Your Water Footprint—and Bill—with Gray Water

By Christopher Weber

In this tough economy, everyone is looking for ways to trim their household expenses, whether by putting in new insulation, compact florescent bulbs or a vegetable garden. But there’s another, often overlooked, way: using gray water. The wastewater generated by your sink, shower, washing machine and dishwasher can cut utility bills while reducing a household’s water footprint.

Gray water (also spelled “grey” water) carries traces of food, grease, hair and cleaning products that make it look dirty. But if you get past your initial squeamishness, you’ll find that it’s a beneficial resource that can safely take the place of tap water for household tasks like flushing a toilet or watering a lawn.

The average household of four uses up to 400 gallons of water every day, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. By recycling just a little of that wastewater, family members get a quick lesson in water conservation.

Gray water projects target the biggest water-wasters in the house—particularly bathroom showers and sinks, where a lot of gray water is generated (toilet water, known as “black water,” is never to be reused). Some of that water can be recycled via an ingenious contraption called SinkPositive, a hand-washing station that sits atop the toilet tank. Soapy water falls into the tank, where it waits until the next time someone flushes the toilet. Then it does double duty, carrying away soap and toilet waste. The SinkPositive sells for $110 plus shipping, but do-it-yourselfers can make their own versions for much less by cutting the drain pipe under the bathroom sink and connecting it via a hose to the toilet tank.

One-third of a household’s water, over 120 gallons per day, is used on lawns and gardens. To trim that figure, gardeners often use gray water to slake grass and ornamental plants. Young plants need fresh water, but once they mature, many can thrive on doses of gray water.

But use caution when applying gray water to edible plants. Bath water can contain microorganisms like fecal coliform that might sicken people if sprinkled over lettuce or tomatoes. The best place for gray water in an edible garden is around the root zone of plants, far away from the produce. For the same reason, it’s unwise to plug gray water into a sprinkler that sends it scattering. You’ll need to check with your local building department for gray water regulations, too. There may be limits on the amount you can use outdoors and specific storage requirements.

A few simple precautions make gray water palatable for plants. First, keep in mind that common household chemicals like bleach and borax (found in some laundry detergents) kill plants. Also, ordinary soap contains large amounts of salt, which can build up in the soil over time and gradually strangle greenery. Many gardeners replace bleach with ammonia and switch to no-borax, low-sodium soaps to reduce this risk. Experts also recommend alternating gray water irrigations with fresh water.

Gray water irrigation can be as simple as placing a pitcher next to the kitchen sink. Whenever someone doesn’t finish a glass of water or cup of tea, dump it into the pitcher. By the end of the day, you’ll have enough “leftover” water to keep the houseplants happy.

The amount of savings from gray water use depends on where one lives. In Arizona, where water is expensive, the adjustment will save more money than in Florida, where water is cheap. Gray water use can also extend the life of a septic system, which costs tens of thousands of dollars to replace.

There are other costs to consider, too, in the form of devastating infrastructure projects that might be spared from future water bills. “Where I live, there are proposals for raising dams, creating new dams, and building desalinization plants for new water sources, all of which are terribly expensive and environmentally damaging,” says Laura Allen, an educator and gray water designer in Oakland, California. “Gray water is a simple, small-scale, decentralized way to save water.“

CHRISTOPHER WEBER is an environmental journalist living in Chicago.

ACT NOW .... PA Budget Threatens Environmental Issues

Heading into our fourth month without a budget, the alleged light at the end of the tunnel is proving itself to be on oncoming train for those who care about the environment.

The framework deal envisioned by the Governor and leadership in the General Assembly will likely divert or cut hundreds of millions of dollars from agency and environmental programs, eliminate a fund that for more than fifty years has been used to protect public resources, and remove any resource management and stewardship from the equation by opening untold acres of public land for additional gas extraction.

Our agencies are facing budgetary cuts that will force them to eliminate, not just reduce, programs that protect public health and sustain our communities and public resources.

Time is running out, but it’s not too late. Public reaction has been swift, and legislators are hearing our call. Last week several environmental organizations participated in a press event with members of the General Assembly vowing to vote against this budget framework if it continues to include this unprecedented assault on environmental needs.

Now is the time for you to join the call. Please contact your legislator today and tell them:

1. You oppose mandating further extraction on public lands without first conducting a true analysis of the resource and community impacts resulting from extraction activities; and that any future extraction should be conducted pursuant to sound resource management by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

2. You oppose elimination of the Oil & Gas Lease Fund, which for more than fifty years has reinvested in our public resources for the benefit of all Pennsylvanians.

3. You oppose the drastic reductions in agency funding to the Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Conservation & Natural Resources. Now is the time to identify meaningful and long-term revenue sources that don’t at the same time rob from other environmental programs or promote additional impacts to our public resources.

The Three "R's" of Conservation

by Bob Berghier, conservation Chair

Educators have traditionally considered the fundamentals of education to be the “Three R’s” – Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic. I have recently become aware, through a paper published in Oryx (a scientific publication of the Fauna & Flora International), of what is referred to as the three R’s of Conservation Biology– Reservation Conservation, Restoration Conservation and Reconciliation Conservation. When I read the paper I was struck by both the simplicity of understanding the conservation three R’s and the conservation potential of implementing the third R - Reconciliation.

Reservation Conservation can be best described as traditional conservation – established national parks, wildlife refugees and other types of reserves. These are areas that have been created to protect biodiversity, which is usually centered on excluding or controlling humans and their effect on the environment. Parks and reserves are set aside and human activities such as hunting (legal and illegal – poaching), logging, mining, farming and grazing of livestock are usually (often with mixed results) excluded or strictly controlled. Examples of Reservation Conservation areas are some of the most famous places on earth – the Serengeti National Park in Tanzania, Manu National Park in Peru and Denali National Park in Alaska.

Restoration Conservation is considered, by many conservation biologists, as being the most important conservation goal in this century. With a world population of 6 billion humans (and still growing) along with their millions of domestic animals, much of the natural environments on the planet have had their biodiversity destroyed. Forests have been cleared, water sources- streams, rivers and lakes polluted, and wildlife populations severely depleted or driven to extinction. Some of these exploited areas have the potential to be restored. Forests can be replanted, water cleaned of pollution, and wildlife populations restored through increased protection or species reintroduction. Some examples of Restoration Conservation in the U.S. include the re-growth of the nearly destroyed Eastern forest, the clean up of the once considered “biologically dead” Philadelphia section of the Delaware River which now supports runs of shad and fishing eating birds like cormorants, and the spectacular increase in the numbers of the once decimated populations of bison, elk and deer throughout the lower 48 states.

The first two R’s have been recognized for at least a hundred years as valid conservation methods. The third R, Reconciliation, is starting to get the attention of conservation biologists. Reconciliation Conservation accepts that much of the planet has been severely affected by human activities. Since the numbers of humans and their companion domestic animals, and the resultant depletion of the environment, will not decrease, at least in our lifetime, we need to look at what can be saved. To paraphrase the Oryx paper- “Much of the potential loss in biodiversity can be stopped by redesigning human effected habitats so that a broad array of other species can survive in them”. Some examples of Reconciliation Conservation include – small farm shade grown coffee and cocoa plots that have a greater diversity of birds and plants versus biological sterile open sun grown coffee and cocoa plantations, Eastern bluebirds, whose original natural nesting sites were taken by introduced alien bird species (primarily European sparrows) and facing extinction, have adapted to human made nesting boxes, increasing bluebird numbers, and the National Wildlife Federation’s “Backyard Wildlife Habitats” which now includes over 20,000 micro wildlife habitats adjacent to human dwellings throughout the United States.

As individuals we can actively support Reservation Conservation. You can make donations to organizations that support national parks or other reserves, vote for legislation or legislators who do so, or help protect these areas by visiting them and paying admission fees. Through these same methods you can also provide for Restoration Conservation. Reconciliation Conservation is a conservation fundamental we all can directly participate in. Buy shade-grown coffee and chocolate and help support farmers who protect biodiversity. Plant native flora in your garden instead of exotics and native birds and insects will benefit. Consider making your own property a “Backyard Wildlife Habitat” haven for local wildlife. If we all do what we can to support the 3 R’s of conservation, the planet and its plants and animals, as well as humans, will benefit. For my own part, I leave a small part of my tiny yard un-mowed (my wife thinks this is actually more due to laziness on my part and I must admit that she may be partially right about that). However I have noticed an increased number of insect species on our property as a result

Sign the Audubon Climate Action Pledge

Global warming is the most urgent environmental threat we face, and individual actions can help to promote solutions to this problem.

Take our global warming pledge!
I recognize that I must take responsibility to raise awareness about this global problem, and take definitive action to help provide a clean, safe environment for generations to come. I pledge to take at least three of the following actions:

Federal advocacy:
• Write to my Senators in support of strong global warming legislation
• Work to encourage my Representative to formulate and pass strong global warming legislation
Set up an in-district meeting with the district staff of my Senators and Representative to advocate for strong global warming legislation

State:
• Encourage my State legislators to work toward a stronger Renewable Electricity Standard
• Write a letter to the Governor encouraging stricter standards for greenbuilding and building efficiency in the state
• Contact my energy utilities and urge them to provide clean, renewable energy alternatives like wind, solar, and biomass

Local:
• Write a letter-to-the-editor of my local newspaper in support of global warming initiatives at the federal, state or local level
• Encourage my Mayor to sign on to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement if they have not already
• Attend a city council, county commission, planning, fish and wildlife commission meeting and report and report back to my local Audubon chapter about what was discussed

Personal
• Switch my light bulbs to compact fluorescent bulbs or LEDs
• Reduce my car travel, or use public transportation when possible
• Use less energy to heat/cool my house
• Conserve water in my home and use less hot water
• Set a goal of reducing my household waste by half in the next year by recycling and buying less packaged goods

uploaded August 20, 2008