Avian Risk Assessment (See Kerlinger and Guarnaccia 2007) Noted That Migrating Raptors Were Quite Numerous (Nine Species Recorded, About 450

SPRING MIGRATION STUDY

Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project

Delta County, Michigan

DRAFT

September 2008

Report Prepared for:

Heritage Sustainable Energy

Report Prepared by:

John Guarnaccia and Paul Kerlinger, Ph.D.* Curry & Kerlinger, LLC P.O. Box 453 Cape May Point, NJ 08212 (609) 884-2842, fax 884-4569 [email protected]

* Primary Contact

Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

SPRING MIGRATION STUDY

Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project

Delta County, Michigan

Executive Summary

Heritage Sustainable Energy proposes a utility-scale wind-energy project for the Garden Peninsula, located in Delta County on the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The number of wind turbines has not been determined, but a leasehold map provided to Curry & Kerlinger indicates that turbines would be erected on private lands in mainly agricultural areas on the western side of the peninsula, and possibly on Little Summer Island. For the purpose of analysis, we are assuming wind turbines with a nameplate capacity of approximately 2.0 MW. The turbine towers would likely be about 78.0 meters (256 feet) tall and have rotors of about 39.0 m (128 feet) long. With the rotor tip in the 12 o’clock position, the wind turbines would reach a maximum height of about 118.0 m (387 feet) above ground level (AGL). When in the 6 o’clock position, rotor tips would be about 38.0 m (125 feet) AGL. However, larger turbines with nameplate capacities (up to 2.5 MW and more) reaching to 152.5 m (500 feet) are being considered.

To assess the Garden Peninsula’s importance to raptor and songbird migration, two studies were conducted in spring 2008 at the southern end of the peninsula. The flight from Door Peninsula to the Garden Peninsula can be achieved by island hopping with the maximum overwater crossing being slightly greater than about four miles (7+ km). These studies sought to quantify: 1) the volume of raptor migration from the Door Peninsula in Wisconsin along an island-hopping route to the Garden Peninsula, and 2) the abundance and diversity of night-migrating songbirds that stopover on the peninsula.

For the Raptor Migration Study, two hawk watches were established at the southern end of the Garden Peninsula, one near Fairport and the other on Burnt Bluff. Two hours of observation were conducted at each site on 23 days from April 30 to May 31. Data collected included species, number of individuals, date and time of observation, direction of flight, flight type, and flight height. These data were also collected for landbird and waterbird migrants noted. Observational details are provided in the report.

The spring study confirmed that a relatively small number of northbound raptors of thirteen species use the Garden Peninsula on a migration track that departs Wisconsin’s Door Peninsula. Raptor migration at Fairport (HW1) was measured at 7.3 birds/hour (335 birds in 46 hours), with about half of the raptors appearing to have used an island-hopping route from the Door Peninsula. At Burnt Bluff (HW2), raptor traffic was measured at 10.7 birds/hour (493 birds in 46 hours), with about one fifth of raptors apparently arriving over water from Wisconsin or other points. The greater raptor traffic rate at Burnt Bluff was probably attributable to resident Turkey Vultures, which were suspected to nest on the bluffs. Excluding vultures not judged to have

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 1 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI originated from Wisconsin, the traffic rates would be similar – 6.0 birds/hour at HW1 versus 6.5 birds/hour at HW2.

Compared with Great Lakes raptor migration sites that are regularly monitored in spring, the migration rates recorded in the Garden Peninsula study were relatively low, about one tenth of that recorded at the Whitefish Point and Straits of Mackinaw hawk watches in Michigan. There are various reasons for this. The Garden Peninsula is not a spring migrant “trap” or “bottleneck” such as occurs at Whitefish Point and the Straits of Mackinaw. Both of these sites are at the southern shore of a large body of water as opposed to the Garden Peninsula, which is on a northern shore. It appears that only a small percentage of the raptors migrating across Wisconsin in spring are funneled into the Door Peninsula and cross to the Garden Peninsula. This study found that peak spring migration along Door-Garden Peninsula route occurred on southerly winds and involved mostly Broad-winged Hawks. There was also one instance of wind drift on northerly winds bringing Broad-wings to the Garden Peninsula possibly from the base of the Upper Peninsula.

Regarding the fall raptor migration dynamic on the Garden Peninsula, a site visit conducted by Curry & Kerlinger on September 8-10, 2007, noted that migrating raptors were quite numerous (nine species recorded, about 450 individuals recorded in three days), especially toward the southern part of the peninsula and on Little Summer Island. The most numerous raptors were Broad-winged Hawk and Sharp-shinned Hawk. Interestingly, most of the raptors (and also many hundreds of Blue Jays, another daytime migrant) did not attempt crossing water to the Door Peninsula. Instead, they turned around at the southern end of the peninsula and headed back north along the peninsula’s western side, a phenomenon that has also been recorded at other peninsulas, particularly Cape May, New Jersey, and Whitefish Point, Michigan.

Therefore, hawk migration occurs along the Garden Peninsula in both the spring and fall seasons. But, the traffic is probably greater in fall, indicated by the fact that hawk watches along the western shore of Lake Michigan only operate in that season. This is similar to large flights of hawks along the north shore of several Great Lakes during fall.

Flight height of raptors reaching the Garden Peninsula in spring was generally high (i.e., above the rotor-sweep area [RSA]). Given the low migration volume and the predominantly high flight altitude, collision risk to migrating raptors in spring would appear to be low.

Regarding special-status species, the Michigan-threatened Bald Eagle was the third most abundant raptor recorded in the spring study (at about one bird/hour), after Turkey Vulture and Broad-winged Hawk. Given that only 35% of Bald Eagles recorded at Fairport were judged to have migrated from Wisconsin, it appears likely that some of the records were of resident birds recorded more than once or wandering individuals. Most Bald Eagles were recorded in the high- height zone, especially at Fairport.

Regarding other special-status raptors, the 16 records of Michigan-threatened Merlin at Burnt Bluff (HW2) may have resulted from a pair nesting on the bluffs. Merlin height use at both observation points was predominantly low (below the RSA) and birds may have been hunting as opposed to migrating. The Michigan-endangered Peregrine Falcon was more frequent at HW1

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 2 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

(6 records) than at HW2 (one record). At HW1, five of the six Peregrines appeared to have originated from Wisconsin, indicating they were migrants. One-half (50%) of these birds were in the high altitude category, whereas 33% were in the middle category (i.e., in the RSA), and 17% were low. Other listed raptors (Michigan-threatened Osprey and special-concern Northern Harrier, Cooper’s Hawk) and Northern Goshawk were infrequent, and their flight behavior did not suggest particular risk from wind farm operation. .

For landbirds and waterbirds in spring, abundance and flight height did not suggest heightened risk of collision. Blue Jay was by far the most abundant landbird migrant, favoring an island- hopping route through Fairport (HW1). Blue Jay traffic at Burnt Bluff (HW2) was a third that at Fairport. Flight eight of Blue Jays and other landbirds was predominantly low. Waterbird diversity was greater at Fairport, where more birds were observed resting or foraging on the water, but migration traffic was about equal between sites.

For the Stopover Ecology Study, six point counts were established within two miles (3.2 km) of the tip of the Garden Peninsula, with three in the vicinity of Fairport and three in the vicinity of Burnt Bluff. In each area, point counts sampled habitat use in forest, forest edge, and grassland.

Point-count circles extended to the limit of visibility, as the goal of the study was to determine whether or not birds were making stopovers and, if so, in what numbers and habitats. Each circle was sampled for 15 minutes on 23 days from April 30 to May 31, beginning after dawn as soon as light allowed for bird identification. For each observation, the following data were collected: point-count number, date, time, bird species (using standard four-letter codes), number of individuals, and behavior (coded either F, in flight, or P, perched).

Stopover of Neotropical migrants and related species was found to be minimal on the Garden Peninsula in spring. When all habitats were pooled, the highest daily diversity was 16 species, and the highest daily abundance was 19.2 birds/hour. On most days, these values were much lower.

A published weather-surveillance radar study indicates that most of the migration occurs to the west of the peninsula. In fall, however, significant stopover may be expected, because the migration direction is perpendicular to the peninsula and headed over Lake Michigan. At dawn, birds over Lake Michigan in the vicinity of the Garden Peninsula apparently reorient themselves toward the peninsula. A September 2007 site visit conducted by Curry & Kerlinger qualitatively confirmed greater stopover on the Garden Peninsula in fall, as well as “morning flight,” – essentially a continuation of the migration after dawn – with many songbirds flying above the treetops on what appeared to be a reverse migration to the north within the peninsula.

Regarding collision risk to night-migrating songbirds, the spring study does not suggest increased risk, because relatively few migrants stopped over. Risk would be greater in fall, when bird abundance is much greater, particularly at turbines located near lakeshore woodland, where migratory fallouts would be expected to be greatest. Finally, it is important to note that if the larger turbines, extending to 150 m, were to be used, risk to night migrants would be greater than if shorter turbines were used. Because turbines taller than about 125 m have never been erected or studied in North America, the increased risk associated with taller turbines is not known.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 3 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 4 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1

1.0 Introduction 8

2.0 Raptor Migration Study 8 2.1 Methodology 8 2.2 Results 10

3.0 Stopover Ecology of Night-Migrating Songbirds 26 3.1 Methodology 26 3.2 Results 26

4.0 Interpretation of Results/Risk Assessment 29 4.1 Raptor Migration Study 29 4.2 Stopover Ecology of Night-Migrating Songbirds 31

5.0 References 33

Figures

Figure 1 Project Location in Michigan 6 Figure 2 Hawk Watch and Point-Count Locations 7 Figure 2.2-1 Traffic Comparison at HW1 and HW2 12 Figure 2.2-2 Flight Direction at HW1 21 Figure 2.2-3 Flight Direction at HW2 21 Figure 2.2-4 Flight Behavior at HW1 22 Figure 2.2-5 Flight Behavior at HW2 22 Figure 2.2-6 Height Use at HW1 23 Figure 2.2-7 Height Use at HW2 23 Figure 2.2-8 Raptor Passage from Wisconsin 24 Figure 3.2-1 Diversity and Abundance of Selected Songbird Migrants, All Habitats 28

Tables

Table 2.2-1 Summary of Observer Effort 10 Table 2.2-2 Summary of Birds Observed 11 Table 2.2-3 Spring Raptor Traffic at HW1 and HW2 13 Table 2.2-4 Spring Landbird Traffic at HW1 and HW2 14 Table 2.2-5 Spring Waterbird Traffic at HW1 and HW2 17 Table 3.2-1 Records of Night-Migrating Songbirds 27

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 5 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Appendices

Appendix A. Observation Periods and Weather Conditions during Raptor Migration Study Appendix B. Weather Conditions during Stopover Ecology Study

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 6 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Figure 1. Project Location in Michigan. Note locations of regional hawk watches discussed in Section 4.0 (green icons).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 7 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Figure 2. Hawk Watch and Point-Count Locations

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 8 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

1.0 Introduction

Heritage Sustainable Energy is proposing a utility-scale wind-energy project for the Garden Peninsula, located in Delta County on the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. This Garden Peninsula separates northern Lake Michigan from Big Bay de Noc. A series of islands connect it with the Door Peninsula of Wisconsin.

Heritage Sustainable Energy has not yet determined the number of wind turbines it would construct, but a leasehold map provided to Curry & Kerlinger indicates that turbines would be erected on private lands (i.e., not in the Lake Superior State Forest) in mainly agricultural areas on the western side of the peninsula, and possibly on Little Summer Island. For the purpose of analysis, we are assuming wind turbines with a nameplate capacity of 2.0 MW. The turbine towers would likely be about 78.0 meters (256 feet) tall and have rotors of about 39.0 m (128 feet) long. With the rotor tip in the 12 o’clock position, the wind turbines would reach a maximum height of about 118.0 m (387 feet) above ground level (AGL). When in the 6 o’clock position, rotor tips would be about 38.0 m (125 feet) AGL. However, larger turbines with nameplate capacities (up to 2.5 MW and more) reaching to 152.5 m (500 feet) may be used.

The Garden Peninsula is considered a site where significant bird migration occurs (Chartier and Ziarno 2004). The peninsula is believed to serve as a migration corridor both spring and fall for raptors crossing to and from Wisconsin’s Door Peninsula. Birds crossing in spring from Door County can accomplish the crossing by island hopping, but they still must make water crossings of slightly greater than 4 miles (7+ km) between some of the islands. Night-migrating songbirds may occasionally concentrate in the peninsula’s wooded and brushy habitats during fallout events, when, in certain weather conditions, birds migrating on broad fronts over Lake Michigan redirect themselves to the nearest landfall at dawn or dusk. During such events, fallout would be expected to be greatest in lakeshore woodland and the edges of these woodlands.

To assess the Garden Peninsula’s importance to raptor and songbird migration, two studies were conducted in spring 2008 at the southern end of the peninsula. These studies sought to quantify: 1) the volume of raptor migration from the Door Peninsula in Wisconsin along an island-hopping route to the Garden Peninsula, and 2) the volume of night-migrating songbird stopover on the peninsula. These studies are reported below.

2.0 Raptor Migration Study

2.1 Methodology

For this study, two hawk watches (identified in Figure 3) were established at the southern end of the Garden Peninsula. Hawk Watch 1 (HW1, coordinates 45.625190, -86.671419) was located on the shore to the west of the town of Fairport and facing Little Summer Island. Hawk Watch 2 (HW2, coordinates 45.689331, -86.702061) was located on Burnt Bluff at the edge of the bluffs that descend to Big Bay de Noc. The distance between the sites was 4.7 miles (7.5 km). Both observation points had clear views of migration proceeding from the Door Peninsiula to the Garden Peninsula.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 9 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Two hours of observation were conducted at each site on 23 days from April 30 to May 31, amounting to five days per week, focusing on days when weather was likely to be optimal for migration. For details on observation periods and weather conditions, see Appendix A.

Observations alternated between the two hawk watches, with the first two hours conducted at HW1 and the second two hours at HW2. The next day, observations commenced at HW2, then continued at HW1. Observations at the first site commenced at 10:00 a.m. At the second site, they commenced at around 12:15 p.m. Forty-six hours of observation were conducted at each hawk watch.

To collect data, the observer scanned in a southerly direction, as this was the direction from which migrants would approach in spring. When a bird was sighted, it was observed with naked eye and binoculars as it moved through the observer’s field of view. When more than one bird was in view at a time, all were followed until the required data were gathered. The observer recorded data on the provided datasheet as birds passed an imaginary line that ran approximately east to west of the observation location – or a line approximately perpendicular to the main axis of migration. Data were also recorded for landbirds and waterbirds, but raptors received priority attention.

The following data were collected and entered on a datasheet:

Date: Recorded as month/day/year.

Species: All raptor species were recorded using standard two-letter abbreviations. Landbirds and waterbirds were noted by standard four-letter codes.

Class: Class was recorded to facilitate data analysis. The three bird-class abbreviations were R for raptors, L for landbirds, and W for waterbirds.

Number: The number of individuals involved in a single observation was recorded; i.e., solitary bird = 1; flocks – including mixed flocks – were recorded together, with the total number of individuals (these individuals were not independent). In the case of mixed kettles of hawks, the number of each species was noted (i.e., a separate line for each species, or a note in the note column indicating how many individuals of each species). This level of detail was not used for recording landbirds or waterbirds, unless time permitted.

Time: Time was recorded to the nearest minute, when a bird or flock passed within visual range. If a bird lingered for more than one minute, the beginning and ending times of the observation was separated by a hyphen. Military time was preferred (e.g., 0820, 1301; colon not required).

Direction: The direction of flight in each observation was recorded in one of eight cardinal directions (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW). If a bird or flock changed direction, this was noted by providing the new direction separated by a hyphen.

Behavior: This refers to flight type, namely, D (Direct flight with few changes in direction, all less than 30 degrees), I (Indirect flight during which more than one circle was recorded, but more than 50% of flight is without such turns), S (Soaring flight during which more than 50% of the time is spent circling), H (Flight that appeared to be for hunting), and P (Birds that were perched).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 10 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Height: Height in the fall study was divided into the following categories: L (Low) = <125 feet (<30 m); M (Medium/Moderate) = >125 feet (>30 m) but < 400 feet (<125 m); and H (High) = >400 feet (>125 m). Flight height categories were based on wind-turbine dimensions, with Height M corresponding to the rotor-swept area. Height can often be difficult to gauge. Therefore, if a bird appeared to be at the boundary between heights, it was recorded with two letters (LM or MH, etc.). If a bird moved from one height into another, it was recorded in the sequence the bird moved (e.g., LM, MH, HML, etc.).

From Wisconsin: Birds that were observed crossing water to arrive at the Garden Peninsula were coded as FW (From Wisconsin). If a bird was not observed crossing water, it did not receive the FW code, even though it had probably originated from the Door Peninsula or other locations.

Data were entered on the data sheet as birds were observed. Later, the data were logged into an Excel spreadsheet for subsequent analysis.

2.2 Results

Table 2.2-1. Summary of Observer Effort

EFFORT HW1 HW2 COMBINED Begin date 30-Apr-2008 30-Apr-2008 30-Apr-2008 End date 31-May-2008 31-May-2008 31-May-2008 # observation days 23 23 23 # observation hours 46.0 46.0 92.0 Avg. obs. hours/day 2.0 2.0 4.0

Table 2.2-1 summarizes observer effort (for details, see Appendix A). Twenty-three days of observations were conducted from April 30 to May 31. Total observation hours were 92, with 46 hours conducted at each hawk watch (two hours per day).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 11 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table 2.2-2. Summary of Birds Observed

RAPTORS HW1 HW2 COMBINED # species 12 12 13

# birds observed 335 493 828 birds/hour 7.3 10.7 9.0

# observations 227 320 547 observations/hour 4.9 7.0 5.9 birds/observation 1.5 1.5 1.5

LANDBIRDS HW1 HW2 COMBINED # species 47 47 59

# birds observed 1,624 991 2,615 birds/hour 35.3 21.5 28.4

# observations 403 397 800 observations/hour 8.8 8.6 8.7 birds/observation 4.0 2.5 3.3

WATERBIRDS HW1 HW2 COMBINED # species 24 8 24

# birds observed 374 388 762 birds/hour 8.1 8.4 8.3

# observations 128 133 261 observations/hour 2.8 2.9 2.8 birds/observation 2.9 2.9 2.9

ALL BIRDS HW1 HW2 COMBINED # species 83 67 96

# birds observed 2,333 1,872 4,205 birds/hour 50.7 40.7 45.7

# observations 758 850 1,608 observations/hour 16.5 18.5 17.5 birds/observation 3.1 2.2 2.6

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 12 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table 2.2-2 summarizes the number of birds observed by class (raptors, landbirds, and waterbirds). A total of 4,205 birds were observed in 1,608 observations (2.6 birds/observation), of which 19.7% (547) were raptors, 62.2% (800) were landbirds, and 18.1% (261) were waterbirds. Flocking (birds/observation) was not high for any bird group, but raptors were generally observed individually (1.5 birds/observation) more than landbirds (3.3) and waterbirds (2.9).

As can be appreciated in Figure 2.2-1, raptor migration appeared to be slightly greater at HW2 (10.7 birds/hour) than at HW1 (7.3), but as will be explained below, that higher traffic at HW2 was attributable to resident Turkey Vultures. Landbird traffic, however, was nearly double at HW1 (35.3) as compared with HW2 (21.5). Waterbird traffic was virtually the same at the two hawk watches.

Figure 2.2-1. Traffic Comparison at HW1 and HW2

40.0

35.0

30.0

25.0

20.0 birds/hour 15.0

10.0

5.0

- HW1 HW2 Raptors 7.3 10.7 Landbirds 35.3 21.5 Waterbirds 8.1 8.4

Tables 2.2-3 through 5, detail results among bird types. Note that each table includes columns with the percentage of birds arriving from Wisconsin.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 13 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table 2.2-3. Spring Raptor Traffic at HW1 and HW2

HW1 HW2 % % from from ∆% Avg Raptors1 #birds birds/hr WI #birds birds/hr WI birds/hr birds/hr Turkey Vulture 95 2.07 29% 202 4.39 3% 113% 3.23 Broad-winged Hawk 112 2.43 74% 127 2.76 44% 13% 2.60 Bald Eagle (MI-T) 52 1.13 35% 48 1.04 19% -8% 1.09 Sharp-shinned Hawk 20 0.43 60% 24 0.52 42% 20% 0.48 Red-tailed Hawk 6 0.13 33% 37 0.80 8% 517% 0.47 Northern Harrier (MI-SC) 15 0.33 73% 16 0.35 13% 7% 0.34 Merlin (MI-T) 4 0.09 50% 16 0.35 19% 300% 0.22 Unidentified Raptor 13 0.28 77% 3 0.07 33% -77% 0.17 Cooper's Hawk (MI-SC) - - 8 0.17 50% 0.09 American Kestrel 5 0.11 100% 3 0.07 0% -40% 0.09 Osprey (MI-T) 3 0.07 67% 4 0.09 75% 33% 0.08 Peregrine Falcon (MI-E) 6 0.13 83% 1 0.02 0% -83% 0.08 Rough-legged Hawk 2 0.04 100% 4 0.09 25% 100% 0.07 Northern Goshawk (MI-SC) 2 0.04 50% - - -100% 0.02 Total 335 7.28 54% 493 10.72 20% 47% 9.00

1 State-listed species designated E (endangered), T (threatened), or SC (special-concern).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 14 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table 2.2-4. Spring Landbird Traffic at HW1 and HW2

HW1 HW2 % % from from ∆% Avg Raptors1 #birds birds/hr WI #birds birds/hr WI birds/hr birds/hr Blue Jay 977 21.24 40% 356 7.74 49% -64% 14.49 American Crow 93 2.02 39% 86 1.87 0% -8% 1.95 Cedar Waxwing 21 0.46 100% 138 3.00 0% 557% 1.73 American Goldfinch 77 1.67 51% 65 1.41 5% -16% 1.54 Common Raven 21 0.46 5% 79 1.72 3% 276% 1.09 Unidentified Songbirds 91 1.98 1% 4 0.09 0% -96% 1.03 European Starling 49 1.07 27% 27 0.59 0% -45% 0.83 Savannah Sparrow 7 0.15 0% 48 1.04 0% 586% 0.60 Red-winged Blackbird 45 0.98 31% 4 0.09 0% -91% 0.53 Tree Swallow 34 0.74 9% 12 0.26 0% -65% 0.50 Barn Swallow 31 0.67 35% 12 0.26 0% -61% 0.47 Northern Flicker 25 0.54 4% 14 0.30 0% -44% 0.42 Yellow-rumped Warbler 4 0.09 0% 34 0.74 0% 750% 0.41 Common Grackle 20 0.43 10% 3 0.07 0% -85% 0.25 American Robin 15 0.33 0% 4 0.09 0% -73% 0.21 Mourning Dove 11 0.24 0% 3 0.07 0% -73% 0.15 Chipping Sparrow 3 0.07 67% 10 0.22 20% 233% 0.14 Bobolink 1 0.02 0% 11 0.24 0% 1000% 0.13 Indigo Bunting 3 0.07 100% 9 0.20 0% 200% 0.13 N. Rough-winged Swallow 8 0.17 38% 4 0.09 0% -50% 0.13 Chimney Swift 3 0.07 0% 8 0.17 0% 167% 0.12 Red-bellied Woodpecker 8 0.17 0% 3 0.07 0% -63% 0.12 Brown-headed Cowbird 9 0.20 0% - - 0.10

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 15 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Cliff Swallow 1 0.02 0% 8 0.17 0% 700% 0.10 Yellow Warbler 8 0.17 13% 1 0.02 0% -88% 0.10 Eastern Kingbird 6 0.13 0% 2 0.04 0% -67% 0.09 Brown Thrasher 7 0.15 0% - - -100% 0.08 Ruby-throated Hummingbird 3 0.07 33% 4 0.09 0% 33% 0.08 Eastern Bluebird 5 0.11 0% 1 0.02 0% -80% 0.07 Eastern Meadowlark 2 0.04 0% 4 0.09 0% 100% 0.07 Bank Swallow 3 0.07 67% 2 0.04 0% -33% 0.05 Gray Catbird 5 0.11 0% - - -100% 0.05 Palm Warbler - - 5 0.11 0% 0.05 Hairy Woodpecker - - 4 0.09 0% 0.04 Pileated Woodpecker 1 0.02 0% 3 0.07 0% 200% 0.04 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 2 0.04 0% 2 0.04 0% 0% 0.04 Red-eyed Vireo 1 0.02 0% 3 0.07 0% 200% 0.04 Song Sparrow 4 0.09 0% - - -100% 0.04 Wild Turkey - - 4 0.09 0% 0.04 Baltimore Oriole 3 0.07 0% - - -100% 0.03 House Finch 3 0.07 0% - - -100% 0.03 House Wren 2 0.04 0% 1 0.02 0% -50% 0.03 Northern Cardinal 1 0.02 0% 2 0.04 0% 100% 0.03 Scarlet Tanager 2 0.04 50% 1 0.02 0% -50% 0.03 Downy Woodpecker 1 0.02 0% 1 0.02 0% 0% 0.02 Eastern Wood-Pewee 2 0.04 0% - - -100% 0.02 Purple Martin 2 0.04 0% - - -100% 0.02 American Redstart - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Black-billed Cuckoo 1 0.02 0% - - -100% 0.01 Blue-headed Vireo - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Lincoln's Sparrow - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Mourning Warbler - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Nashville Warbler - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 16 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Olive-sided Flycatcher - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Purple Finch 1 0.02 0% - - -100% 0.01 Ruby-crowned Kinglet - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Red-headed Woodpecker 1 0.02 0% - - -100% 0.01 Summer Tanager - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Swamp Sparrow - - 1 0.02 0% 0.01 Western Meadowlark (MI- SC) 1 0.02 0% - - -100% 0.01 Total 1,624 35.30 34% 991 21.54 19% -39% 28.42

1 State-listed species designated E (endangered), T (threatened), or SC (special-concern).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 17 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Table 2.2-5. Spring Waterbird Traffic at HW1 and HW2

HW1 HW2 % % from from ∆% Avg Raptors1 #birds birds/hr WI #birds birds/hr WI birds/hr birds/hr Double-crested Cormorant 40 0.87 5% 223 4.85 0% 458% 2.86 Ring-billed Gull 29 0.63 7% 133 2.89 0% 359% 1.76 American White Pelican 80 1.74 29% 9 0.20 0% -89% 0.97 Bonaparte's Gull 55 1.20 0% - - 0% -100% 0.60 Sandhill Crane 26 0.57 46% 11 0.24 0% -58% 0.40 Bufflehead 25 0.54 0% - - 0% -100% 0.27 Killdeer 18 0.39 0% - - 0% -100% 0.20 Red-breasted Merganser 17 0.37 0% - - 0% -100% 0.18 Common Loon (MI-T) 10 0.22 0% 3 0.07 0% -70% 0.14 Mallard 9 0.20 11% 4 0.09 0% -56% 0.14 Mute Swan 12 0.26 0% - - 0% -100% 0.13 Herring Gull 11 0.24 9% - - 0% -100% 0.12 Common Merganser 10 0.22 0% - - 0% -100% 0.11 Redhead 8 0.17 0% - - 0% -100% 0.09 Canada Goose 4 0.09 0% 3 0.07 0% -25% 0.08 Spotted Sandpiper 5 0.11 0% - - 0% -100% 0.05 Caspian Tern (MI-T) 1 0.02 0% 2 0.04 50% 100% 0.03 Great Blue Heron 3 0.07 67% - - 0% -100% 0.03 Long-tailed Duck 3 0.07 0% - - 0% -100% 0.03 Unidentified Waterbirds 3 0.07 33% - - 0% -100% 0.03 Gadwall 2 0.04 0% - - 0% -100% 0.02 Black-crowned Night-Heron (MI- SC) 1 0.02 0% - - 0% -100% 0.01 Great Black-backed Gull 1 0.02 0% - - 0% -100% 0.01

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 18 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Solitary Sandpiper 1 0.02 100% - - 0% -100% 0.01 Total 374 8.13 12% 388 8.43 0% 4% 8.28

1 State-listed species designated E (endangered), T (threatened), or SC (special-concern).

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 19 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Regarding raptors (Table 2.2-3), thirteen of the seventeen species recorded at Central-U.S. hawk watches were observed in the study. Black Vulture, Red-shouldered Hawk, Swainson’s Hawk, and Golden Eagle were not observed. The number of species recorded at each site was the same (12), but Cooper’s Hawk was not observed at HW1, and Northern Goshawk was not observed at HW2.

Turkey Vulture was most abundant overall, with 297 birds recorded overall (35.9% of raptors), for an average of 3.2 birds/hour. As will be discussed, this high percentage probably represents resident birds counted on multiple occasions, particularly at HW2. Broad-winged Hawk was second in abundance, with 239 birds (28.9%), averaging 2.6 birds/hour, followed by Bald Eagle (Michigan threatened), with 100 birds (12.1%), averaging 1.1 birds/hour. All other species averaged less than one bird/hour.

The numbers of some species were fairly even between sites. Examples are Broad-winged Hawk, Bald Eagle (Michigan threatened), Sharp-shinned Hawk, and Northern Harrier (Michigan special-concern). Other species were much more abundant at one site than the other. For example, twice as many Turkey Vultures, six times as many Red-tailed Hawks, and four times as many Merlins (Michigan threatened) were recorded at HW2 than at HW1. These differences may be attributable to resident birds having been attracted to Burnt Bluff for lift (either thermal or wind-deflected). For Merlin and Turkey Vultures, the bluffs probably provided nesting sites (Tom Tustison, personal communication) and soaring opportunities. Only Peregrine Falcon (Michigan endangered) was notably more abundant at HW1 (6 birds) than at HW2 (one bird).

It is interesting to note that about one-half of the raptors recorded at HW1 were considered to be migrating from Wisconsin’s Door Peninsula, whereas only 20% of birds recorded at HW2 were considered to be migrating from Wisconsin (see Table 2.2-3). At HW1, the observer (Tom Tustison, personal communication) noted that most raptors flew along the western side of Little Summer Island to make landfall to the west of the observation point. This appears to confirm that the island chain from the Door Peninsula serves as a migration route for some raptors. Most of the birds observed at Burnt Bluff appeared to have already made landfall, but some were recorded arriving over water.

It was noted that some raptors at Burnt Bluff did not follow the peninsula north. Rather, they used the thermal lift generated over the bluff to gain height, which they then used to cross Big Bay de Noc to reach the mainland beyond. In other words, for some raptors, the tip of the Garden Peninsula appears to be another “island” in the island-hopping path northward.

As already noted, raptor traffic rate at HW2 was greater than at HW1, but this difference is probably mostly attributable to resident Turkey Vultures. If resident vultures (i.e., birds not originating from Wisconsin) are excluded, the adjusted traffic rates are similar – 6.0 birds/hour at HW1 versus 6.5 birds/hour at HW2. It is possible that if some of the Red-tailed Hawks observed at Burnt Bluff were residents, the migration rate there would have been less at that site.

Blue Jay was by far the most abundant landbird recorded, averaging 14.5 birds/hour. The only other species recorded above one bird/hour were American Crow (2.0), Cedar Waxwing (1.7),

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 20 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

American Goldfinch (1.5), and Common Raven (1.1). Most of the other fifty-plus species recorded were relatively scarce. While landbird traffic was higher at HW1 (35.3 birds/hour) than at HW2 (21.5), most of this difference was attributable to Blue Jays, which were recorded at 21.2 birds/hour at HW1 and at 7.7 birds/hour at HW2. With regard to migration route, landbirds demonstrated the same pattern as raptors, with more birds appearing to have originated from Wisconsin at HW1 (34%) than at HW2 (19%).

Waterbird diversity was much higher at HW1 (24 species) than at HW2 (8 species). This difference probably owes to better quality habitat near Fairport. That the traffic rates were nearly the same between sites was due to larger numbers of Double-crested Cormorants and Ring-billed Gulls observed at HW2. Few waterbirds appeared to have originated from Wisconsin, but nearly all of those that did were observed at HW1, including nearly half of the Sandhill Cranes and nearly a third of the American White Pelicans.

The following figures have been prepared to demonstrate flight behavior recorded during spring migration at the tip of the Garden Peninsula. Percentages were calculated based on the number of birds for which flight direction, strategy, and height was recorded.

Figures 2.2-2 and 2.2-3 show flight direction. At HW1, flight direction was northerly for all bird groups, but strongly so for raptors and landbirds. At HW2, on the other hand, raptors and landbirds did not demonstrate a strong directional tendency. In fact, for a large proportion of raptors, a directional tendency could not be discerned (29.1% recorded as variable). The reason appears to be that raptors took advantage of thermal lift at Burnt Bluff to gain height, circling and changing direction to ascend on rising air currents (Tom Tustison, personal communication). Some of these birds were also likely to be residents of the area and counted more than once.

Figures 2.2-4 and 2.2-5 illustrate flight strategy. At HW1, most raptors employed indirect flight strategy (more than one circle recorded, but more than 50% of flight without such turns). Landbirds, however, strongly favored direct flight (few changes in direction, all less than 30 degrees). Waterbirds also favored direct flight, but many were recorded on the water. At HW2, landbirds and waterbirds strongly favored direct flight, but raptors did not demonstrate a preference. More were recorded soaring at HW2 than at HW1, no doubt because they took advantage of thermal lift at Burnt Bluff.

Regarding altitude of flight, it should be noted that when a bird or flock of birds was observed at more than one height, its presence in each height was recorded fractionally. For example, if a bird or flock was recorded ascending from low height to middle height, values of 0.5 were recorded in the two categories for that observation. Note that the middle height (code M) corresponds with the rotor-swept area of a wind turbine.

Figures 2.2-6 and 2.2-7 illustrate flight height. At HW1, most raptors were recorded flying high, which is to be expected, as soaring hawks (such as Broad-wings) need height to glide long distances over water barriers. At HW2, more raptors were recorded using the high-height zone than the other zones. Landbirds, on the other hand, were recorded flying mainly in the low- height zone at both hawk watches. At HW1, most waterbirds recorded flying were at high height, while at HW2 they were fairly evenly distributed between height categories.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 21 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Figure 2.2-2. Flight Direction at HW1

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% N S E W Variable Raptors (N=330) 67.6% 14.0% 5.1% 3.5% 9.9% Landbirds (N=1534) 60.7% 17.4% 7.4% 7.9% 6.6% Waterbirds (N=299) 37.8% 22.6% 9.0% 26.3% 4.3%

Figure 2.2-3. Flight Direction at HW2

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% N S E W Variable Raptors (N=464) 24.3% 20.1% 18.4% 8.2% 29.1% Landbirds (N=889) 30.8% 16.7% 28.7% 15.7% 8.1% Waterbirds (N=387) 53.0% 25.3% 6.6% 12.5% 2.9%

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 22 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Figure 2.2-4. Flight Behavior at HW1

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% Direct Indirect Soaring Hunting Perched Raptors (N=265) 27.6% 56.2% 14.7% 1.1% 0.4% Landbirds (N=1074) 89.3% 2.4% 0.5% 0.0% 7.8% Waterbirds (N=239) 37.6% 17.2% 13.8% 0.0% 31.4%

Figure 2.2-5. Flight Behavior at HW2

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% Direct Indirect Soaring Hunting Perched Raptors (N=265) 37.0% 31.0% 26.9% 4.0% 1.1% Landbirds (N=1074) 84.3% 3.1% 1.3% 0.1% 11.2% Waterbirds (N=239) 74.8% 19.3% 2.8% 3.1% 0.0%

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 23 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI

Figure 2.2-6. Height Use at HW1

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Raptors (N=328) Landbirds (N=1535) Waterbirds (N=290) H 65.4% 16.2% 55.0% M 14.5% 24.8% 18.1% L 20.1% 59.0% 29.9%

Figure 2.2-7. Height Use at HW2

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Raptors (N=466) Landbirds (N=897) Waterbirds (N=383) H 44.0% 8.9% 28.8% M 23.7% 10.9% 39.5% L 32.3% 80.2% 31.7%

Figure 2.2-8 graphs the data for raptors classified as having arrived from Wisconsin (code FW). The three peaks correspond with Broad-winged Hawk passage. At HW1, small flocks of Broad- wings (range of 1 to 18 birds) were observed on two days with southerly winds (for wind direction, see Appendix A). On May 15, 36 of the 38 Broad-wings observed in the morning at HW1 were determined to have crossed from Wisconsin. That afternoon, at HW2, no Broad- winged Hawks were recorded. On May 28, 35 of 36 Broad-wings recorded in the morning at HW1 were judged to have come from Wisconsin. That afternoon, at HW2, 53 Broad-wings were recorded (flocks of 1 to 8 birds), but none was judged to have crossed from Wisconsin (i.e., they were already on the Garden Peninsula). This appears to indicate that raptors arriving near Fairport do not follow a fixed track or path up the peninsula.

Figure 2.2-8. Raptor Passage from Wisconsin

25.0

20.0

15.0

HW1 HW2

birds/hour 10.0

5.0

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 /08 /08 0 0 0 /08 /08 0 0 /08 0 0 0 /08 /0 0 2 /4/ 0 2 4/ 8 0/ 2/ 8 0 /3 5/ 5 5/6/ 5/8/ /1 /1 /1 /16/ /1 /2 /2 /2 /3 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5/24/ 5/26/08 5 5

At HW2, on the morning of May 27, one flock of 31 Broad-wings was judged to have arrived from Wisconsin. Interestingly, winds were out of the north. When this flock reached the Garden Peninsula, it headed northeast, up the peninsula. Given the wind direction, it is conceivable that this flock was blown off course, not from the Door Peninsula, but from the mainland, possibly Menominee County at the base of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. No Broad-wings were seen that afternoon at HW1.

More data are required to improve understanding of spring raptor migration over water to the Garden Peninsula, but these few observations appear to strongly suggest that small numbers of Broad-wings only make the water crossing from the Door Peninsula when winds are southerly. Once they reach the Garden Peninsula, their route out of the peninsula varies. Northerly winds may also blow Broad-wings over to the Garden Peninsula, but in that case, birds are possibly using the peninsula to make up ground lost by wind drift.

In the hawk-migration study, most of the special-status species recorded were raptors. These included the Michigan-endangered Peregrine Falcon, threatened Osprey, Bald Eagle, and Merlin, and special-concern Northern Harrier, Cooper’s Hawk, and Northern Goshawk. Other special- status species were the Michigan threatened Common Loon and Caspian Tern and special- concern Black-crowned Night-Heron and Western Meadowlark.

The endangered Peregrine Falcon was mainly recorded at HW1, where five of six birds appeared to have migrated from the Door Peninsula. Height use was H 50%, M 33%, L 17%. The one bird recorded at HW2 used the high and middle height zones.

The most common special-status species was the threatened Bald Eagle, recorded at about one bird/hour at both hawk watches (see Table 2.2-3). At HW1, most Bald Eagles were recorded in the high-height zone (H 73%, M 13%, L 14%). At HW2, half of the Bald Eagles used the high- height zone (H 50%, M 21%, L 29%). At HW1, 35% of Bald Eagles were judged to have migrated from the Door Peninsula. At HW2, the percentage was 19%. This may indicate that some of the Bald Eagle observations were of resident birds recorded more than once.

The threatened Merlin was mostly recorded at HW2, where there were 16 records, as compared with 4 at HW1. 19% of the Merlins recorded at HW2 were judged to have crossed from Wisconsin, while at HW1 it was 50%. It was suspected that a pair of Merlins was nesting on Burnt Bluff, but a nest could not be located or confirmed (Tom Tustison, personal communication). At HW2, Merlins preferred the low-height zone (H 17%, M 13%, L 70%). At HW1, use of the low-height zone also predominated (H 17%, M 17%, L 67%).

Among other threatened species, Common Loon was also mostly recorded at HW1, where there were ten records (H 75%, M 20%, L 5%), as opposed to HW2, where there were three (H 10%, M 30%, L 60%). Osprey, on the other hand, was relatively scarce at both hawk watches, with three birds recorded at HW1 (H 83%, M 17%, L 0%) and four at HW2 (H 58%, M10%, L 32%). Caspian Tern was scarce at both sites, with one bird at HW1 and two at HW2 (all recorded at low height).

Northern Harrier was the most common among the special-concern species. Fifteen birds were recorded at HW1 (H 37%, M 21%, L 41%), and 16 birds were recorded at HW2 (H17%, M12%, L71%). All eight Cooper’s Hawk records were from HW2, where half the birds were judged to have made a water crossing (H 38%, M 6%, 56%). The two Goshawks recorded were both at HW1 (H 0%, M 25%, L 75%). There was one record each of Black-crowned Night-Heron and Western Meadowlark at HW1.

The actual numbers of special-status species migrating along the Garden Peninsula was likely greater than recorded during the study period, because the study period did not include every day of the entire migration season, nor did it include all hours of the day. Additionally, effort was divided between the hawk watches. Therefore, when the observer was at one hawk watch, he did not observe birds at the other.

3.0 Stopover Ecology of Night-Migrating Songbirds

3.1 Methodology

This study was designed to determine the magnitude of stopover by night-migrating songbirds and related species. Shown in Figure 3, six point counts were established within two miles (3.2 km) of the tip of the Garden Peninsula, with three in the vicinity of Fairport (F1, E1, and G1) and three in the vicinity of Burnt Bluff (F2, E2, and G2). In each area, point counts sampled habitat use in forest (F1 and F2), forest edge (E1 and E2), and grassland (G1 and G2). Center coordinates of point counts were:

F1 45.630559, -86.676506 E1 45.670509, -86.667780 G1 45.635071, -86.650449 F2 45.665100, -86.676869 E2 45.635062, -86.640911 G2 45.688419, -86.702129

Point-count circles extended to the limit of visibility, as the goal of the study was to determine whether or not birds were making stopovers.

Each point-count circle was sampled for 15 minutes on 23 days from April 30 to May 31 (goal of five days per week when weather was favorable for migration). The first point count was conducted as soon after dawn as light allowed for bird identification, generally between 5:45 and 6:30, slightly later on overcast days. Points were then sampled in a rotational manner such that, on the first day, those closest to Fairport were sampled first, followed by those near Burnt Bluff. The ones near Burnt Bluff were sampled first the following day.

For each observation, the following data were collected: point-count number, date, time, bird species (using standard four-letter codes), number of individuals, and behavior (coded either F, in flight, or P, perched).

3.2 Results

There were 924 observations of 1,797 landbirds (1.9 birds/observation) of 72 species. Of this number, 689 landbirds (38.3%) of 46 species were observed at the grassland sites (393 at G1, 296 at G2), 633 (35.2%) of 50 species at the forest-edge sites (172 at E1, 461 at E2), and 475 (26.4%) of 47 species at the forest sites (276 at F1, 199 at F2). Given the greater range of vision in grassland, a greater percentage of birds were observed in flight there (61%) than at forest-edge (48%) and forest (41%), but the percentage of perched bird was highest in forest (55%) than at forest edge (51%) and grassland (37%)1.

1 In each habitat, there was a small percentage of birds that were heard, but it could not be determined if they were perched or in flight.

Overall, the most abundant landbirds recorded were American Crow (287 records), European Starling (273), Blue Jay (176), and Red-winged Blackbird (121). Together, these four species made up 48% of all landbirds. These common species are not nocturnal migrants. To determine the magnitude of stopover by night-migrating songbirds, a subset of landbirds was examined. Shown in Table 3.2-1, these 32 species include Neotropical migrants and other night-migrating species that arrived on the Garden Peninsula in May. Some night-migrating songbirds, such as Yellow-rumped Warbler, were excluded from this analysis because they were already present on the peninsula when the study began.

Table 3.2-1 Records of Night-Migrating Songbirds

Species (Taxonomic Order) Edge Forest Grassland Total Great-crested Flycatcher 1 3 2 6 Eastern Kingbird 1 - 5 6 Philadelphia Vireo 1 - - 1 Red-eyed Vireo 3 6 2 11 House Wren 3 - 4 7 Winter Wren - 1 - 1 Sedge Wren - - 1 1 Swainson's Thrush - 1 - 1 Wood Thrush - 1 - 1 Gray Catbird - - 1 1 Brown Thrasher 2 1 2 5 Nashville Warbler 1 1 - 2 Northern Parula - 2 - 2 Yellow Warbler 1 - 3 4 Chestnut-sided Warbler 1 2 - 3 Magnolia Warbler 3 2 - 5 Cape May Warbler - - 1 1 Black-throated Green Warbler 8 33 - 41 Blackburnian Warbler 1 3 - 4 Palm Warbler - - 3 3 Black-and-white Warbler - 3 - 3 American Redstart 4 13 - 17 Ovenbird 17 30 5 52 Common Yellowthroat 2 - 8 10 Wilson's Warbler 1 - - 1 Scarlet Tanager 3 1 - 4 Eastern Towhee - - 1 1 Lincoln's Sparrow 1 - 2 3 White-crowned Sparrow - - 1 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 1 1 3 5 Indigo Bunting 2 - 2 4 Baltimore Oriole - - 3 3 32 species 57 104 49 210

These 32 species made up 44% of all landbird species recorded, but their total number (210) was only 12% of all individuals. Only two species were relatively abundant: Ovenbird (52 records) and Black-throated Green Warbler (41). Most species were scarce.

To illustrate migratory stopover on the Garden Peninsula, Figure 3.2-1 has been prepared. It graphs the number of individuals and species recorded by date, based on the records indicated in Table 3.2-1.

Figure 3.2-1. Diversity and Abundance of Selected Songbird Migrants, All Habitats

20 species individuals

Number 15

0 5/1/08 5/2/08 5/3/08 5/4/08 5/5/08 5/6/08 5/7/08 5/8/08 5/9/08 4/30/08 5/10/08 5/11/08 5/12/08 5/13/08 5/14/08 5/15/08 5/16/08 5/17/08 5/18/08 5/19/08 5/20/08 5/21/08 5/22/08 5/23/08 5/24/08 5/25/08 5/26/08 5/27/08 5/28/08 5/29/08 5/30/08 5/31/08

As this chart illustrates, the arrival of night-migrating songbirds did not commence until about mid May. The first significant wave of migrants occurred on May 14, when there was a spike in the number of species and individuals. The next recorded waves were on May 26 and May 29, with the May-26 wave recording the highest species diversity (16) and number of individuals (29). Given that 1.5 hours of sampling was conducted each day (15 minutes at each of six point counts), the maximum abundance of nocturnal migrants, recorded on May 26, was 19.3 birds/hour.

Between sites, there was no significant difference in the number of individual night-migrating songbirds. In the vicinity of Fairport, 48 individuals were recorded in forest (F1), 31 in forest edge (E1), and 25 in grassland (G1). In the vicinity of Burnt Bluff, 56 individuals were recorded in forest (F2), 26 in forest edge (E2), and 24 in grassland (G2). This indicates that abundance was about the same in shoreline locations (F1) as in interior locations (F2) (see Figure 3). If significant migratory fallout had occurred, one might have expected greater abundances in lakeshore habitats, as night-migrating songbirds aloft over Lake Michigan at dawn would likely fly to them.

4.0 Interpretation of Results/Risk Assessment

4.1 Migration Study

The spring study confirmed that some northbound raptors use the Garden Peninsula on a migration track that departs Wisconsin’s Door Peninsula. Raptor migration at Fairport (HW1) was measured at 7.3 birds/hour, with about one-half of the raptors appearing to have used an island-hopping route from the Door Peninsula. At Burnt Bluff (HW2), raptor traffic was measured at 10.7 birds/hour, with about one-fifth of raptors apparently arriving over water from Wisconsin or other points. The higher raptor traffic at Burnt Bluff was mostly attributable to resident Turkey Vultures, which were suspected to nest on the bluffs. Excluding vultures not judged to have originated from Wisconsin, the traffic rates would be similar – 6.0 birds/hour at HW1 versus 6.5 birds/hour at HW2.

Compared with Great Lakes raptor migration sites that are monitored annually in spring, the migration rates recorded in the Garden Peninsula study were low. From April 30 to May 31, 2008, the hawk watch at Whitefish Point, located 95 miles (150 km) northeast of the Project site (see Figure 1), recorded 9,770 raptors in 168 hours for a passage rate of 58.1 birds/hour2. The most common raptors were Sharp-shinned Hawk (5,609 individuals) and Broad-winged Hawk (2,254). From April 30 to May 12, 2008, the hawk watch at the Straits of Mackinaw, located 85 miles (135 km) east of the Project site (see Figure 1), recorded 6,110 raptors in 82 hours for a passage rate of 74.5 birds/hour3. The most common raptors were Broad-winged Hawk (4,570) and Red-tailed Hawk (993).

Spring raptor traffic on the Garden Peninsula, therefore, was about one-tenth of that recorded at Whitefish Point and Straits of Mackinaw. There are various reasons for this. The Garden Peninsula is not a migrant trap or bottleneck to migration, as is the case at Whitefish Point and the Straits of Mackinaw. It appears, rather, that only a small percentage of the raptors migrating across Wisconsin in spring get funneled into the Door Peninsula and cross to the Garden Peninsula. It is also important to note that hawks counted at both Whitefish Point and the Straits of Mackinaw are at the northernmost points of land on these bodies of water, whereas the Garden Peninsula is at the southernmost point of land on a large lake. Thus, birds flying northward in spring are concentrated at both Whitefish Point and the Straits of Mackinaw, whereas they are not concentrated at the Garden Peninsula.

The present study found that peak spring migration from the Door Peninsula to the Garden Peninsula occurred on southerly winds and involved mostly Broad-winged Hawks. There was also one instance of possible wind drift on northerly winds bringing Broad-wings to the Garden Peninsula perhaps from elsewhere.

Regarding the fall raptor migration dynamic on the Garden Peninsula, a site visit conducted on September 8-10, 2007 for the Phase I Avian Risk Assessment (see Kerlinger and Guarnaccia 2007) noted that migrating raptors were quite numerous (nine species recorded, about 450

2 For details, see http://hawkcount.org/month_summary.php?rsite=286. 3 For details, see http://hawkcount.org/month_summary.php?rsite=613.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 30 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI individuals recorded in three days), especially toward the southern part of the peninsula and on Little Summer Island. The most numerous raptors were Broad-winged Hawk (about 200 birds in several flocks near the southern tip) and Sharp-shinned Hawk (about 125 birds tallied). Interestingly, most of the raptors (and also many hundreds of Blue Jays, another daytime migrant) did not attempt crossing to the Door Peninsula. Instead, they turned around at the southern end of the peninsula and flew north along the peninsula’s western shore, a phenomenon that has also been recorded at Cape May, New Jersey, and Whitefish Point, Michigan, two other peninsulas (Kerlinger 1985, Kerlinger 1984).

Therefore, hawk migration occurs along the Garden Peninsula in both spring and fall. However, migration traffic is much greater in fall, indicated by the fact that hawk watches along the western shore of Lake Michigan operate only in that season. The number of hawks that migrate along the peninsula is uncertain, but it is likely less than what is recorded at hawk watches along the western shore of Lake Michigan, given its location farther north on Lake Michigan. For example, the Concordia University hawk watch in Wisconsin, located 170 miles (270 km) south- southwest of the Project site (see Figure 1), averages about 5,400 hawks per fall season4. In fall 2007, it recorded 3,627 hawks in 85.5 hours (42.4 birds/hour). The most common raptors were Sharp-shinned Hawk (1,840 individuals) and Merlin (795).

Flight height of raptors reaching the Garden Peninsula in spring was generally high (i.e., at altitudes above the sweep of wind-turbine rotors). Given the low migration volume and the predominantly high flight, collision risk to migrating raptors is likely to be low. Furthermore, as detailed in the Phase I Avian Risk Assessment (Kerlinger and Guarnaccia 2007), a study at a raptor-migration concentration point in southern Spain showed that migrating raptors avoided wind turbines more than resident raptors (see Janss 2000, de Lucas et al. 2004). In addition, outside of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area in California, raptor collision mortality at wind farms has generally been low, averaging 0.03 birds per turbine per year in a recent review (see NRC 2007).

Regarding special-status species, the Michigan-threatened Bald Eagle was the third most abundant raptor recorded in the spring study (at about one bird/hour), after Turkey Vulture and Broad-winged Hawk. Given that only about one-third (35%) of Bald Eagles recorded at Fairport were judged to have migrated from Wisconsin, it appears likely that some of the records were of resident birds recorded more than once. Most Bald Eagles were recorded in the high-height zone, especially at Fairport. As noted in Kerlinger and Guarnaccia 2007, Bald Eagles have shown habitation to a wind-energy project in Ontario, Canada, including nesting within 600 m (1,980 feet) of turbines (see James 2008).

Regarding other special-status raptors, the 16 records of Michigan-threatened Merlin at Burnt Bluff (HW2) may have resulted from a pair nesting on the bluffs. Merlin height use at both observation points was predominantly low, however. The Michigan-endangered Peregrine Falcon was more frequent at HW1 (6 records) than at HW2 (one record). At HW1, five of the six Peregrines appeared to have originated from Wisconsin, strongly suggesting that these were migrating birds. Altitude during their overwater flight was recorded as 50% high, 33% middle,

4 For details, see http://hawkcount.org/siteinfo.php?rsite=515.

Curry & Kerlinger, LLC – September 2008 © 31 Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, MI and 17% low. Other listed raptors were infrequent, and their flight behavior did not suggest particular risk from wind farm operation.

For landbirds and waterbirds in spring, abundance and flight altitude did not indicate heightened risk of collision. Blue Jay was by far the most abundant landbird migrant, favoring an island- hopping route through Fairport (HW1). Blue Jay traffic at Burnt Bluff (HW2) was a third that at Fairport. Flight height for Blue Jays and other landbirds was predominantly low, however. Waterbird diversity was greater at Fairport, where more birds were observed resting or foraging on the water, but migration traffic was about equal between sites. Most waterbirds flew at high altitude at Fairport, but most flew within the middle height category at Burnt Bluff. The most abundant species at Burnt Bluff were Double-crested Cormorant and Ring-billed Gull, both of which flew mainly over the bluffs (Tom Tustison, personal communication).

4.2 Stopover Ecology of Night-Migrating Songbirds

As noted above, the site visit for the Phase I Avian Risk Assessment for this Project (Kerlinger and Guarnaccia 2007) was conducted on September 8-10, 2007. On those three days, night- migrating songbirds were abundant on the peninsula, indicating that they concentrate there in fall, stopping over to feed and rest. The site visit also noted what is called “morning flight,” essentially a continuation or reinitiation of migration after dawn, with many songbirds flying above the treetops on what appeared to be a reverse migration, mostly oriented north or northeast.

Regarding the factors influencing fall migration at the Garden Peninsula, it is likely that songbirds concentrate there after avoiding a crossing of Lake Michigan. These same birds likely continue migration over the lake on the following night. The evidence for this is a weather surveillance radar study of nocturnal bird migration over the Great Lakes (Diehl et al. 2000) that showed that the direction of fall migration on heavy flight nights over Michigan is predominantly southeasterly (on northwest winds after the passage of cold fronts). This study also showed that birds over the Great Lakes reoriented themselves at dawn toward the nearest land. Therefore, birds approaching, or over just over, Lake Michigan at dawn likelyconcentrate on the Garden Peninsula.

When morning flight was studied in fall at the Cape May Peninsula in New Jersey (Wiedner et al. 1992), it was thought to result from a combination of factors, including birds returning to land from the ocean, birds compensating for lateral wind drift incurred from the previous night’s migration, and birds seeking habitat in which to rest and forage. Topography appeared to play a role in dictating the direction of morning flight, which at Cape May was in a northerly direction, exiting the peninsula. Similar factors probably influence the dynamics of morning flight on the Garden Pensinsula.

Regarding spring migration, Diehl et al. (2000) show the general direction of nocturnal migration along the western shore of Lake Michigan to be northerly and roughly parallel to the lakeshore. They also found that, at Green Bay, significantly more songbirds migrated over land than over water, indicating some lake avoidance. Given these findings, it is perhaps not surprising that the stopover study found no evidence of night-migrating songbirds concentrating on the Garden

Peninsula in spring migration. When all habitats were pooled, the greatest daily diversity was 16 species, and the greatest daily abundance was 19.2 birds/hour. These values are relatively low, especially in comparison with well known sites such as Cape May, New Jersey (Wiedner et al. 1992). On most days, these numbers were much lower.

In conclusion, stopover of Neotropical migrants and related species is minimal on the Garden Peninsula in spring. The probable reason is that nocturnal songbird migration in spring occurs mainly to the west of the peninsula. In fall, however, significant stopover may be expected on heavy flight nights, because the migration direction is perpendicular to the peninsula and headed over Lake Michigan. Morning flight may also be observed, as was documented in the September 2007 site visit.

Regarding collision risk to night-migrating songbirds, the spring study does not indicate increased risk, because of the low abundance of birds stopping over. Risk would be higher in fall, when bird abundance is higher, particularly at turbines located near lakeshore woodland, where migratory fallout would be expected to be greatest.

It is important to note that if taller turbines (152.5 m; 500 feet) are chosen for use on the Garden Peninsula, impacts to night migrants are likely to be greater than if the shorter turbines (118 m; 387 feet) are used. The reason for this is that taller turbines extend further into the height of night migration, increasing the potential for collisions with these birds. It is not known, however, how much greater risk would be, at least in terms of numbers of fatalities per turbine per year, because the tallest turbines studied to date have been about 122 m (400 feet) in height. It is also possible that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would ask for steady burning lights on wind turbines that are 152.5 (500 feet) or more in height. Such lighting has been implicated in larger fatality events of night migrants at communication towers (Gehring et al. in press 2008), which could further increase the numbers of fatalities. Studies on turbines of this height and having steady burning lights have not been conducted to date, so assessing risk at these taller turbines with steady burning FAA lights is not possible at this time.

5.0 References

Chartier, A.T., and J. Ziarno. 2004. A Birder’s Guide to Michigan. American Birding Association, Colorado Springs, CO. de Lucas, M., G.F.E. Janss, and M. Ferrer. 2004. The effects of a wind farm on birds in a migration point: the Strait of Gibraltar. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:395-407.

Diehl, R.H., R.P. Larkin, and J.E. Black. 2003. Radar observations of bird migration over the Great Lakes. Auk 120:278-290.

Gehring, J.L., P. Kerlinger, and A.M. Manville, II. In Press (2008). Communication towers, lights, and birds: successful methods of reducing the frequency of avian collisions. Ecological Applications.

James, R.D. 2008. Erie Shores Wind Farm, Port Burwell, Ontario: Fieldwork Report for 2006 and 2007 during the First Two Years of Operation. Report to Environment Canada, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Erie Shores Wind Farm LP-McQuarrie North American, and AIM PowerGen Corporation. 63 pp.

Janss, G. 2000. Bird behavior in and near a wind farm at Tarifa, Spain: management considerations. Proc. National Avian - Windpower Planning Meeting III, San Diego, CA, May 1998. National Wind Coordinating Committee, Washington, DC.

Kerlinger, P. 1985. Water-crossing behavior of raptors during migration. Wilson Bulletin 97:109-113.

Kerlinger, P. 1984. Flight behavior of Sharp-shinned Hawks during migration. 2. Over water. Animal Behaviour 32:1029-1034.

Kerlinger, P., and J. Guarnaccia. 2007. Phase I Avian Risk Assessment for the Garden Peninsula Wind Energy Project, Delta County, Michigan. Report to Heritage Sustainable Energy. 94 pp.

National Research Council, Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects. 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Wiedner, D.S., P. Kerlinger, D.A. Sibley, P. Holt, J. Hough, and R. Crossley. 1992. Visible morning flight of neotropical landbird migrants at Cape May, New Jersey. Auk 109:500-510.

Appendix A. Observation Periods and Weather Conditions during Raptor Migration Study

Time Time Date Site Start End Temp. Wind Dir. Wind Sp. Cloud C. Precip. 4/30/08 HW1 1000 1200 6c SW 16-24kph 30 none 4/30/08 HW2 1218 1418 7c SW 16-24kph 20 none 5/1/08 HW2 1000 1200 6c E 8-16kph 90 none 5/1/08 HW1 1215 1415 9c E 8-24kph 90 none 5/2/08 HW1 1000 1200 7c E 16-24kph 100 inter. light rain 5/2/08 HW2 1216 1416 7c NE 16-32kph 100 none 5/3/08 HW2 1000 1200 7c SE 16-24kph 90 none 5/3/08 HW1 1215 1300 7c SE 16-32kph 100 none 5/5/08 HW1 1000 1200 6c NW 8-24kph 40 none 5/5/08 HW2 1218 1418 8c SW 8-24kph 30 none 5/6/08 HW2 1000 1200 6c E 8-16kph 80 none 5/6/08 HW1 1213 1413 8c E 8-16kph 0 none 5/8/08 HW1 1000 1200 13c SE 9-15kph 0 none 5/8/08 HW2 1344 1544 13c SE 9-15kph 0 none 5/9/08 HW2 1000 1200 11c NE 5kph 100 none 5/9/08 HW1 1214 1414 16c NE 2-6kph 60 none 5/10/08 HW1 1000 1202 13c S 4-10kph 5 none 5/10/08 HW2 1215 1417 13c S 4-10kph 50 none 5/12/08 HW2 1000 1200 8.5c N 10-22kpm 10 none 5/12/08 HW1 1215 1415 12c N 7-13kph 10 none 5/13/08 HW1 1000 1200 10c S 18-25kph 20 none 5/13/08 HW2 1221 1422 14c S 20-29kph 20 none 5/14/08 HW2 1002 1202 9c NW 6-18kph 100 none 5/14/08 HW1 1216 1421 15c NW 2-9kph 5 none 5/15/08 HW1 1000 1200 13c S 5-13kph 0 none 5/15/08 HW2 1212 1413 13c S 5-13kph 0 none 5/16/08 HW2 1000 1200 12c W 5-11kph 100 inter. light rain 5/16/08 HW1 1211 1416 19c NW 4-19kph 40 none 5/19/08 HW1 1000 1208 14c NW 4-19kph 5 none 5/19/08 HW2 1223 1423 14c NW 6-23kph 5 none 5/20/08 HW2 1000 1200 12c NW 6-15kph 50 none 5/20/08 HW1 1231 1431 13c NW 6-13kph 25 none 5/21/08 HW1 1000 1200 9.5c NW 7-17kph 90 none 5/21/08 HW2 1215 1415 11c NW 4-15kph 100 none 5/22/08 HW2 1000 1200 8c NW 5-13kph 100 none 5/22/08 HW1 1210 1410 12c NW 5-13kph 100 none 5/23/08 HW1 1000 1200 11c NW 4-13kph 5 none 5/23/08 HW2 1211 1411 13c SE 5-13kph 30 none 5/27/08 HW2 1000 1200 7c N 5-16kph 30 none 5/27/08 HW1 1213 1413 9c N 5-16kph 5 none 5/28/08 HW1 1000 1200 8c SW 5-14kph 5 none 5/28/08 HW2 1221 1421 10c S 7-14kph 5 none 5/29/08 HW2 1000 1200 11c SW 7-11kph 80 none 5/29/08 HW1 1215 1415 14c SW 13-29kph 80 none 5/31/08 HW1 1000 1201 14c NW 7-23kph 100 none 5/31/08 HW2 1215 1415 14c NW 7-15kph 95 none

Appendix B. Weather Conditions during Stopover Ecology Study

Time Cloud Date Start Temp Wind Dir. Wind Speed Cover Precipitation 4/30/08 6:10 neg 2c SW 4kph 0 none 5/1/08 6:23 1c E 5-11kph 90 none 5/2/08 6:36 7c NE 5-11kph 100 none 5/3/08 6:23 4c SE 5-11kph 95 drizzle starting at 7:30 5/5/08 6:20 5c NE 6kph 0 none 5/6/08 6:32 4c SE 5-11kph 30 none 5/8/08 6:27 11c Var. 5kph 0 none 5/9/08 5:59 5c calm 100 light rain 5/10/08 6:14 4c calm 0 none 5/12/08 6:04 5c N 13kph w/gusts 100 none 5/13/08 6:30 11c SE 2-6kph 100 none 5/14/08 6:19 13c calm 100 light rain 5/15/08 6:04 3c calm 0 none 5/16/08 5:55 10c SW 6-14kph 10 light rain 5/19/08 6:09 3c NW 4-11kph 5 none 5/20/08 5:56 10c NW 2-6kph 100 none 5/21/08 6:08 5c NW 9-16kph 100 none 5/22/08 5:41 6c NW 6-18kph 100 none 5/23/08 6:10 7c N 2-9kph 100 none 5/26/08 6:00 11c SW 5-11kph 100 none 5/27/08 5:41 2c N 3-13kph 5 none 5/28/08 6:03 2c N 1-3kph 5 none 5/29/08 6:00 9c WE 1-3kph 0 none 5/31/08 6:09 14c SW 6-16kph 100 light fog