Knabs Ridge Wind Farm

Post-construction breeding bird surveys 2010

Dr Steve Percival and Tracey Percival

Ecology Consulting

Swallow Ridge Barn, Old Cassop, Durham, DH6 4QB, UK. Tel: 0191 372 0306 Fax: 0870 137 0373 Email: [email protected]

January 2011

Contractor: RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 2 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 THE STUDY AREA ...... 3 BREEDING BIRD SURVEY ...... 3 CONSERVATION EVALUATION UPDATE ...... 6 ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF THE WIND FARM ON BREEDING BIRDS ...... 7 REFERENCES ...... 9

2 INTRODUCTION

1. An eight-turbine wind farm development has been constructed at Knabs Ridge, North Yorkshire. One of the planning conditions was to carry out a bird monitoring scheme. Following advice from the County Ecologist, a pre- construction breeding bird survey was carried out in 2007 to update the baseline data obtained in 2002 (Percival and Percival 2008). Initial construction of the wind farm had started prior to the start of the 2007 breeding season but was suspended through the breeding season itself. Wind farm construction continued after the 2007 breeding season, with the remaining infrastructure and 4 of the 8 2MW turbines installed ahead of the start of the 2008 breeding season. Each turbine comprises a 58m tower with a 70 m rotor diameter. The remaining 4 turbines were installed after the end of the 2008 breeding season.

2. The specific objectives of the 2010 survey were to undertake further breeding bird surveys of the Knabs Ridge wind farm site, to determine the numbers of birds present, and approximate breeding locations, and to make a further assessment of the effects of the wind farm on the breeding bird community.

THE STUDY AREA

3. The site is located 5km west of Harrogate, in North Yorkshire. The same survey area was used as for the previous 2002 survey reported in the Environmental Statement [ES], the 2007, 2008 and the 2009 surveys. It was chosen to include all areas within the potential zone of ecological influence of the wind farm. This included all the land that was being considered for locating the wind farm, plus a 300m buffer around this. This distance was chosen as it is the greatest distance at which breeding birds have been shown to be displaced by existing wind farms (Percival 2005). The study area covered a total area of 2.1km2.

4. The study area is predominantly used for rearing livestock. The field boundaries are mainly fenced but with scattered hedgerows and trees, more extensive in some places (including along the main A59 road along the northern edge of the wind farm site). There is a narrow belt of planted woodland along the road that forms the southern boundary of the wind farm site.

BREEDING BIRD SURVEY

5. The bird survey was carried out using a standardised timed method (Brown and Shepherd 1993), following the same methodology as that used in 2002, 2007, 2008 and 2009. Two survey visits were made, the first on 10 May and the second on 22 June 2010. All bird locations and behaviour were mapped to 1:10,000 scale, using the standard Common Birds Census notation. Supplementary behavioural observations were made to determine breeding locations as accurately as possible. The area was subdivided into half-

3 kilometre square areas. Birds were recorded systematically for 20-25 minutes in each of these areas, standardising the search effort per unit area. The surveys were carried out avoiding strong winds, heavy rain, fog and low cloud. Birds were located by walking, listening and scanning by eye and with binoculars. Birds were considered to be breeding if singing, displaying, carrying nest material, nests or young found, repetitively alarmed adults, disturbance displaying, carrying food or in territorial dispute.

6. The survey data were used to obtain population estimates for all of the bird species breeding on the site (Table 1). Maps were produced of the breeding pairs recorded during each visit and these were combined to produce an estimate of the overall breeding population for each species. Pairs were considered separate from each other if greater than 1km (waterfowl other than snipe and raptors), 500m (snipe, pigeons, gamebirds and crows) or 200m (all other species) apart, with this distance reflecting the relative distance that birds might move between survey visits.

7. The breeding bird populations in 2010 were generally similar to those found in 2002, 2007, 2008 and 2009. Lapwing numbers were again relatively high (as had been found in 2008 and 2009) and curlew numbers were higher in 2010, with numbers of other waders generally similar to those in the pre- construction surveys. One species was recorded in 2010 that had not been seen previously (grey partridge). The rookery on the southern edge of the study area held more pairs in 2009 and 2010 than previously.

Table 1. Breeding bird population estimates at Knabs Ridge, 2002, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. Number of pairs

Species 2002 2007 2008 2009 2010 Mallard 1 1 0 0 1 Kestrel 1 0 0 1 1 Grey Partridge 0 0 0 0 1 Pheasant 0 0 3 1 2 Moorhen 1 1 1 0 1 Oystercatcher 4 1 0 1 1 Lapwing 5 10 15 16 18 Snipe 1 1 6 2 3 Curlew 7 7 7 7 10 Redshank 0 0 1 0 0 Stock Dove 3 1 0 1 0 Woodpigeon 5 28 6 17 12 Great Spotted Woodpecker 0 1 1 1 0 Skylark 17 31 23 21 18 Swallow 0 2 1 1 1 Meadow Pipit 19 18 20 15 22 Pied Wagtail 2 2 4 4 5 Wren 5 7 5 3 4 Dunnock 2 2 1 2 3 Robin 8 9 7 7 7 Wheatear 0 3 0 2 1

4 Number of pairs

Species 2002 2007 2008 2009 2010 Blackbird 3 5 3 3 4 Lesser Whitethroat 0 1 0 0 0 Garden Warbler 0 2 0 0 0 Blackcap 1 2 0 4 0 Chiffchaff 0 2 1 1 0 Willow Warbler 10 5 6 6 11 Goldcrest 3 1 1 0 1 Long-tailed Tit 0 1 0 3 1 Coal Tit 1 4 2 4 2 Blue Tit 4 9 3 5 7 Great Tit 1 3 2 2 2 Magpie 1 0 0 1 1 Jackdaw 0 3 3 5 1 Rook 0 11 0 35 26 Carrion Crow 7 5 5 6 6 Starling 3 1 0 0 0 Chaffinch 17 14 12 15 12 Goldfinch 1 5 0 4 5 Linnet 3 2 1 3 3 Lesser Redpoll 0 0 0 6 0 Bullfinch 0 1 0 1 0

8. Other additional species seen over-flying/using the study area but not showing any indication of breeding were similar to the previous years and included sparrowhawk (a single sighting), black-headed gull (peak 26), swift (peak 4), house martin (peak 4) and starling (peak 100).

9. The distributions of the breeding birds were also similar to those recorded in 2002, 2007, 2008 and 2009. The 2002 and 2007 pre-construction data and the 2008, 2009 and 2010 post-construction data are shown in Figures (a) and (b) respectively. The more abundant species have been presented separately for clarity.

10. Lapwings (Figure 1) were found mostly on the neutral and acidic grassland in the central part of the study area, though also continued to expand their previous distribution. Curlew (Figure 2) were widely scattered across the study area. Skylark (Figure 3) and meadow pipit (Figure 4) were both found at highest density in the central neutral and acidic grassland. Robin (Figure 5) and chaffinch (Figure 6) were found mostly in the woodland areas and more mature hedgerows, mainly on the southern and eastern edges of the study area. There were no marked changes in distributions following construction of the wind farm in 2008, 2009 or 2010.

11. Of the less abundant species (Figure 7a-e), most were found either in the woodland habitats, or on the neutral and acidic grassland in the central part of the study area, as in the previous years’ surveys. No species was found that is protected under Schedule 1 of the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act or listed on Annex 1 of the EU Birds Directive, again as in the previous surveys.

5 12. Overall there were no notable concentrations of birds noted anywhere within the study area, as found previously. The breeding bird community was again typical of farmland habitats in this region.

Conservation Evaluation Update

13. The 2010 breeding bird survey data were evaluated, together with the previous data, to provide a current assessment of the conservation value of the birds breeding in the study area. This was based on the criteria adopted by Natural England in Guidelines for Selection of Biological SSSIs (JNCC 1995), using 1% of the resource to define national and regional importance. The national and regional breeding populations were estimated from Baker et al. (2006). A further category of ‘local importance’ was used for species that did not reach regional importance but were still of some ecological value. For bird species this included all species on the red or amber lists of the RSPB’ et al’s (Eaton et al. 2009) ‘Birds of Conservation Concern 3’ that did not reach national or regional importance at the site.

14. The conservation importance of the bird populations using the study area during the breeding season is summarised in Table 2. This Table includes all the species noted during the surveys that have low or greater sensitivity. It gives the estimated number of breeding pairs of each of these within the 300m zone around the wind turbines in each of the three years. Additional species that were only observed over-flying the study area have also been included. The red/amber listings have been updated to reflect changes following publication of the recent update to the Birds of Conservation Concern list (Eaton et al 2009).

Table 2. Conservation evaluation of the breeding bird populations at Knabs Ridge, 2002, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Species Total breeding pairs within 300m of the Red Amber UK BAP Sensitivity wind turbines List List priority species 2002 2007 2008 2009 2010 Mallard 1 1 0 0 1  Low Kestrel 0 0 0 0 0  Low Grey Partridge 0 0 0 0 1   Medium Oystercatcher 2 1 0 1 1  Low Lapwing 4 9 12 14 16   Medium Snipe 1 1 6 2 3  Low Curlew 5 6 6 7 9   Medium Redshank 0 0 1 0 0  Low Stock Dove 2 1 0 0 0  Low Skylark 17 29 22 19 18   Medium Swallow 0 2 1 1 1  Low Meadow Pipit 17 18 19 15 22  Low Dunnock 1 0 1 0 1   Medium Wheatear 0 3 0 2 1  Low Willow Warbler 7 4 5 4 8  Low Starling 2 0 0 0 0   Medium Linnet 2 0 1 2 3   Medium Lesser Redpoll 0 0 0 5 0   Medium Bullfinch 0 0 0 1 0   Medium

6 Species Total breeding pairs within 300m of the Red Amber UK BAP Sensitivity wind turbines List List priority species 2002 2007 2008 2009 2010 Additional non- breeding species Black-headed gull  Low Swift  Low House Martin  Low

15. Lapwing numbers maintained their higher level (18 pairs) in 2010 over the 2007 and 2002 levels, whilst curlew numbers increased to 10 pairs (7 pairs had been consistently recorded in the previous surveys). Five species of conservation importance (kestrel, oystercatcher, stock dove, starling and bullfinch) that had been recorded breeding previously had not been found breeding in 2008 but four of these (kestrel, oystercatcher, stock dove and bullfinch) were breeding there in 2009. Kestrel and oystercatcher were again found breeding in 2010. One new species of conservation importance was recorded breeding in 2010, grey partridge (a red-listed species that is also a UK BAP priority species, giving it medium sensitivity).

Assessment of the Effects of the Wind Farm on Breeding Birds

16. Several of the breeding bird populations in the study area have shown changes since the construction of the wind farm commenced. The increase in lapwing numbers found in 2008 and 2009 has continued in 2010 (up to 18 pairs, compared with 5-10 pairs prior to construction). Curlew numbers also increased in 2010 to 10 pairs, from their previous level of 7 pairs in each of the previous survey years. A pair of oystercatchers returned to breed in the wind farm in 2009 and were there again in 2010 (none had been seen there in 2008). No major changes in numbers of other species (including skylark and meadow pipit) have been noted (other than an increase in rook numbers on the edge of the survey area), particularly within 300m of the wind turbines.

17. The only habitat change apparent that may have contributed to these observed changes was a small increase in disturbed ground following construction of the wind farm. However it is unlikely that this or the general presence of the wind farm has contributed to most of the changes observed, and they were not any more apparent in closer proximity to the wind turbines. Rather they appear to be related to ongoing population changes.

18. The distributions of the more abundant breeding birds (those with a sufficient population size to give a meaningful result, taken as those with at least 7 independent locations in the years being compared) in relation to the wind turbines were investigated further by analysing the distance from each breeding pair location to the nearest turbine location before and after construction of the turbines. If any of these birds were avoiding the turbines, then one would expect a significantly greater distance from the turbines in 2008, 2009 and 2010 after they had been constructed. The results of these

7 analyses are summarised in Table 3, which gives the median distance to the nearest turbine for each species for the four years and the results of Kruskal- Wallis statistical tests carried out for each species. A probability (p) of less than 0.05 (in the right-hand column of the Table) would be required to reject the null hypothesis of no significant difference between the five years. Comparing across all five survey years, all of these species showed no statistically significant difference in the median distance to the nearest turbine before and after construction.

Table 3. Median distance of breeding birds at Knabs Ridge from the wind turbines in 2008 (4 turbines constructed) and 2009 and 2010 (construction complete), with those for the same area for 2002 and 2007 (prior to construction of the wind farm) given for comparison.

Species Median distance to nearest turbine (m) 2002 2007 2008 2009 2010 p Lapwing 198 211 173 139 124 0.77 Curlew 181 201 165 188 170 0.97 Skylark 117 126 154 141 127 0.43 Meadow Pipit 144 113 133 112 114 0.29 Robin 160 201 197 169 264 0.62 Chaffinch 205 183 246 194 336 0.47

19. The distributions of the six more abundant species (lapwing, curlew, skylark, meadow pipit, robin and chaffinch) in relation to the distance from the wind turbines are summarised in Figures 8 to 13 respectively. All showed only minor differences between years in their overall pattern of distribution, with numbers in proximity to the wind turbines largely maintained after construction.

20. No evidence has been found from the 2008, 2009 or 2010 survey data of any statistically or biologically significant effect on the local breeding bird populations that is likely to be linked to the presence of the wind farm. Indeed several species were more abundant after the construction of the wind turbines. Results of the post-construction monitoring to date suggest that the local breeding bird community has been largely unaffected by the wind turbines. It is certainly very clear that the worst-case assumption made in the ES, that birds would be displaced to 300m from the turbines, was not a reasonable worst-case, with considerable numbers remaining to breed in this zone after construction.

21. Recent research undertaken by RSPB (Pearce-Higgins et al. 2009) has suggested that some upland-breeding birds may be displaced around wind farms. This suggested that breeding densities of curlew may be reduced up to 800m from wind turbines and those of meadow pipits within 100m. No significant effect was reported in that study for lapwings. The results from Knabs Ridge support the findings of Pearce-Higgins et al with regard to lapwing, but strongly contradict those with regard to curlew (to an even greater degree in 2010 when a population increase within 300m of the wind

8 farm was noted). No evidence was found at Knabs Ridge for the much larger- scale displacement of this species reported by Pearce-Higgins et al. The Pearce-Higgins et al. study was not a before-after comparison but rather an analysis of bird densities in relation to distances to wind turbines studied post-construction. It is likely that it had confounding factors such as habitat and topography that could not be fully accounted for in the analysis, and are likely to have contributed to the apparent result. Other studies of the effects of existing wind farms on curlew that have carried out surveys before and after construction have found results more similar to those at Knabs Ridge, with largely little or no adverse effect, for example at the Dun Law (Gill et al. 2002), Causeymire (N. Redgate, pers. comm.) and Ovenden Moor (Bullen Consultants 2002) wind farms.

REFERENCES

Baker, H., Stroud, D.A., Aebischer, N.J., Cranswick, P.A., Gregory, R.D., McSorley, C.A., Noble, D.G. and Rehfisch, M.M. 2006. Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the United Kingdom. British Birds, 99, 25-44. Brown, A. F. and Shepherd, K. B. 1993. A method for censusing upland breeding waders. Bird Study 40: 189-195. Bullen Consultants 2002. Ovenden Moor Ornithological Monitoring - breeding bird survey 2002. Report to Powergen Renewables Ltd. Eaton, M.A., Brown, A.F., Noble, D.G., Musgrove, A., Hearn, R.D., Aebischer, N., Gibbons, D.W., Evans A. and Gregory, R.D. Birds of Conservation Concern 3: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 102: 296-341. Gill, J. P., D. Sales, and J. Tiel. 2002. Changes in Breeding Bird Populations at Dun Law Wind Farm, 1999-2001. ESS Report to Scottish Power plc and CRE Energy Ltd. JNCC 1995. Guidelines for the selection of biological SSSIs. JNCC, Peterborough. Pearce-Higgins, J.W., Stephen, L., Langston, R.H.W, Bainbridge, I.P. and Bullman, R. 2009. The distribution of breeding birds around upland wind farms. Journal of Applied Ecology. Percival, S.M. 2005. Birds and wind turbines in Britain: what are the real issues? British Birds 98: 194-204.

9 Figure 1a. Distribution of breeding lapwing at the Knabs Ridge wind farm site pre-construction, 2002 (red dots) and 2007 (black dots)

Dashed red line = survey area; solid red line = wind farm site

Red dot in circle indicates proposed wind turbine location

Figure 1b. Distribution of breeding lapwing at the Knabs Ridge wind farm site post-construction, 2008 (black dots), 2009 (red dots) and 2010 (blue dots)

Dashed red line = survey area solid red line = wind farm site