DOCSLIB.ORG

Confirmation Letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Confirmation Letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Confirmation Letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study Barlow Solar Energy Centre Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Barlow Energy Centre Limited Partnership 53 Jarvis Street, Suite 300 Toronto, Ontario M5C 2H2 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Suite 1-70 Southgate Drive Guelph, ON N1G 4P5 File No. 160960879 June 15, 2017 BARLOW SOLAR ENERGY CENTRE NATURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY This document entitled Barlow Solar Energy Centre Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Barlow Energy Centre Limited Partnership (the “Client”). In connection with the Client’s application for a Renewable Energy Approval, this document may be reviewed and used by the following entities in the normal course of their review and approval process: (a) the MOECC; (b) the MNRF; (c) the MTCS; and (d) the Environmental Review Tribunal. Except as set forth in (a) through (d) above, any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others, unless otherwise stated therein. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document. Prepared by: Anna Corrigan, B.Sc. (Hons), Ecologist Prepared by: (signature) Melissa Straus, M.Sc. Terrestrial Ecologist Reviewed by: (signature) Nicole Kopysh, BES Project Manager/ Ecologist BARLOW SOLAR ENERGY CENTRE NATURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY Table of Contents ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................................... I 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1.1 1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1.1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND ZONE OF INVESTIGATION ................................................ 1.1 1.3 REPORT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 1.2 1.4 GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................. 1.3 2.0 RECORDS REVIEW ........................................................................................................2.1 2.1 METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 2.1 2.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 2.2 2.2.1 Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 2.2 2.2.2 Woodlands ................................................................................................... 2.3 2.2.3 Wildlife Habitat ............................................................................................. 2.3 2.2.4 Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs) ....................................... 2.4 2.2.5 Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves ........................................... 2.5 2.2.6 Summary of Natural Features and Boundaries Identified ...................... 2.5 3.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................................................................3.1 3.1 METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 3.1 3.1.1 Alternative Site Investigation Methods ..................................................... 3.1 3.1.2 Vegetation Community and Vascular Plants Assessment..................... 3.2 3.1.3 Wetland Confirmation and Delineation ................................................... 3.2 3.1.4 Woodlands ................................................................................................... 3.2 3.1.5 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ....................................................................... 3.2 3.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 3.3 3.2.1 Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 3.4 3.2.2 Woodlands ................................................................................................... 3.4 3.2.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ....................................................................... 3.5 3.3 SITE INVESTIGATION RESULTS SUMMARY ...................................................................... 3.5 4.0 EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................4.1 4.1 METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 4.1 4.1.1 Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 4.1 4.1.2 Woodlands ................................................................................................... 4.4 4.1.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ....................................................................... 4.5 4.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 4.5 4.2.1 Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 4.5 4.2.2 Woodlands ................................................................................................... 4.5 4.2.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ....................................................................... 4.5 4.3 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 4.5 4.4 QUALIFICATIONS ............................................................................................................ 4.6 BARLOW SOLAR ENERGY CENTRE NATURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY ...............................................................................5.1 5.1 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMPONENTS ...................................................................... 5.1 5.1.1 Solar Panels .................................................................................................. 5.2 5.1.2 Access Roads ............................................................................................... 5.2 5.1.3 Inverters and Step-Up Transformers ........................................................... 5.3 5.1.4 Substation ..................................................................................................... 5.4 5.1.5 Operations and Maintenance Storage Area .......................................... 5.4 5.1.6 Perimeter Fence .......................................................................................... 5.5 5.1.7 Construction Staging and Temporary Construction Areas ................... 5.5 5.1.8 Construction Timeline and Activities ......................................................... 5.6 5.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................... 5.7 5.2.1 Significant Wetlands .................................................................................... 5.7 5.2.2 Significant Woodlands .............................................................................. 5.10 5.2.3 Generalized Candidate Significant Wildlife Habitat ............................ 5.12 5.2.4 Amphibian Movement Corridor .............................................................. 5.14 5.2.5 Best Management Practices and Other General Construction Mitigation .................................................................................................... 5.17 5.3 MONITORING PLAN ..................................................................................................... 5.18 5.4 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION ................................................................ 5.19 6.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................6.1 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Summary of Natural Features Identified in Records Review for the Project Location and ZOI ....................................................................................... 2.5 Table 3.1: Summary of Corrections to Records Review ....................................................... 3.5 Table 4.1: Summary of Significant Natural Features Carried Forward to EIS ..................... 4.6 BARLOW SOLAR ENERGY CENTRE NATURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY LIST OF
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Joining of Large Components in a Harsh Environment Research Report for the Vanguard Initiative ADMA Energy Pilot – Challenges and Outlook
    Antwerpen Technologiepark – Zwijnaarde 48 Brussel-Bruxelles BE-9052 Zwijnaarde Charleroi tel. : +32 9 395 06 97 Gent fax : +32 9 345 13 78 J1 Hasselt [email protected] Kortrijk www.sirris.be Leuven Liège date 27-11-2019 version v1.1 reference ADMA Energy Research Report for Joining of Large Components © copyright Sirris author Jeroen Tacq contact [email protected] +32 493 31 06 44 Joining of Large Components in a Harsh Environment Research report for the Vanguard Initiative ADMA Energy Pilot – Challenges and outlook Recognized under application of the Decree of 30 January 1947 1 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ....................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 3 REPORT SCOPE ........................................................................................................................................ 4 4 LARGE COMPONENTS AND JOINING TECHNOLOGIES IN CURRENT DESIGNS ............................................ 6 4.1 FIXED WIND .............................................................................................................................................. 6 4.2 FLOATING WIND ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative & Renewable Energy
    Alternatives_Cover_Jan2009:Layout 1 1/6/2009 9:43 AM Page 1 Equity Research Industry Report January 2009 Alternative & Renewable Energy Down…But Not Out 10 Reasons We Remain Long-Term Bulls Financing Renewables in a Post-Credit Crunch World Playing the Consolidation Theme Kick-Start 2009 with Free Development Pipelines A Solar Shakeout Is Inevitable Utilities – Ben Isaacson, MBA, CFA – (416) 945-5310 Alternative & Renewable Energy For Reg AC Certification and important disclosures see Appendix A of this report. Down…But Not Out January 2009 Contents Down… 4 …But Not Out 5 Stock Recommendations 6 Sector Outperforms 6 Sector Underperforms 6 The Rest of the Pack 7 Why Renewable Power Stocks Were Down 70% in 2008 10 Global Energy Complex Worth Materially Less 10 Weak Credit and Equity Markets 12 10 Reasons We Remain Long-Term Bulls 15 Renewable Portfolio Standards Keep Growing 15 The Failed Kyoto Protocol Requires a Successor Program by 2012 15 Renewable Power Capital Costs Should Start to Flatten Shortly 16 The Implementation of Carbon-Pricing Mechanisms Are Accelerating 17 Long-Term Global Demand for Limited Fossil Fuels Continues to Rise 17 Increased Transmission to Accommodate Renewables Is Evolving 18 Political Support Continues to Strengthen for Alternative Energy 19 Energy Security and Independence Remain a Strong Societal Concern 19 Renewable Subsidy and Incentive Growth Remain Intact 20 Weak Credit and Equity Markets will Eventually Recover 20 Financing Renewables in a Post-Credit Crunch World 21 Renewable Power Project Capital
    [Show full text]
  • A Stakeholder Analysis of Investments for Wind Power Electricity Generation in Ontario
    Queen's Economics Department Working Paper No. 1442 A stakeholder analysis of investments for wind power electricity generation in Ontario Pejman Bahramian Department of Economics, Queen's University Glenn Jenkins Frank Milne Queen's University Department of Economics Queen's University 94 University Avenue Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6 10-2020 A stakeholder analysis of investments for wind power electricity generation in Ontario ∗ Pejman Bahramian Glenn P. Jenkins Frank Milne † October 2020 ‡ § Abstract This study uses an ex-post evaluation of the grid-connected wind projects in Ontario, Canada, to quantify the stakeholder impacts of such renewable energy projects. Our study includes a financial, economic and stakeholder analysis of these wind farms. The analysis sheds light on the distributional impacts that arise when there is a significant gap between the incentives created by the financial price paid for electricity generation and the economic value of the electricity generated. The analysis shows that the nego- tiated power purchase agreements (PPAs) have resulted in a negative outcome for the economy in all circumstances. It is found that the present value of the economic costs is at least three times the present value of the economic benefits, including the global benefits from the reduced CO2 emissions. This loss is borne by all the stakeholders of the electricity system, except the private owners of the wind farms. The losers are pri- marily the electricity consumers followed by the governments. The Ontario Electricity Rebate (OER) programme, which is financed by increased government borrowing, has the effect of transferring a large share of the costs incurred to promote investments in wind power to future generations of taxpayers in Ontario.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy Forecasts in Calculation of Expected Energy Not Served
    WIND ENERGY FORECASTS IN CALCULATION OF EXPECTED ENERGY NOT SERVED By Richard Sun Bachelor of Applied Science and Engineering, University of Toronto 2011 A thesis presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree Master of Applied Science in the program Electrical and Computer Engineering Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2014 ©Richard Sun 2014 AUTHOR'S DECLARATION FOR ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF A THESIS I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I authorize Ryerson University to lend this thesis to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this thesis by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii Wind Energy Forecasts In Calculation of Expected Energy Not Served Master of Applied Science 2014 Richard Sun Electrical and Computer Engineering Ryerson University ABSTRACT The stochastic nature of wind energy generation introduces uncertainties and risk in generation schedules computed using optimal power flow (OPF). This risk is quantified as expected energy not served (EENS) and computed via an error distribution found for each hourly forecast. This thesis produces an accurate method of estimating EENS that is also suitable for real-time OPF calculation. This thesis examines two statistical predictive models used to forecast hourly production of wind energy generators (WEGs), Markov chain model, and auto-regressive moving-average (ARMA) model, and their effects on EENS.
    [Show full text]
  • A Stakeholder Analysis of Investments for Wind Power Electricity Generation in Ontario
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Bahramian, Pejman; Jenkins, Glenn P.; Milne, Frank Working Paper A stakeholder analysis of investments for wind power electricity generation in Ontario Queen’s Economics Department Working Paper, No. 1442 Provided in Cooperation with: Queen’s University, Department of Economics (QED) Suggested Citation: Bahramian, Pejman; Jenkins, Glenn P.; Milne, Frank (2020) : A stakeholder analysis of investments for wind power electricity generation in Ontario, Queen’s Economics Department Working Paper, No. 1442, Queen's University, Department of Economics, Kingston (Ontario) This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/230595 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Queen's Economics Department Working Paper No.
    [Show full text]
  • Gwec | Global Wind Report
    GLOBAL WIND REPORT Annual market update 2010 Foreword 2010 was a tough year for our industry, and although We are still waiting for a resolution to the global debate on cumulative market growth was still a healthy 24.1 %, the climate change and we are still waiting for any signs of a annual market decreased for the first time in about two clear pathway towards a global price on carbon. If the pace decades. The medium term consequences of the financial of the international climate negotiations during 2010 is any crisis and the economic slowdown finally took their toll, indication, we are going to have to continue to wait for and very low orders in OECD countries at the end of 2008 some time. Hopes are higher for COP17 in Durban this year and the beginning of 2009 made themselves felt in the than they were for Cancun, but few observers expect final 2010 installation totals, particularly in the United States. resolutions to the fundamental unresolved issues. Having said that, 38.3 GW of new wind power capacity was We expect that by the time this report is printed global added around the world last year, and for the first time the installed capacity will have reached 200 GW. We estimate majority of that new capacity was in developing countries that this will double again within three to four years, and emerging economies; driven mainly by the booming keeping open the option to reach GWEC’s aspirational goal wind sectors in China and India, but also with strong of 1,000 GW of installed capacity by 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Policy Analysis of Wind Farm Development Strategies in Ontario and Germany
    A COMPARATIVE POLICY ANALYSIS OF WIND FARM DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES IN ONTARIO AND GERMANY by Leo Lau, Bachelor of Environmental Studies Geography, University of Waterloo, 2005 Masters Research Project Presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Applied Science in the Program of Environmental Applied Science and Management Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2014 ©Leo Lau 2014 AUTHOR'S DECLARATION FOR ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF A MASTERS RESEARCH PROJECT I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this Masters Project Paper. This is a true copy of the Masters Project Paper, including any required final revisions. I authorize Ryerson University to lend this Masters Project Paper to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this Masters Project Paper by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I understand that my Masters Project Paper may be made electronically available to the public. ii A Comparative Policy Analysis of Wind Farm Development Strategies in Ontario and Germany Leo Lau, 2014 Master of Applied Science Environmental Applied Science and Management Ryerson University ABSTRACT Wind farm development strategies are compared with respect to gaining public acceptance between Ontario and Germany. Public opposition to wind farm development is currently experienced in Ontario and strategies employed by Germany to mitigate public opposition and gain public acceptance have been proven to be effective. These two jurisdictions are comparable due to similar jurisdictional responsibility for renewable energy development and implementation of climate change goals.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of the Science on Operational Minimization to Reduce Bat Fatality at Wind Energy Facilities
    The State of the Science on Operational Minimization to Reduce Bat Fatality at Wind Energy Facilities Prepared for: The National Renewable Energy Laboratory Prepared by: Michael D. Whitby, Michael R. Schirmacher, Winifred F. Frick May 2021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Support for this document was provided by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, Managing and Operating Contractor for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office. Manuela Huso contributed expertise that greatly enhanced the methodology and interpretation of the meta-analysis. We thank Ross Renshaw for contributing to literature searches and reviews. SUGGESTED CITATION Whitby, M. D., M. R. Schirmacher, and W. F. Frick. 2021. The State of the Science on Operational Minimization to Reduce Bat Fatality at Wind Energy Facilities. A report submitted to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Bat Conservation International. Austin, Texas. — i — EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wind energy is rapidly growing in the United States and around the world. The growth of wind energy is stimulated by a desire to reduce carbon emissions from the electric power sector and reduce the effects of climate change. Projected industry growth and evolving turbine technology (i.e., taller turbines with larger rotor-swept areas and turbines with lower cut-in speeds) have heightened concerns about cumulative impacts on bat populations. In 2008, the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) – an alliance of experts from government agencies, private industry, academic institutions, and non- governmental organizations – was formed to address these concerns. Since its formation, the BWEC has sought to develop and disseminate solutions to measure and mitigate the impacts of wind turbines on bats, while maintaining the ability to develop and operate wind energy facilities in a competitive and cost-effective manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Addendum to the Consultation Report – Part 3
    Appendix A4. Additional Public Comments 18ra_2013-10-30_Jericho App Tps_60301207.Docx ADDENDUM to the ABORIGINAL (FIRST NATION AND MÉTIS) CONSULTATION REPORT FOR: PROPOSED JERICHO WIND ENERGY CENTRE Jericho Wind, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of NextEra Energy Canada, ULC) Report Updated as of October 2013 1 Table of Contents Context .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Director’s List of Aboriginal Communities to be engaged and consulted: ................................................... 4 Consultation with the Director’s List of Communities as of February 15, 2013 ........................................... 6 Chippewas of Aamjiwnaang ...................................................................................................................... 6 Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point ........................................................................................................ 7 Chippewas of the Thames ....................................................................................................................... 11 Moravian of the Thames/Delaware First Nation .................................................................................... 13 Munsee–Delaware First Nation .............................................................................................................. 14 Oneida Nation of the Thames ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Based Radar Observations of Wind Turbines
    Ground based radar observations of wind turbines Chuck Livingstone Shen Chiu DRDC - Ottawa Research Centre Defence Research and Development Canada Scientific Report DRDC-RDDC-2014-R57 August 2014 Ground based radar observations of wind turbines Chuck Livingstone Shen Chiu DRDC - Ottawa Research Centre Defence Research and Development Canada Scientific Report DRDC-RDDC-2014-R57 August 2014 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2014 © Sa Majesté la Reine (en droit du Canada), telle que représentée par le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2014 Abstract …….. Wind turbines are large radar targets whose radar cross sections (RCS) contain both static and dynamic components that are major interference sources for air traffic surveillance radars (ASRs). Investigations in response to a Canadian Air Force support request revealed that currently available wind-turbine RCS models are too primitive to answer the ASR interference questions asked. This report documents the development of a first-order RCS model that uses environmental conditions to replicate the static and dynamic effects present in the radar returns from wind turbines and generates the expected Doppler signatures of wind turbine targets that cause ASR interference effects. The model uses measured data from reference wind turbines and uses published results from detailed electromagnetic scattering models to create a semi-empirical description of a wind turbine target that replicates the target’s properties under all normal operating conditions. The model includes scaling laws that allow it to be used for a wide range of commercial wind turbines whose detailed designs differ from the reference cases used for model development.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Hounsfield Wind Farm
    United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. In the Matter of: (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) ENT000513 ASLBP #: 07-858-03-LR-BD01 Docket #: 05000247 | 05000286 Submitted: March 30, 2012 Exhibit #: ENT000513-00-BD01 Identified: 10/15/2012 Admitted: 10/15/2012 Withdrawn: Rejected: Stricken: Other: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Hounsfield Wind Farm Town of Hounsfield Jefferson County, New York Lead Agency: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Environmental Permits 625 Broadway, 4th Floor Albany, New York 12233 Steven Tomasik 518-486-9955 Project Sponsor: Upstate NY Power Corp 950-A Union Road, Suite 20 West Seneca, NY 14224 Prepared by: American Consulting Professionals of New York, PLLC 70 Niagara Street, Suite 410 Buffalo, NY 14202 Date of Acceptance by Lead Agency: February 27, 2009 Date by which Comments must be Received: May 29, 2009 Hounsfield Wind Farm Draft Environmental Impact Statement CONSULTANTS CONTRIBUTING TO THE PREPARATION OF DEIS American Consulting Professionals of ESS Group NY 401 Wampanoag Trail, Suite 400 70 Niagara Street, Suite 410 East Providence, Rhode Island 02915 Buffalo, New York 14202 (401) 434-5560 (716) 362-1116 Steve Wood Mark Colmerauer http://www.essgroup.com www.acp-ny.com URS Corporation C&S Companies 77 Goodell Street 499 Col. Eileen Collins Boulevard Buffalo, New York 14203 Syracuse, NY 13212 (716) 856-5636 (315) 455-2000 Kevin Shanahan Bryan Bayer www.urscorp.com www.cscos.com Old Bird, Inc. Stantec 605 W. State St. 30 Park Drive Ithaca, New York 14850 Topsham, ME 04086 (607) 272-1786 (207) 729-1199 William R.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments on MNR Document "Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (2010)”
    SUBMISSION TO THE EBR: Comments on MNR document "Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects (2010)” Reference: EBR Registry Number: 011-0112 18 December, 2010 The Friends of Arran Lake/ Central Bruce Grey Wind Concerns Ontario Prepared by Keith Stelling, BA, MA, (McMaster), MNIMH, Dip. Phyt., MCPP (England). Please include this submission as part of the public record. 1 Contents 1.0 Requirement for consistency with existing legislation ............................................................................................ 3 1.1 The Ontario Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) ....................................................................................................... 4 1.2 The Bergen Declaration ........................................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 The Provincial Policy Statement (2005) (PPS) .......................................................................................................... 6 2.0 Legal compliance of proposed MNR Guidelines ...................................................................................................... 8 2.1 The MNR guidelines fail to recognize the actual extent of damage to significant wildlife habitat that is already occurring. ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Ontario bird mortality study from Wolfe Island: 6.99 birds per turbine
    [Show full text]