Draft Environmental Assessment for Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROPOSED HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN AND INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT

TIMBER ROAD II, III AND IV WIND FARMS

APPENDIX C – PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEY REPORTS

APPENDIX C – Pre-Construction Survey Reports

February 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service C

Wildlife Baseline Studies for the Timber Road Wind Resource Area Paulding County, Ohio

Final Report September 2, 2008 – August 19, 2009

Prepared for:

Horizon Wind Energy

808 Travis Street, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by:

Rhett E. Good, Michelle Ritzert, and Kimberly Bay

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc.

804 North College, Suite 103 Bloomington, Indiana 47403

WEST, Inc.

December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Horizon Wind Energy has proposed a wind-energy facility in Paulding County, Ohio. The Timber Road Wind Farm will have a target capacity of 48.6 megawatts and construction is anticipated to begin in early 2011. Future developments are planned for the surrounding Timber Road Study Area; however, details about these future projects are currently unknown. Horizon Wind Energy contracted Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. to conduct surveys and monitor wildlife resources in the Timber Road Wind Resource Area to estimate the impacts of project construction and operations on wildlife. The following document contains results for fixed-point bird use surveys, sandhill crane migration surveys, raptor nest surveys, habitat mapping, and incidental wildlife observations. The results of the acoustic bat surveys will be presented in a separate final report. Surveys at the Timber Road Study Area were designed to meet Horizon Environmental Standards, and exceeded the recommendations of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

The objective of the fixed-point bird use surveys was to estimate the seasonal, spatial, and temporal use of the study area by birds, particularly raptors. Fixed-point surveys were conducted from September 2, 2008, through August 19, 2009 at thirty-eight points established throughout the Timber Road Wind Resource Area. A total of 618 twenty-minute fixed-point surveys were completed and 68 bird species were identified.

Sixty-eight unique species were observed over the course of all fixed-point bird use surveys, with a mean number of large bird species of 1.18 species/800-meter plot/20-minute survey and 2.39 small species/100-meter plot/20-minute survey. More unique species were observed during the spring (53 species), followed by summer (42), fall (31), and winter (16). The mean number of species per survey for large birds and for small birds was higher in the summer (1.58 and 3.91 species/survey, respectively) and spring (1.45 and 3.60, respectively) compared to the fall (1.31 and 1.75, respectively) and winter (0.64 and 0.77, respectively). A total of 12,867 individual bird observations within 4,264 separate groups were recorded during the fixed-point surveys. Cumulatively, regardless of bird size, five species (7.4% of all species) composed approximately 67.0% of the observations: European starling, red-winged blackbird, horned lark, Lapland longspur and common grackle. All other species comprised less than 5% of the observations. The most abundant large bird species was killdeer (463 individuals in 332 groups) and Canada goose (386 individuals in 41 groups). A total of 218 individual raptors were recorded within the study area, representing eight species.

Waterbird use was highest in the spring (0.09 birds/800-meter plot/20-minute survey), primarily due to groups of great blue heron. Waterfowl use was highest during the winter (1.14 birds/800- meter plot/20-min survey), primarily due to large groups of Canada geese. Raptor use was highest during the summer (0.42 birds/800-meter plot/20-minute survey) and lowest during the

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. i December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

spring (0.26). The most common raptors observed in the study area were red-tailed hawk, northern harrier, and American kestrel. Northern harriers had the highest use of any raptor in fall (0.15), American kestrels had highest use in winter (0.18) and red-tailed hawk and American kestrel had the highest use in spring (0.10 and 0.10 birds/800-meter plot/20-minute survey, respectively). Passerine use ranged from 21.64 birds/100-meter plot/20-minute survey in fall to 3.73 in winter; although the focus was within a 100 meter viewshed and is not directly comparable to the other bird types.

A relative exposure index was calculated for each bird species. This index is only based on initial flight height observations and relative abundance (defined as the use estimate) and does not account for other possible collision risk factors such as foraging or courtship behavior. Exposure indices are intended to rank the exposure of risk between species observed and are not intended to be a measure of actual exposure or risk for an individual species. Canada goose, followed by turkey vulture had an exposure index higher than any other species observed at the Timber Road Study Area. The red-tailed hawk was the raptor species with the highest exposure index compared to other raptors observed during surveys. Based on observations within 100 m, the chimney swift had a higher exposure risk than other passerines observed.

Levels of bird use varied within the study area by point. For all large bird species combined, use was highest at point 18A (8.20 birds/20-minute survey). Bird use at other points ranged from 0.60 to 6.75 birds/20-minute survey. The high mean use estimates for point 18A was largely comprised of waterfowl (6.40 birds/20-min survey). The landcover surrounding Point 18A was similar to the other point count locations within the Timber Road Wind Farm and study area. Raptor use was highest at point 6B with 1.07 birds/20-min survey, while use at other points ranged from zero to 1.00. Point 6B is comprised of 23 acres (4.7%) of woodlots, 2.3 acres (0.5%) shelterbelts and 3.6 (0.7%) unmowed planted grasslands. Passerine use, focused within 100m, was highest at point 15A (70.3 birds/20-min survey), and ranged from 3.10 to 57.9 at other points.

Flight paths for waterbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds, raptors, and vultures were digitized to determine if any flyways or concentration areas were present. No obvious flyways or concentration areas were observed. No strong association with topographic or habitat features within the Timber Road Study Area were noted for raptors or other large birds. Although some differences in bird use were detected among survey points, the differences are not large enough to suggest that any portions of the Timber Road Wind Resource Area, other than the 0.5 mile buffer around Flatrock Creek, should be avoided when siting turbines.

A total of eight sensitive species were recorded during fixed-point surveys. Two state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (44 individuals) and sandhill crane (one individuals), and two state-listed threatened species, bald eagle (one individual) and dark-eyed junco (one individual) were observed during fixed point surveys at the Timber Road Study Area. Three Ohio species of special interest were recorded during fixed-point surveys, including blue grosbeak (two individuals), Wilson’s snipe (two individuals) and western meadowlark (one individual). Bobolink (42 individuals), an Ohio state species of concern, was also recorded during fixed-point surveys.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. ii December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

The objective of the sandhill crane migration surveys was to determine if the project is heavily used by migrating sandhill cranes. Twenty-eight unique species were recorded within the proposed wind resource area during sandhill crane surveys. A total of 5,366 individual birds within 321 groups were recorded. Passerines were the most abundant bird type, comprising 90.1% of all observations, though these observations were focused within a 100-meter viewshed. Waterbirds comprised 2.5% of total bird observations, and consisted of six groups of sandhill crane (135 individuals); all sandhill crane observations were in the Timber Road Wind Farm. The only other waterbird species recorded was one great blue heron.

One state-listed threatened species, the dark-eyed junco (four individuals), and two state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (11 individuals) and sandhill crane (135 individuals), were recorded during scheduled sandhill crane surveys.

To evaluate the relative risk of turbine collision to birds, a zone of risk of 66 to 394 ft (20 to 120 m) above ground level was assumed. During the surveys, a total of (5.7%) of the birds observed during the fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane migration surveys were observed within the zone of risk. Wood duck, bald eagle, unidentified hawk and unidentified shorebird were all recorded within the zone of risk during 100% of observations; however, all of these were based on one observation. Two groups of wood duck were recorded and both were flying in the zone of risk during 100% of observations. Red-tailed hawk and rough-legged hawk were observed within the zone of risk during greater than 20% of surveys (33.9% and 22.2%, respectively). Sandhill cranes were observed within the zone of risk during 10.3% of observations.

The objective of the raptor nest surveys was to record raptor nests that may be subject to disturbance and/or displacement by wind-energy facility construction and/or operation. A search for nesting raptors was conducted in March 2009 that included the entire boundary of the Timber Road Study Area and a one mile buffer. Ground-based surveys were completed by driving along public roads and accessible private roads and looking for raptor nest structures within areas of suitable habitat (trees, power poles, etc). One inactive raptor nest was observed within the Timber Road Wind Farm, and within the Timber Road Study Area, two active red-tailed hawk nests and 9 inactive raptor nests were observed. A great-blue heron rookery was also reported along the Flatrock Creek in the central portion of the study area.

The objective of the habitat mapping was to indicate areas that may be used by federally or state- listed species. At a landscape scale, the Timber Road Wind Resource Area is dominated by tilled agriculture. The project area is also comprised of small amounts of developed areas, mowed and unmowed grasslands, woodlots, wetlands, shelterbelts, and areas of railroad verges. Corn and soybean fields typically do not provide suitable breeding habitat for species protected under the state or federal endangered species act.

The objective of incidental wildlife observations was to provide record of wildlife seen outside of the standardized surveys. There were 15 bird species observed incidentally, totaling 355 birds within 158 separate groups during the study. Five mammal species and one reptile species were also observed incidentally at the Timber Road Study Area. The most abundant large bird species recorded incidentally were Canada geese.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. iii December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Three state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (17 individuals), sandhill crane (eight individuals) and American bittern (one individual) were observed incidentally at the Timber Road Study Area. A state-listed threatened species, bald eagle (one individual) was also recorded incidentally at the Timber Road Study Area.

Based on fixed-point bird use data collected for the Timber Road Wind Resource Area, mean raptor use (number of raptors divided by the number of 800-m plots and the total number of surveys) during the fall (0.33 raptors/800-meter plot/20-minute survey), winter (0.32), spring (0.26), summer (0.42), and annually (0.33) is considered to be low relative to raptor use at other wind-energy facilities located in the western and midwestern US. that implemented similar protocols to the present study and compiled data for three or four different seasons. The data collected at the Timber Road Wind Resource Area do not indicate that an extraordinarily high number of raptors utilized the study area during the fall and winter of 2008, or spring and summer of 2009. To date, relatively few raptor fatalities have been reported at wind-energy facilities in the Midwest located within landscapes dominated by tilled agriculture. A total of six raptors were recorded as fatalities at studies of six wind-energy facilities in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Ontario located in tilled agriculture landscapes. Raptor fatality rates at the proposed project are expected to be similar to those observed at other Midwest projects.

The proposed wind-energy facility is located within an area dominated by tilled agriculture, which is recommended by the USFWS in its interim guidelines as more suitable for wind-energy development than native habitats. No areas showing concentrated use by birds were observed in the project area, likely due to the preponderance of tilled agriculture in the project. Areas containing planted grasslands and forested areas represent areas that have the highest potential for bird use; however, these areas are highly fragmented within the Timber Road Study Area, limiting the potential for protected species to breed within these areas.

Based on the results of studies conducted at the Timber Road Study Area, the following measures are recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to birds:

• To the extent possible, place turbines and associated infrastructure within tilled agriculture, and minimize impacts to grassland, forest, and wetland areas.

• Construct all transmission lines and distribution lines in accordance with Avian Power Line Interaction Committee APLIC) standards (APLIC 2006), in order to reduce the potential for raptor electrocution fatalities.

• Place turbines a minimum of 400 m away from raptor nest locations.

• No turbines should be placed within 0.5 miles of Flat Rock Creek, which represents the highest quality habitat for birds within the Timber Road Study Area

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. iv December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

studies. Post-construction studies of the Timber Road Study Area may also help to better quantify potential impacts from later developments in the Timber Road Study Area.

Horizon may consider the performing a post-construction monitoring study at the Timber Road Study Area in order to verify the results of the study included in this report. The post- construction monitoring plan has not yet been developed. The details of the plan have not been finalized, but should be coordinated with US Fish and Wildlife Service and Ohio Department of Natural Resources officials. The results of bird studies conducted at the Timber Road Study Area indicate that fatality rates for birds are likely to be similar to fatality rates documented at other wind-energy facilities in largely agricultural areas in the Midwest. However; few-post construction studies of wind-energy projects have been conducted in the Midwest, and no post- construction studies of bird fatality rates at wind-energy facilities in Ohio have been conducted.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. v December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i INTRODUCTION ...... 1 STUDY AREA ...... 1 METHODS ...... 2 Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys ...... 2 Bird Use Survey Plots...... 2 Bird Survey Methods ...... 3 Observation Schedule ...... 3 Sandhill Crane Migration Surveys...... 3 Survey Plots ...... 4 Survey Methods ...... 4 Observation Schedule ...... 5 Raptor Nest Surveys ...... 5 Habitat Mapping ...... 5 Incidental Wildlife Observations ...... 5 Statistical Analysis...... 5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control...... 5 Data Compilation and Storage...... 6 Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys ...... 6 Bird Diversity and Species Richness ...... 6 Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence ...... 6 Bird Exposure Index ...... 6 Spatial Use ...... 7 Sandhill Crane Migration Surveys...... 7 Bird Diversity and Species Richness ...... 7 Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence ...... 7 Bird Flight Height and Behavior...... 7 RESULTS ...... 8 Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys ...... 8 Bird Diversity and Species Richness ...... 8 Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence by Season...... 8 Waterbirds...... 8 Waterfowl ...... 9 Shorebirds ...... 9 Raptors ...... 9 Vultures...... 9 Large Corvids...... 9 Passerines...... 10 Bird Exposure Index ...... 10 Spatial Use ...... 10 Sensitive Species Observations...... 11

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. vi December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Sandhill Crane Surveys...... 11 Bird Diversity and Species Richness ...... 11 Sensitive Species Observations...... 11 Flight Height Characteristics ...... 11 Raptor Nest Surveys ...... 12 Habitat Mapping ...... 12 Agricultural Areas...... 12 Abandoned Structures...... 12 Railroad Verge...... 12 Unmowed Grasslands ...... 12 Mowed Grasslands...... 13 Woodlots...... 13 Riparian Areas ...... 13 Incidental Wildlife Observations ...... 13 Bird Observations ...... 13 Mammal Observations...... 13 Reptile Observations...... 14 Sensitive Species Observations...... 14 DISCUSSION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT...... 14 Potential Impacts...... 14 Potential for Bird Fatalities...... 15 Raptors ...... 15 Waterfowl/Waterbirds/Shorebirds ...... 16 Vultures...... 16 Passerines...... 17 Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 17 Displacement Impacts...... 20 Recommendations for Reducing Impacts ...... 21 Recommendations for Further Studies...... 22 REFERENCES ...... 23

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. The land cover types, coverage, and composition within the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 34 Table 2. Summary of species richness (species/plota/20-min survey), and sample size by season and overall during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area., September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 35 Table 3. Total number of individuals and groups for each bird type and speciesa, by season and overall, during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Areaa , September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 36

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. vii December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 4a. Mean bird use (number of birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), percent of total composition (%), and frequency of occurrence (%) for each large bird type and species by season during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 40 Table 4b. Mean use (number of birds/100-m plot/20-min survey), percent of total composition (%), and frequency of occurrence (%) for each small bird type and species by season during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 42 Table 5a. Relative exposure index and flight characteristics by large bird species during fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 44 Table 5b. Relative exposure index and flight characteristics for small birds during fixed- point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 46 Table 6. Total number of groups and individuals for each bird type and species by season during sandhill crane migration surveys in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, November 3 – December 12, 2008...... 48 Table 7. Flight height characteristics of birds observed during fixed-point bird use surveys and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 50 Table 8. Summary of sensitive species observed at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area during fixed-point bird use surveys (FP), sandhill crane surveys (SACR) and as incidental wildlife observations (Inc.), September 2, 2008 – August 19, 2009...... 54 Table 9. Average time (minutes) spent in rotor swept area (20 – 120 m) for raptor and sensitive species during fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 55 Table 10. Habitat types present at the overall Timber Ridge Study Area and Timber Road Wind Farm...... 56 Table 11. Incidental wildlife observed while conducting all surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009...... 57 Table 12. Comparison of seasonal raptor use at other wind energy facilities in the Midwestern region to the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 58

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. viii December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 59 Figure 2. Overview of the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 60 Figure 3. The land cover types and coverage within the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area (USGS NLCD 2001)...... 61 Figure 4. Fixed-point bird use survey points at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 62 Figure 5. Sandhill crane migration survey points at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 63 Figure 6. Mean use (number of birds/20-min survey) at each fixed-point bird use survey point for all birds and major bird types at the Timber Road Wind Farm and the surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 64 Figure 7. Location of raptor nests observed in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 71 Figure 8. Habitat types present in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area...... 72 Figure 9. Comparison of fall raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities...... 73 Figure 10. Comparison of winter raptor use between Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities...... 74 Figure 11. Comparison of spring raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities...... 75 Figure 12. Comparison of summer raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities...... 76 Figure 13. Comparison of annual raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities...... 77 Figure 14. Regression analysis comparing raptor use estimations versus estimated raptor mortality...... 78

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. ix December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

REPORT REFERENCE

Good, R.E., M. Ritzert, and K. Bay. 2009. Wildlife Baseline Studies for the Timber Road Wind Resource Area, Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: September 2, 2008 – August 19, 2009. Draft report prepared for Horizon Wind Energy, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana and Cheyenne, Wyoming.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A number of individuals from different organizations were instrumental in the completion of the first year of monitoring at the Timber Road Wind Project. Keith Lott of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and Megan Seymour of the US Fish and Wildlife Service reviewed the protocols used in this study. Ryan Brown, Erin Bowser, and Paul Cummings served as project managers and developers with Horizon, and provided access and important project coordination. Danna Small served as Environmental Manager for this project and provided input regarding study protocols and objections. All the landowners in the Timber Road project deserve recognition for their support and cooperation in allowing safe, secure, and trouble-free property access.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. x December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

INTRODUCTION

Horizon Wind Energy has proposed a wind-energy facility in Paulding County, Ohio (Figures 1 and 2). Horizon Wind Energy contracted Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to conduct surveys and monitor wildlife resources in the Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF) and surrounding Timber Road Study Area (TRSA) to estimate the impacts of wind-energy facility construction and operations on wildlife. A draft protocol, dated October 31, 2008, was submitted to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) on November 3, 2008. This study plan was based on the final draft of wildlife study guidelines from the ODNR and a meeting held with ODNR and US Fish and Wildlife Service officials on September 18, 2008. Based on the final guidelines, which include a map of expected survey effort, the proposed project fell within the “minimum” survey effort category (ODNR 2009). The protocol was approved by the ODNR on November 18, 2008, and exceeds the recommendations for study effort provided by the ODNR.

The principal objectives of the study were to (1) provide site specific bird and bat resource and use data that would be useful in evaluating potential impacts from the proposed wind-energy facility, (2) provide information that could be used in project planning and design of the facility to minimize impacts to birds and bats, and (3) recommend further studies or potential mitigation measures, if warranted. The protocols for the baseline studies were similar to those used at other wind-energy facilities across the nation, and followed the guidance of the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (Anderson et al. 1999). The protocols were developed based on recommendations for the study received from the ODNR, as well as WEST’s experience studying wildlife at proposed wind-energy facilities throughout the US; the protocols were designed to help predict potential impacts to bat and bird species (particularly raptor species).

Baseline surveys, conducted from September 2, 2008 through August 19, 2009 at the TRSA, included fixed-point bird use surveys, sandhill crane migration surveys, raptor nest surveys, acoustic bat surveys, habitat mapping, and incidental wildlife observations. The results of the acoustic bat surveys will be presented in a separate final report. In addition to site-specific data, this report presents existing information and results of studies conducted at other wind-energy facilities. The ability to estimate potential bird mortality at the proposed TRSA is greatly enhanced by operational monitoring data collected at existing wind-energy facilities. For several wind-energy facilities, standardized data on fixed-point surveys were collected in association with standardized post-construction (operational) monitoring, allowing comparisons of bird use with bird mortality. Where possible, comparisons with regional and local studies were made.

STUDY AREA

The proposed wind-resource study area includes approximately 104,715 acres (164 square miles [mi2]; 424 square kilometers [km2]) in Paulding County located in northwestern Ohio. The proposed project is located within the Huron/Erie Lake Plain Ecoregion which encompasses a large portion of northern Ohio and part of southeastern and east-central Michigan (Woods et al. 1998). The Huron/Erie Lake Plains Ecoregion is a broad, fertile plain punctuated by relict sand dunes, beach ridges, and end moraines. The region is characterized by nearly flat topography; the TRSA itself is very flat with no hills, ridges, or other areas of starkly elevated topography.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 1 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

The boundaries of the proposed TRSA occur within an area formerly dominated by extensive elm (Ulmus spp.) - ash (Fraxinus spp.) swamps and American beech (Fagus grandiflora) forests, with oak (Quercus spp.) savanna typically restricted to sandy, well drained dunes and beach ridges. Today, most of the forests have been cleared and artificially drained to make way for highly productive farms producing corn (Zea mays), soybean (Glycine max), livestock, and vegetables. According to the National Landcover Dataset (USGS NLCD 2001; Table 1), cultivated cropland and developed open space are the two most dominant land use types, totaling approximately 92% of the overall study area. The remaining area is comprised of small areas of grassland, deciduous forest, open water, woody and emergent wetlands and scrub-shrub areas (Table 1). Developed areas are generally confined to residences and farms scattered throughout the project area.

Vegetated wetlands are relatively rare within the study area, and are limited primarily to areas along small creeks and irrigation ditches. There are several small creeks and agricultural ditches throughout the TRSA, including Blue Creek and its tributaries in the southeast, and tributaries from the Maumee River and Flatrock Creek in the north. Flatrock Creek bisects the two halves of the TRSA, while the Maumee River occurs to the north of the TRSA (Figure 1).

The TRWF will have a target capacity of 48.6 megawatts (MW) and be comprised of a maximum of 35 turbines. A zone of risk (ZOR) for potential collision with a turbine blade of 20 to 120 m (66 to 394 ft) above ground level (AGL) was used for the purposes of the analysis, per ODNR guidelines.

METHODS

The studies at the TRSA reported in this document consists of the following research components: 1) fixed-point bird use surveys; 2) sandhill crane migration surveys; 3) raptor nest surveys; 4) habitat mapping; and 5) incidental wildlife observations.

Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys

The objective of the fixed-point bird use surveys was to estimate the seasonal and spatial use of the study area by birds, particularly raptors, defined here as kites, accipiters, buteos, harriers, eagles, falcons, and owls. Fixed-point surveys (variable circular plots) were conducted using methods described by Reynolds et al. (1980). The points were selected using a systematic sample, with a random start in order to provide relatively even coverage of the study area. All birds seen during each 20-minute (min) fixed-point survey were recorded.

Bird Use Survey Plots During the course of the survey period, September 2, 2008 through August 19, 2009, the boundary of the study area was expanded twice (Figure 1). A new sample of points was drawn after the boundary change (Figure 4). For the initial month of surveys, 15 survey points were distributed throughout the TRSA. On September 30, 2008, the project boundary expanded and a total of 22 survey points were used to sample the project area. The project boundary expanded

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 2 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report again early in 2009 and eight of the 22 survey points were redistributed to cover the area more evenly. Changes in the distribution of survey points are represented in Figure 4. Each survey plot was an 800-m (2,625-ft) radius circle centered on the point.

Bird Survey Methods All species of birds observed during fixed-point surveys were recorded. Observations of large birds beyond the 800-m (2,625-ft) radius were recorded, but were not included in the statistical analyses; for small birds observations beyond the 100-m (328-ft) radius were excluded. A unique observation number was assigned to each observation point.

The date, start, and end time of the survey period, and weather information such as temperature, wind speed, wind direction, and cloud cover were recorded for each survey. Species or best possible identification, number of individuals, sex and age class (if possible), distance from plot center when first observed, closest distance, altitude above ground, activity (behavior), and habitat(s) were recorded for each observation. The behavior of each bird observed, and the vegetation type in which or over which the bird occurred, were recorded based on the point of first observation. Approximate flight height and flight direction at first observation were recorded to the nearest 5-m (16-ft) interval. Other information recorded about the observation included whether or not the observation was auditory only and the 10-min interval of the 20-min survey in which it was first observed. Additionally the amount of time, in minutes, spent flying within the rotor swept area (20 to 120 m [66 to 394 ft]) was recorded for each observation. The time spent within the rotor swept area for raptors and sensitive species is presented in Table 9.

Locations of raptors, other large birds, and species of concern seen during fixed-point bird use surveys were recorded on field maps by observation number. Flight paths and perched locations were digitized using ArcGIS 9.3. Any comments were recorded in the comments section of the data sheet. Any unusual animal observations were recorded on the incidental datasheets.

Observation Schedule Sampling intensity was designed to document bird use and behavior by habitat and season within the study area. Fixed-point surveys were conducted from September 2, 2008 through August 19, 2009. Surveys were conducted approximately once per week during fall (September 1 – November 1) and spring migrations (March 1 to May 31), once per month during winter (December 15 – February 28), and every other week during summer (June 1 to August 31). Surveys were conducted during daylight hours and survey periods varied to approximately cover all daylight hours during a season. To the extent practical, each point was surveyed about the same number of times.

Sandhill Crane Migration Surveys

The objective of the sandhill crane migration surveys was to estimate the temporal and relative abundance of sandhill cranes and raptors, migrating through the TRSA. Results were used to evaluate the potential impact to sandhill cranes and other migrants from the wind-energy facility development.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 3 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Survey Plots Four survey points were established within the TRSA to survey for sandhill cranes and other migrants (Figure 5). The points were selected to provide good visual coverage of the vegetation types, topographic features, and areas proposed for turbine construction in roughly 360o around the point. This provided maximal visibility over long distances in order to look for migrant sandhill cranes, raptors and other diurnal migrants. The survey plot was a variable circular plot centered at the point. The location of the survey points were recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS; Figure 5).

Survey Methods Modified point count surveys were conducted in the TRSA using observation methods typical for raptor migration surveys and hawk watch sites (e.g., Hawk Migration Association of North America [HMANA] and Hawk Watch International [HWI]). All species of birds observed during sandhill crane surveys were recorded.

Surveys were conducted according to methods used by the HMANA and HWI with observers continuously scanning the sky and surrounding areas for sandhill cranes in the survey area. Surveyors used a binocular or spotting scope to help in spotting and identifying birds.

The date, start and end time of the observation period, and weather information such as air temperature, wind speed, wind direction, percent cloud cover, precipitation, and maximum visibility estimates were recorded for each survey. All species of birds observed during sandhill crane surveys were recorded and each observation was assigned a unique observation number. Time of observation; species or best possible identification; number of individuals; age and sex (if possible); approximate distance from point when first observed; approximate altitude above ground; approximate flight direction; activity (behavior); and habitat(s) or topographic features the bird was flying over were recorded for each observation. Additionally, the amount of time each bird spent flying within the rotor swept area (20 to 120 m [66 to 394 ft]) was recorded. Data for raptor and sensitive species is presented within (Table 9).

The behavior of each bird or group of birds observed and the habitat or prominent topographic features in which or over which the bird was observed was recorded. Behavior categories included perched, circling/soaring, flapping, active foraging, gliding, hovering, vocalizing, and other (noted in comments). Behavior categories were used to aid in estimating of the proportion of raptors observed that were actively migrating versus resident or winter resident birds. Habitat over which the observation was made was recorded and included shrub, grassland, riparian, open water, cropland, forest/woodlot, and other (noted in comments). Information about each observation, such as approximate flight height and behavior, was recorded from the point of first observation.

Locations of birds during sandhill crane migration surveys were recorded on field maps by observation number. Sensitive species (species listed at either the federal or state level as being endangered, threatened, or protected; species considered to be of conservation concern; etc.) were also recorded in the same manner. Flight paths and locations of perched birds were recorded in the field and were later digitized using ArcGIS 9.3.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 4 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Observation Schedule Surveys were conducted three days per week during the late fall and early winter for the sandhill crane migration season (November 3, 2008 – December 12, 2008). Surveys were conducted at four stations within the survey area each survey day, for a total of 7 hours per survey day (1.75 hours per survey station). To the greatest extent possible, bird use surveys were scheduled to occur between 9 am and 4 pm. Some surveys occurred slightly before and after this period due to the amount of time required to travel between point locations. To the extent practicable, each plot was surveyed during a different time of day from the previous survey to vary the time of day during which plots were surveyed and distributed observations over all daylight periods throughout the study period.

Raptor Nest Surveys

The objective of the raptor nest surveys was to locate raptor nests in the TRSA that may be subject to disturbance and/or displacement effects from the wind-energy facility construction and/or operation. A search for nesting raptors was conducted in March 2009 that included the entire boundary of the TRSA and a one mile buffer. Ground-based surveys were completed by driving along public roads and accessible private roads and looking for raptor nest structures within areas of suitable habitat (trees, power poles, etc). Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates, current status (inactive, active, incubating, young in nest), and species present were recorded for each nest.

Habitat Mapping

Land cover types within the TRWF, surrounding study area and a 0.25 mile buffer were mapped on recent aerial photographs, and verified in the field during March 2009. All plant species observed within each habitat type were recorded. The purpose of the habitat mapping survey was to identify potential habitat for federally- or state-listed species. A secondary objective was to collect baseline information on habitat types, for use in designing a post-construction monitoring protocol.

Incidental Wildlife Observations

The objective of incidental wildlife observations was to provide record of wildlife seen outside of the standardized surveys. All raptors, unusual or unique birds, sensitive species, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians were recorded in a similar fashion to standardized surveys. The observation number, date, time, species, number of individuals, sex/age class, distance from observer, activity, height above ground (for bird species), habitat, and, in the case of sensitive species, the location was recorded by UTM or GPS coordinates.

Statistical Analysis

Quality Assurance and Quality Control Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures were implemented at all stages of the study, including in the field, during data entry and analysis, and report writing. Following field surveys, observers were responsible for inspecting data forms for completeness, accuracy, and

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 5 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

legibility. A sample of records from an electronic database was compared to the raw data forms and any errors detected were corrected. Irregular codes or data suspected as questionable were discussed with the observer and/or project manager. Errors, omissions, or problems identified in later stages of analysis were traced back to the raw data forms, and appropriate changes in all steps were made.

Data Compilation and Storage A Microsoft® ACCESS database was developed to store, organize, and retrieve survey data. Data were keyed into the electronic database using a pre-defined format to facilitate subsequent QA/QC and data analysis. All data forms, field notebooks, and electronic data files were retained for reference.

Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys Bird Diversity and Species Richness Bird diversity was illustrated by the total number of unique species observed. Species lists, with the number of observations and the number of groups, were generated by season, including all observations of birds detected regardless of their distance from the observer. Species richness was calculated as the mean number of species observed per plot per survey (i.e., number of species/plot/20-min survey). Species diversity and richness were compared between seasons for fixed-point bird use surveys.

Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence For the standardized fixed-point bird use estimates, only observations of large birds detected within the 800-m radius plot were used; small bird observations were limited to 100 m. Estimates of mean bird use (i.e., number of birds/plot/20-min survey) were used to compare differences between bird types, seasons, and other wind-energy facilities.

The frequency of occurrence was calculated as the percent of surveys in which a particular bird type or species was observed. Percent composition was calculated as the proportion of the overall mean use for a particular species/bird type. Frequency of occurrence and percent composition provide relative estimates of species exposure to the proposed wind-energy facility. For example, a particular species might have high use estimates for the study area based on just a few observations of large groups; however, the frequency of occurrence would indicate that the species only occurred during a few of the surveys, therefore making it less likely to be affected by the wind-energy facility or the transmission corridor.

Bird Exposure Index A relative index of collision exposure (R) was calculated for bird species observed during the fixed-point bird use surveys using the following formula:

R = A*Pf*Pt

Where A equals mean relative use for species i (large bird observations within 800 m of the observer or 100 m for small birds) averaged across all surveys, Pf equals the proportion of all observations of species i where activity was recorded as flying (an index to the approximate

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 6 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

percentage of time species i spends flying during the daylight period), and Pt equals the proportion of all initial flight height observations of species i within the likely ZOR.

Spatial Use Data were analyzed by comparing use among plots. Mapped flight path were qualitatively compared to study area features such as topographic features. The objective of mapping observed bird locations and flight paths was to look for areas of concentrated use by raptors and other large birds and/or consistent flight patterns within the study area. This information can be useful in turbine layout design or adjustments of individual turbines for micro-siting.

Sandhill Crane Migration Surveys Bird Diversity and Species Richness Bird diversity was represented by the total number of unique species observed. Species lists, with the number of observations and the number of groups, were generated by season. Species richness was calculated as the mean number of species observed per survey (i.e., number of species/survey). Species diversity and richness were compared between seasons for raptor migration surveys.

Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence Typically, bird use by species or bird type is calculated as the mean number of observations per X-minute survey within a certain distance of the survey point or station. For migration studies, this is often reported as the mean number of raptors per observer hour of survey within an unlimited viewshed. These types of metrics allow standardized comparison between sample locations, time (hours, days, weeks, seasons), or with other studies where similar data exist. Due to the unlimited viewshed used in the surveys, the distribution of distances from the observer recorded in the field was evaluated to determine the estimated percent of observations of birds passing through the TRSA area. In order to compare to other studies, the distance from observer was also used to standardized observations to within 800 m of the observer (i.e., number of birds/observer hour/survey).

The frequency of occurrence was calculated as the percent of surveys in which a particular species or bird type is observed. Percent composition was calculated as the proportion of the overall mean use for a particular species or bird type. Frequency of occurrence and percent composition provide relative estimates of species exposure to the proposed wind-energy facility. For example, a species may have high use estimates for the site based on just a few observations of large groups; however, the frequency of occurrence will indicate that the species occurs during very few of the surveys and, therefore, may be less likely to be affected by the facility.

Bird Flight Height and Behavior To calculate potential risk to flying birds during fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane surveys, the first flight height recorded was used to estimate the percentages of birds flying within the “likely ZOR” for potential collision with turbine blades for typical turbines. Because the type of turbines that will be used at the TRSA is currently unknown, the likely ZOR used in analysis was 20 m to 120 m (66 to 394 ft) AGL, which is the blade height of typical turbines that could be used at the TRSA and is based on ODNR regulations.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 7 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

RESULTS

Surveys were completed at the TRSA from September 2, 2008 through August 19, 2009. Seventy-five bird species, five mammal species, and one reptile species were identified during all surveys completed at the TRSA. Results of the fixed-point surveys, sandhill crane surveys, raptor nest surveys, habitat mapping, and incidental surveys are discussed in the sections below.

Fixed-Point Bird Use Surveys

A total of 618 20-min fixed-point surveys were conducted at the TRSA (Table 2). Two different viewsheds were utilized when calculating the different statistics; species richness, use, percent composition, percent frequency, and exposure index; 800 m for large birds and 100 m for small birds.

Bird Diversity and Species Richness Sixty-eight unique species were observed over the course of all fixed-point bird use surveys, with a mean number of large bird species of 1.18 species/800-m plot/20-min survey and 2.39 small species/100-m plot/20-min survey (Table 2). More unique species were observed during the spring (53 species), followed by summer (42), fall (31), and winter (16; Table 2). The mean number of species per survey for large birds and for small birds was higher in the summer (1.58 and 3.91 species/survey, respectively) and spring (1.45 and 3.60, respectively) compared to the fall (1.31 and 1.75, respectively) and winter (0.64 and 0.77, respectively; Table 2). A total of 12,867 individual bird observations within 4,264 separate groups were recorded during the fixed- point surveys (Table 3). Cumulatively, regardless of bird size, five species (7.4% of all species) composed approximately 67.0% of the observations: European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), red- winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), Lapland longspur (Calcarius lapponicus) and common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula). All other species comprised less than 5% of the observations. The most abundant large bird species were killdeer (Charadrius vociferous; 463 individuals in 332 groups) and Canada goose (Branta canadensis; 386 individuals in 41 groups). A total of 218 individual raptors were recorded within the TRSA, representing eight species (Table 3).

Bird Use, Composition, and Frequency of Occurrence by Season Mean bird use, percent composition, and frequency of occurrence for by season were calculated (Tables 4a and 4b). The highest overall large bird use occurred in the fall (4.49 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), followed by spring (3.40), summer (2.67), and winter (1.91; Table 4a). For small birds, use was highest in the fall (21.66 birds/100-m plot/20-min survey), followed by the spring (12.08), summer (9.69), and winter (3.73; Table 4b).

Waterbirds Waterbirds had the highest use in spring (0.09 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), compared to other times of the year (summer 0.05, fall 0.03, and winter 0; Table 4a). Spring waterbird use was largely comprised 23 great-blue heron (Ardea herodias) in 21 groups. Great blue heron was also the only waterbird species recorded during summer and fall. Waterbirds comprised 2.7% of

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 8 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

the overall bird use in spring, 2.0% in summer and 0.6% in fall. Waterbirds were observed during 6.0% of spring surveys, 5.3% of summer surveys and 2.4% of fall surveys (Table 4a).

Waterfowl Waterfowl had the highest use in winter (1.14 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), compared to other times of the year (spring 0.76; fall 0.53; and summer 0.10; Table 4a). Canada geese had the highest use among all waterbird species across all seasons (fall 0.53 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey, winter 1.11, spring 0.46 and summer 0.05). Waterfowl comprised 59.5% of the overall bird use in winter, compared to 22.5% in spring, 11.7% in fall and 3.7% in summer. Waterfowl were observed more frequently in spring (15.1%) and winter (9.1%) compared to in summer (3.8%) and fall (1.5%; Table 4a).

Shorebirds Shorebirds had the highest use in spring (1.66 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), compared to other times of the year (fall 1.33, summer 0.62, and winter 0; Table 4a). Killdeer had the highest use among all shorebird species across all seasons (fall 0.93 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey, spring 0.83 and summer 0.62birds/plot/20-min survey). Shorebirds comprised 48.6% of the overall bird use during spring, compared to 29.6% during fall and 23.2% during summer. Shorebirds were observed during 58.8% of the surveys in the spring, compared to 47.0% in summer and 41.4% in fall.

Raptors Raptor use was highest in summer (0.42 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), followed by fall (0.33), winter (0.32) and spring (0.26; Table 4a). Higher use in the summer was primarily due to high use of the area by Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis; 0.22 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey). Northern harriers (Circus cyaneus) had the highest use of any raptor in fall (0.15 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey), American kestrels (Falco sparverius) had highest use in winter (0.18) and red-tailed hawk and American kestrel had the highest use in spring (0.10 and 0.10 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey, respectively). Raptors comprised 16.7% of the overall bird use in winter and 15.6% in summer, compared to 7.7% in spring and 7.3% in fall. Raptors were observed during 31.8% of surveys in summer, 29.5% in winter, 25.4% in fall and 23.5% in spring (Table 4a).

Vultures Vultures had slightly higher use in fall (0.36 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey) compared to other times of the year (summer; 0.28, spring; 0.24 and winter; 0 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey; Table 4a). Turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) was the only vulture species observed. Vultures comprised 10.5% of overall bird use during summer, 8.0% in fall and 7.1% in spring. Vultures were observed during 18.2% of surveys in summer, 18.0% in fall and 14.9% in spring (Table 4a).

Large Corvids Large corvids use was highest in highest in fall (0.72 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey; Table 4a), compared to other times of the year (winter; 0.30, summer; 0.05, spring; 0.03 birds/800-m plot/20-min survey). The only large corvid species observed was American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos). Large corvids comprised 16.0% of the overall bird use in fall, 15.5% in winter,

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 9 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

2.0% in summer and 0.9% in spring. Large corvids were observed during 9.1% of winter surveys and 4.5% of fall surveys, compared to 1.9% of spring surveys and 1.5% of summer surveys.

Passerines A 100-m viewshed was used for small birds thus, making them not directly comparable to the other large bird types. Passerine use was highest in fall (21.64 birds/100-m plot/20-min survey), compared to spring (12.06), summer (9.42) and winter (3.73; Table 4b). European starlings had the highest use among all passerines during fall (10.36 birds/100-m plot/20-min survey) and summer (2.42), horned lark had the highest use in winter (2.27) and Lapland longspur had the highest use in spring (2.94). Passerines were observed during 97.6% of spring surveys, 96.2% of summer surveys, 90.8% of fall surveys and 61.4% of winter surveys (Table 4b).

Bird Exposure Index A relative exposure index was calculated for each bird species (Tables 5a and 5b). This index is only based on initial flight height observations and relative abundance (defined as the use estimate) recorded during fixed-point bird use surveys and does not account for other possible collision risk factors such as foraging or courtship behavior. Exposure indices are intended to rank the exposure of risk between species observed and are not intended to be a measure of actual exposure or risk for an individual species. Canada goose, followed by turkey vulture had an exposure index higher than any other species observed at the TRSA. The red-tailed hawk was the raptor species with the highest exposure index compared to other raptors observed at the TRSA (Table 5a). Based on observations within 100 m, the chimney swift (Chaetura pelagica) had a higher exposure risk than other passerines (Table 5b).

Spatial Use For all large bird species combined, use was highest at point 18A (8.20 birds/20-min survey). Bird use at other points ranged from 0.60 to 6.75 birds/20-min survey (Figure 6). The high mean use estimates for point 18A was largely comprised of waterfowl (6.40 birds/20-min survey).Landcover surrounding point 18A was similar to other point count locations within the TRWF and TRSA. Waterfowl use at other points ranged from zero to 3.35 birds/20-min survey. Waterbird use occurred at less than half (15 points) of the points. Waterbird use was highest at points 12B, 2B and four, with 0.20 birds/20-min survey, while use at other points ranged from zero to 0.19. Points 12B, 2B and four are all located within close proximity to unmowed grass- lined waterways (Figure 4). Mean shorebird use was highest at point 5B, with 5.73 birds/20-min survey, while use at other points ranged from zero to 5.42. Point 5B is approximately 400 meters south Blue Creek and is comprised of 13.4 acres (12.7%) of unmowed planted grasslands; the highest of any point (Figure 4). Raptor use was highest at point 6B with 1.07 birds/20-min survey, while use at other points ranged from zero to 1.00. Point 6B is comprised of 23 acres (4.7%) of woodlots, 2.3 acres (0.5%) shelterbelts and 3.6 (0.7%) unmowed planted grasslands. The high mean use at point 6B was largely comprised of falcon use (0.87; Figure 6). Vulture use was highest at point 12A with 1.60 birds/20-min survey. Vulture use at other points ranged from zero to 0.80 at other points. Large corvids use was highest at point 2A with 4.90 birds/20-min survey, while use at other points ranged from zero to 1.54. Passerine use, focused within 100 m, was highest at point 15A (70.3 birds/20-min survey), and ranged from 3.10 to 57.9 at other points.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 10 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Flight paths for waterbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds, raptors, and vultures were digitized to determine if any flyways or concentration areas were present. No obvious flyways or concentration areas were observed. No strong association with topographic or habitat features within the TRSA were noted for raptors or other large birds. Although some differences in bird use were detected among survey points, the differences are not large enough to suggest that any portions of the Timber Road Wind Farm should be avoided when siting turbines.

Sensitive Species Observations A total of eight sensitive species were recorded during fixed-point surveys (ODNR 2009b; Table 8). Two state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (44 individuals) and sandhill crane (one individuals), and two state-listed threatened species, bald eagle (one individual) and dark-eyed junco (one individual) were observed during fixed point surveys at the TRSA. Three Ohio species of special interest were recorded during fixed-point surveys, including blue grosbeak (Guiraca caerulea; two individuals), Wilson’s snipe (Gallinago delicate; two individuals) and western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta; one individual). Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus; 42 individuals), an Ohio state species of concern, was also recorded during fixed-point surveys.

Sandhill Crane Surveys

A total of 70 surveys sandhill crane surveys were conducted from November 3 through December 12, 2008 at four points throughout the wind resource area.

Bird Diversity and Species Richness Twenty-eight unique species were recorded within the proposed wind resource area during sandhill crane surveys (Table 6). A total of 5,369 individual birds within 324 groups were recorded. Passerines were the most abundant bird type, comprising 90.1% of all observations, though these observations were focused within a 100-m viewshed. Waterbirds comprised 2.5% of total bird observations, and consisted of six groups of sandhill crane (135 individuals; Table 6); all sandhill crane observations were in the TRWF. The only other waterbird species recorded was one great blue heron.

Sensitive Species Observations One state-listed threatened species, the dark-eyed junco (four individuals), and two state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (11 individuals) and sandhill crane (135 individuals), were recorded during scheduled sandhill crane surveys (ODNR 2009b; Table 8).

Flight Height Characteristics

To evaluate the relative risk of turbine collision to migrant birds, a ZOR of 20 to 120 m (66 to 394 ft) AGL was assumed. During the surveys, a total of (5.7%) of the birds observed during the fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane migration surveys were observed within the ZOR (Table 7). Wood duck, bald eagle, unidentified hawk and unidentified shorebird were all recorded within the zone of risk during 100% of observations; however, all of these were based on one observation (Table 7). Two groups of wood duck were recorded and both were flying in the zone of risk during 100% of observations. Red-tailed hawk and rough-legged hawk were observed

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 11 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

within the ZOR during greater than 20% of surveys (33.9% and 22.2%, respectively). Sandhill cranes were observed within the ZOR during 10.3% of observations.

Raptor Nest Surveys

One inactive raptor nest was observed within the Timber Road Wind Farm, and within the Timber Road Study Area, two active red-tailed hawk nests and nine inactive raptor nests were observed (Figure 7). The inactive nests were likely constructed by red-tailed hawks, based on the abundance of red-tailed hawk in the TRSA; however, the nests could also be used by other raptor species, such as Cooper’s hawk or great horned owl (Bubo virginianus). A great-blue heron rookery was also reported along the Flatrock Creek in the central portion of the TRSA (K. Lott, ODNR, pers. comm.)

Habitat Mapping

The results of the habitat mapping effort can be found in Figure 8 and Table 10. The habitat mapping effort was broad in scale. Although areas of wetlands or waterbodies were identified, this was not a formal delineation of wetlands or waters of the US. Rather, the purpose was to map potential habitat for wildlife and protected species, for use in identifying areas where project facilities may be located within or near important wildlife habitat.

Agricultural Areas Based on the habitat mapping effort, agricultural areas were found to be the dominant land use type for the TRSA, and TRWF (94% and 95%, respectively; Table 10), and were comprised of corn, soybean and vegetable fields. Agricultural areas typically do not provide suitable breeding habitat for species protected under the state or federal endangered species act.

Abandoned Structures A few abandoned structures were observed within the TRSA; however abandoned structures comprised less than 0.1% of the total study area. No abandoned structures were observed within the TRWF (Table 10).

Railroad Verge One railroad verge was observed within the TRSA (<0.1%) and consisted of an area of grass and shrubs extending from the railroad tracks. No native grass species were observed in the railroad verge from public roads. Plant species that were observed within this area included, smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and Queen Anne’s lace (Daucus carota). No railroad verges were observed within the TRWF.

Unmowed Grasslands Approximately 801 acres (0.8%) of unmowed grasslands were observed within the TRSA; however, no native grass species were observed in these areas (Table 10). Plant species observed in unmowed grassland areas included, smooth brome, Queen Anne’s lace, switch grass (Panicum virgatum), giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), common thistle (Cirsium vulgare), teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris), golden rod (Solidago canadensis), aster (Aster spp.), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora). Approximately 86 acres of unmowed grassland

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 12 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

habitat located within the study area was found within 0.5 miles of the Flatrock Creek in the central portion of the TRSA. Unmowed grassland habitat comprised 93.4 acres (0.9%) of the total land in the TRWF.

Mowed Grasslands Mowed grasslands and pastures were found to comprise 277 (0.3%) of the TRSA, and approximately 98 acres of mowed grasslands were observed within 0.5 miles of the Flatrock Creek. No mowed grasslands were observed within the TRWF (Table 10). Plant species observed in mowed grasslands included, smooth brome, tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), prickly lettuce, plantain (Plantago lancelota), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) and giant ragweed.

Woodlots Woodlots comprised approximately 1,665 acres (1.6%) of the total study area and were comprised of pin oak (Quercus palustris), bur oak (Q. macrocarpa), honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos), black walnut (Juglans nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), silver maple (A. saccharinum), shagbark hickory (Carya ovate), eastern redcedar (Junierus viriniana) and black ash (Fraxinus nigra). Woodlots present in the area were highly fragmented. Approximately 728 acres of woodlots present in the TRSA are located within 0.5 miles of the Flatrock Creek. Woodlots comprised 0.6% (60 acres) of the TRWF.

Riparian Areas In addition to Flatrock Creek located in the central portion of the TRSA, two streams (Prairie and Blue Creek) located in the southern portion of the study area had visible water flow and gravel/rock substrate (Figure 8). No streams in the TRWF were observed to have visible flow or rock/gravel substrates. Plant species observed along riparian banks included cattails (Typha latifolia), rushes (Juncus spp.) and giant ragweed.

Incidental Wildlife Observations

There were 15 bird species observed incidentally, totaling 355 birds within 158 separate groups during the study (Table 11). Five mammal species and one reptile species were also observed incidentally at the TRSA.

Bird Observations The most abundant bird species recorded as an incidental wildlife observation was American kestrel (71 individuals; Table 11). One species, American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus; one individual), was only observed incidentally at the TRSA.

Mammal Observations A total of 202 white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), seven woodchucks (Marmota monax), two fox squirrels (Sciurus niger), two mink (Mustela vison), and one red fox (vulpes vulpes) were observed incidentally during the fixed-point surveys at the TRSA (Table 11).

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 13 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Reptile Observations One observation of a common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) was recorded incidentally at the TRSA (Table 11).

Sensitive Species Observations Three state-listed endangered species, northern harrier (17 individuals), sandhill crane (eight individuals) and American bittern (one individual) were observed incidentally at the TRSA (ODNR 2009b; Table 8). A state-listed threatened species, bald eagle (one individual), was also recorded incidentally at the TRSA.

DISCUSSION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The wildlife study conducted at the TRWF and surrounding TRSA had three primary objectives: (1) provide site-specific bird and bat resource and use data that would be useful in evaluating potential impacts from the proposed wind-energy facility, (2) provide information that could be used in project planning and design of the facility to minimize impacts to birds and bats, and (3) recommend further studies or potential mitigation measures, if warranted The USFWS and the ODNR have expressed concern over the potential operation wind-energy facilities to cause fatalities to birds and bats in Ohio. To the extent possible, the study described in this report was designed to help assess the potential for the proposed project to result in bird and bat fatalities. Discussion of potential bat fatalities will be presented in a separate final report.

The primary purpose of conducting pre-construction wildlife surveys at proposed wind-energy facilities is to provide information for making reasonable estimates of potential impacts. The proposed TRWF falls within the “minimum” survey intensity, as defined by the final ODNR wildlife guidelines (Dated May 4, 2009). The methods used to collect information on bird and bat populations at the TRSA exceed the recommendations of the ODNR, and were approved by the ODNR on November 18, 2008.

The ODNR guidelines provide a framework for establishing relatively consistent methods to be used at wind-energy facilities in Ohio, which will allow results to be compared between facilities within Ohio. Currently, the results from three pre-construction wildlife surveys are available for comparison from Ohio, and no data are available describing measured impacts to wildlife populations from post-construction studies at wind-energy facilities in Ohio. However, the impacts of wind-energy facilities to wildlife have been studied at several facilities across the US. Thus, our estimates of potential impacts to wildlife are based on studies of wind-energy facilities conducted throughout the US, with a focus on studies located within agricultural regions of the Midwest

Potential Impacts

Impacts to wildlife resources from wind-energy facilities can be direct or indirect. Direct impacts are considered to be the potential for fatalities from construction and operation of the proposed wind-energy facility. Indirect impacts include the potential for wildlife to avoid wind turbines, resulting in a net decrease in available habitat.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 14 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Project construction could affect birds through loss of habitat, potential fatalities from construction equipment, and disturbance/displacement effects from construction activities. Impacts from the decommissioning of the facility are anticipated to be similar to construction in terms of noise, disturbance, and equipment. Potential mortality from construction equipment is expected to be very low. Equipment used in wind facility construction generally moves at slow rates or is stationary for long periods (e.g., cranes). The risk of direct mortality to birds from construction is most likely potential destruction of a nest for ground- and shrub-nesting species during initial site clearing. Impacts from the construction of the proposed project to wildlife are not expected to jeopardize the continued existence of bird populations, based on the preponderance of tilled agriculture within the project area.

Potential for Bird Fatalities Raptors When discussing potential direct impacts to wildlife, raptors are typically mentioned as a group of concern, likely due to the high raptor fatality rates observed at the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area (APWRA; Smallwood and Karas 2009). Although high numbers of raptor fatalities have been documented at some wind-energy facilities in the western US, a review of studies at wind-energy facilities across the United States reported that only 3.2% of casualties were raptors (Erickson et al. 2001a). Wind-energy facilities that have shown the highest raptor fatality rates have also shown the highest raptor use rates (Figures 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13). One metric for estimating potential impacts is to compare raptor use at the TRSA to wind-energy facilities in the West, where raptor fatality rates have been highest (Figure 14). Overall raptor use at the TRSA was relatively low compared to wind-energy facilities where raptor use and fatality rates are considered high (Figure 14).

The exposure index analysis may provide insight into what species might be the most likely turbine casualties; however, the index only considers relative probability of exposure based on abundance, proportion of observations flying, and proportion of flight height of each species within the ZOR for turbines likely to be used at the wind-energy facility. This analysis is based on observations of birds during the surveys and does not take into consideration behavior (e.g. foraging, courtship), habitat selection, the varying ability among species to detect and avoid turbines, and other factors that may vary among species and influence likelihood for turbine collision. For these reasons, the index is only a relative index among species observed during the surveys and within the study area. Actual risk for some species may be lower or higher than indicated by these data. The red-tailed hawk was the raptor species with the highest exposure index compared to other raptors observed at the TRSA. Red-tailed hawk is a very common raptor species observed across the US and at wind-energy facilities. Smallwood et al. (2009) reports that the red-tailed hawk has been observed demonstrating behaviors at other wind-energy facilities that may increase their risk of collision with turbines (flights 50 m from turbines and many flights through the ZOR). Other raptor species observed during surveys, including the northern harrier, American kestrel and rough-legged hawk (Buteo lagopus), have been found as casualties at other wind-energy facilities, and may also have some risk of turbine collision.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 15 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

The data collected at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding survey area do not indicate that an extraordinarily high number of raptors utilized the study area during the fall and winter of 2008, or spring and summer of 2009. To date, relatively few raptor fatalities have been reported at wind-energy facilities in the Midwest located within landscapes dominated by tilled agriculture. Overall mean raptor use at the TRSA is similar to raptor use reported from four other wind-energy facilities in the Midwest (Table 12). A total of six raptors were recorded as fatalities at studies of six wind-energy facilities in Wisconsin (two facilities), Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Ontario located in tilled agriculture landscapes (Howe et al. 2002; Johnson et al. 2002b, 2003a, 2004; Jain 2005; Kerlinger et al. 2007; Gruver et al. 2009; James 2008). Raptor fatality rates at the TRSA are expected to be similar to those observed at other Midwest projects.

Waterfowl/Waterbirds/Shorebirds A total of 45 great blue heron were observed within the TRSA during all surveys. Observations of great blue heron were distributed throughout the entire TRWF and surrounding survey area and no concentrations were observed. A great blue heron rookery has been reported along the Flatrock Creek; however, only one individual was observed at point counts located near the rookery, and use of the TRWF does not appear to be a function of distance from the rookery. During the fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane surveys, great blue herons were recorded flying within the ZOR during approximately 38% of observations, which may indicate that great- blue herons are vulnerable to turbine collisions. However, even though great blue heron is a relatively common species, they are rarely reported as fatalities from wind-energy facilities in the US. Of 1,033 bird carcasses collected at US wind-energy facilities, waterbirds comprised about 2%, waterfowl comprised about 3%, and shorebirds comprised less than 1% (Erickson et al. 2002b).

Based on data collected during the study, Canada geese were often observed flying near heights of proposed turbines. Thus far, waterfowl have not been shown to be especially vulnerable to turbine collisions at other wind-energy projects. Approximately one million goose-use days and 120,000 duck-use days were recorded in the Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) at the Top of Iowa project during the fall and early winter, and no waterfowl fatalities were documented during concurrent and standardized wind-energy facility fatality studies (Jain 2005). Similar findings were observed at the Buffalo Ridge wind-energy facility in southwestern Minnesota, which is located in an area with relatively high waterfowl use. Snow geese (Chen caerulescens), Canada geese and mallards were the most common waterfowl observed. Three of the 55 fatalities observed during the fatality monitoring studies were waterfowl, including two mallards and one blue-winged teal (Anas discors; Johnson et al. 2002b). Based on the results of the Top of Iowa and Buffalo Ridge studies, Canada geese appear to be able to detect and avoid wind turbines, decreasing the potential for Canada geese fatalities to occur.

Vultures Despite the fact that turkey vultures are commonly observed near wind-energy projects, turkey vultures are rarely observed as fatalities (Erickson et al. 2001a). One notable exception is the Buffalo Gap wind-energy facility in Texas (Tierney 2007), where higher rates of turkey vulture fatalities were observed compared to other wind-energy facilities. The landscape of the Buffalo Gap wind-energy facility differs greatly from the TRWF and surrounding TRSA and is dominated by dense thickets of Ashe’s juniper (Juniperus ashei), post oak (Quercus stellata),

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 16 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

and mesquite (Prosopsis glandulosa) with small inclusions of grassland and dryland agricultural fields. While some potential exists for turkey vulture fatalities to occur at the TRSA, the potential for vulture fatalities is likely much lower than observed at the Buffalo Gap wind-energy facility in Texas.

Passerines Typically, small forest fragments are not considered high-quality nesting habitat due to their size and abundance of edge habitat, which is associated with higher incidence of nest predation and parasitism (Askins et al. 1987, Robinson et al. 1995, Brawn and Robinson 1996), however; they do receive higher levels of use during migration as stopover habitat (Packett and Dunning 2009). Small forest patches and grassland areas within TRSA likely receive higher levels of use by small birds stopping over during migration than the tilled agriculture areas. Migrating small birds and other species may be more at risk of turbine collision when ascending and descending from these stopover habitats, especially if turbines are placed near forest or grassland areas.

While this may indicate some risk from the proposed project to migrating passerines, to date, overall fatality rates for birds (including nocturnal migrants) at wind-energy facilities have been relatively consistent in the Midwest. The range of overall bird fatality estimates at four Midwest wind-energy facilities that were studied using comparable methods have ranged from 0.7 to 3.4 birds/MW/year (Howe et al. 2002, Johnson et al. 2002b, Jain 2005, Kerlinger et al. 2007). Bird fatality rates have been shown to be higher in the eastern US, especially within forested landscapes (NRC 2007).

The proposed facility is located within a landscape largely dominated by tilled agriculture, which is generally recommended by the USFWS as more suitable for wind development versus areas containing native habitats (USFWS 2003). Some increased risk of collision for migrating passerines may exist for turbines placed near forested areas or grasslands within the project. However, studies of other wind-energy facilities within other similarly fragmented habitats in the Midwest have not shown high bird fatality rates. The TRWF is dominated by agricultural areas and very little stopover habitat in the form of woodlots and/or grasslands is present. Overall bird fatality rates at TRSA are expected to be more similar to the wind-energy facilities studied in tilled agricultural landscapes the Midwest versus those studied in more forested landscapes in the eastern US.

Threatened and Endangered Species No federal listed threatened or endangered species were observed during surveys within TRSA. Three state-listed endangered species (American bittern, northern harrier, sandhill crane), two state-listed threatened species (bald eagle, dark-eye junco), one Ohio species of special concern (bobolink), and three Ohio species of interest (blue grosbeak, Wilson’s snipe, western meadowlark) were recorded during all surveys (Table 8).

One American bittern was observed incidentally within the TRSA in April 2009. American bitterns prefer to breed in large undisturbed wetlands, large wet meadows and dense shrubby swamps; however, nests of this species have also been found in upland hayfields (Peterjohn 2001). There are no records of breeding American bittern in Paulding or Van Wert Counties and the species is considered an accidental to casual summer visitor in the area. The observation of

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 17 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

an American bittern within the project area may represent a migrant, as it was observed on April 23, 2009. Breeding habitat for the American bittern is largely absent within the TRSA and TRWF, based on the habitat mapping effort and land use/land cover data, wetlands comprise approximately 0.1% of the entire study area and TRWF. Development and operation of the proposed TRSA is unlikely to effect breeding American bittern; however, American bittern may potentially use pastures, fallow fields, and other upland areas as stopover habitat during migration (Peterjohn 2001). The individual observed within the TRSA was found in an unmowed grass-lined waterway and appeared to be injured; the TRSA does not appear to be heavily utilized by American bittern.

A total of 64 northern harriers were observed within the TRSA during all surveys. Northern harriers were observed during all seasons; however, the frequency of occurrence was relatively higher during the fall (13.6%). Most observations of northern harriers likely represent individuals migrating through the study area. The northern harrier requires large undisturbed wetlands, pastures, old fields, marshes and upland habitats for breeding (Peterjohn 2001). There is limited potential for northern harriers to nest within the TRWF and surrounding study area due to the lack of suitable habitat. While four northern harriers were observed in the summer during fixed- point bird use surveys, no nests were observed. Breeding pairs of northern harriers are currently considered rare in northwest Ohio and there is only one possible breeding record along the border of Paulding and Van Wert counties (Peterjohn 2001). The number of northern harriers reported during the surveys may not represent 64 individuals; rather, they may represent repeated observations of the same individuals. Of the 41 observations of flying northern harriers, only 9.5% were observed within the ZOR at anytime. Northern harriers are rarely found as fatalities at other wind-energy facilities (Erickson et al. 2001a), despite the fact that this species is observed flying at many wind-energy facilities. The hunting habits of northern harriers typically involve low, coursing flights over grassland habitats, which likely decreases the potential for this species to collide with a wind turbine. Northern harriers may fly higher and within the potential ZOR when conducting aerial courtship displays, and this species may occasionally fly within the ZOR during migration. However; the data collected at the TRSA and other wind-energy facilities indicates that this is a relatively rare event. While some potential exists for northern harriers to be found as fatalities at the TRSA, northern harriers are not expected to be especially vulnerable to turbine collisions, and fatality rates are not expected to result in population declines for this species.

The bald eagle is federally protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA 1918) and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA 1940). Two bald eagles were observed within the TRSA during the late fall and spring. A population of breeding bald eagles is present along the southern shore of Lake Erie and bald eagles have fairly well-defined migrations along Lake Erie in the spring and fall (Peterjohn 2001). No nesting bald eagles were documented within one mile of the study area. Some nesting habitat is present along Flatrock Creek located in the central portion of the TRSA; however, no bald eagle nests were observed during raptor nest surveys. Two bald eagles were observed flying through the study area during the late fall and spring surveys, and this species is considered to be a casual to locally uncommon visitor during migration (Peterjohn 2001). Bald eagles may fly at the same heights of turbine blades, and some potential of collision does exist for this species. With the exception of areas along Flatrock

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 18 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Creek, the majority of the project area does not contain habitat that may attract bald eagles, and the potential for a bald eagle fatality to occur is considered low.

Several bobolinks and one western meadowlark were observed within the TRSA during the spring and summer. There are several confirmed breeding records of bobolink in Paulding and Van Wert counties, and there is one confirmed breeding record of western meadowlark in Van Wert County (Peterjohn 2001). Both of these species require large grassy fields or large hayfields for breeding habitat, which is largely absent from the TRWF and surrounding study area. The majority of the study area and TRWF does not contain suitable nesting habitat for bobolink or western meadowlark, and most observations of these species are likely of migrants passing through the area.

All observations of dark-eyed junco, blue grosbeak and Wilson’s snipe within the TRSA occurred during the fall and spring and likely represent individuals migrating through the area. A total of five dark-eyed juncos were observed within the TRSA and this species is considered a common fall and spring migrant in the area (Peterjohn 2001). Only two observations of blue grosbeak and Wilson’s snipe were recorded during all surveys. The TRSA does not appear to be heavily utilized by dark-eyed junco, blue grosbeak, or Wilson’s snipe. While some potential exists for fatalities of these species to occur during migration, the development and operation of the TRSA is unlikely to result in population declines in these species, based on the low numbers of these species observed.

A subpopulation of eastern greater sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis tabida) migrates through Ohio from their breeding grounds in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and southern Ontario, to their wintering grounds in southern Georgia and central Florida (Tacha et al. 1992). A total of 144 sandhill cranes were observed at the TRSA during all surveys. A similar survey was conducted at the proposed Buckeye Wind facility in Champaign County, Ohio, and two groups of four sandhill cranes were observed (Stantec 2009). Although the level of sandhill crane use of the study area was higher than that observed at the Buckeye Wind facility, sandhill crane use of the study area is considered low when compared to well-used stopover sites. The nearest known stopover site for sandhill cranes occurs in central Indiana. More than 10,000 sandhill cranes utilize the Jasper-Pulaski Indiana Fish and Wildlife Area as stopover habitat during the fall migration (IDNR 2009). During fixed-point bird use surveys, one sandhill crane was observed flying within the ZOR for 1.5 minutes. During sandhill crane surveys, six groups of 135 sandhill cranes were observed and 9.6% of observations of flying cranes were in the ZOR. Sandhill cranes were observed flying within the zone of risk an average of one minute during the sandhill crane surveys. To date, only one sandhill crane fatality has been reported at an existing wind- energy facility (APWRA, California; Smallwood and Karas 2009). The low rate of documented crane collisions with turbines may indicate that crane species have a low risk of collision with wind turbines, or it may be a result of a lack of wind-energy facilities located within areas utilized by sandhill cranes. While use by sandhill cranes at the TRSA was lower than use observed at the Jasper-Pulaski Fish and Wildlife Area, where thousands of sandhill cranes stopover during migration (IDNR 2009), some risk exists for this species to collide with turbines or power-lines within TRSA. The potential for cranes to collide with wind turbines is difficult to predict due to the lack of research regarding crane and wind-energy facility interactions in North America. Although research regarding crane and turbine interactions is currently lacking,

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 19 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

existing research has shown that sandhill cranes are vulnerable to power-line collisions (Stehn and Wassenich 2007).

The proposed TRSA is dominated by tilled agriculture which comprises 92% of the total area. The USFWS recommends that wind-energy facilities be placed within cropland areas. Corn and soybean fields typically do not provide suitable breeding or nesting habitat for species protected under the state or federal endangered species acts. All other habitat types present in the TRSA have some potential to provide habitat for protected species. However, habitat for these species is highly fragmented by cropland, limiting the potential for protected species to breed within these areas. The USFWS and the ODNR have not expressed great concern over the potential impacts of the project to most listed species, due to the fragmented nature of the habitat and preponderance of tilled agriculture. Within the Timber Road Wind Farm, agriculture comprises 95% of the total area, and all other habitat types, excluding developed areas, comprise less than 1% of the area. Areas along the Flatrock Creek within the overall study area are comprised of more natural habitats including greater amounts of woodlots, shelterbelts, unmowed grasslands, mowed grasslands, and a heron rookery is also present along the creek. Bird species likely utilize this area more than the rest of the project; however, no turbines will be placed within 0.5 miles of the Flatrock Creek thereby reducing potential impacts those species (R. Brown, Horizon, pers. comm.).

A total of 41 groups of 202 white-tailed deer were also observed during all surveys of the TRSA. White-tailed deer are considered a major species in Ohio due to the economical and recreational value generated by hunting activities. Few researchers have examined potential displacement impacts to big game species; however, at the Foote Creek Rim wind-energy facility, pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) observed during raptor use surveys were recorded year round (Johnson et al. 2000b). The mean number of pronghorn antelope observed at the six survey points was 1.07 animals/survey prior to construction of the wind-energy facility and 1.59 and 1.14 animals/survey the two years immediately following construction, indicating no reduction in use of the immediate area. During a study of interactions of a transplanted elk (Cervus elaphus) herd with operating wind-energy facilities in Oklahoma, no evidence was found that operating wind turbines have a measurable impact on elk use of the surrounding area (Walter et al. 2006).

Displacement Impacts

The presence of wind turbines may alter the landscape so that wildlife use patterns are affected, displacing wildlife away from the wind-energy facilities and suitable habitat. Some studies from wind-energy facilities in Europe consider displacement effects to have a greater impact on birds than collision mortality (Gill et al. 1996). The greatest concern with displacement impacts for wind-energy facilities in the US has been where these facilities have been constructed in grassland or other native habitats (Leddy et al. 1999, Mabey and Paul 2007), Although Crockford (1992) suggests that disturbance appears to impact feeding, resting, and migrating birds, rather than breeding birds, results from studies in the US suggest that breeding birds are also affected by wind energy facility operations.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 20 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Studies concerning displacement of most bird species have concentrated on grassland passerines and waterfowl/waterbirds (Winkelman 1990, Larsen and Madsen 2000, Mabey and Paul 2007). Wind-energy facility construction appears to cause small-scale local displacement of grassland passerines during the breeding season and is likely due to the birds avoiding turbine noise and maintenance activities. Construction also reduces habitat effectiveness because of the presence of access roads and large gravel pads surrounding turbines (Leddy 1996, Johnson et al. 2000a). Leddy et al. (1999) surveyed bird densities in Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) grasslands at the Buffalo Ridge wind-energy facility in Minnesota, and found mean densities of ten grassland bird species were four times higher at areas located 180 m (591 ft) from turbines than they were at grasslands closer to turbines. Johnson et al. (2000) found reduced use of habitat by seven of 22 grassland-breeding birds following construction of the Buffalo Ridge wind-energy facility in Minnesota. Results from the Stateline wind-energy facility in Oregon and Washington (Erickson et al. 2004), and the Combine Hills wind-energy facility in Oregon (Young et al. 2005), suggest a relatively small impact of the wind-energy facilities on grassland nesting passerines. Transect surveys conducted prior to and after construction of the wind-energy facilities found that grassland passerine use was significantly reduced within approximately 50 m (164 ft) of turbine strings, but areas further away from turbine strings did not have reduced bird use.

Habitats that may potentially be utilized by grassland and passerine birds for nesting (unmowed grassland, mowed grassland/pasture, and railroad verges) encompass 1,113.58 acres (1.1%) of the TRSA and 93.43 acres (0.9%) of the TRWF Many of these areas are not contiguous and occur as isolated islands sporadically throughout TRSA. Based on the lack of suitable nesting habitat within the TRWF and TRSA, displacement of nesting grassland and passerine birds at TRSA is expected to be minimal.

Displacement effects of wind-energy facilities on waterfowl and shorebirds appear to be mixed. Studies from the Netherlands and Denmark suggest that densities of these types of species near turbines were lower compared to densities in similar habitats away from turbines (Winkelman 1990, Pedersen and Poulsen 1991). However, a study from a facility in England, found no effect of wind turbines on populations of cormorant (Phalacrcorax xarbo), purple sandpipers (Calidris maritima), eiders (Somateria mollissima), or gulls, although the cormorants were temporarily displaced during construction (Lawrence et al. 2007). At the Buffalo Ridge wind-energy facility in Minnesota, the abundance of several bird types, including shorebirds and waterfowl, were found to be significantly lower at survey plots with turbines than at reference plots without turbines (Johnson et al. 2000a). The report concluded that the area of reduced use was limited primarily to those areas within 100 m of the turbines. However, studies conducted at wind- energy facilities in Iowa and Illinois have not shown avoidance by Canada geese, despite high levels of use recorded prior to construction (Jain 2005, Derby et al. 2009).

Recommendations for Reducing Impacts

The proposed wind-energy facility is located within an area dominated by tilled agriculture, which is recommended by the USFWS in their interim guidelines as more suitable for wind- energy development than native habitats. No areas showing concentrated use by birds were observed in the project area, likely due to the preponderance of tilled agriculture in the project.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 21 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Areas containing planted grasslands and forested areas represent areas that have the highest potential for bird use; however, these areas are highly fragmented within the Timber Road Study Area and Wind Farm, limiting the potential for protected species to breed within these areas. The proposed Timber Road Wind Farm, is dominated by tilled agriculture, which is generally considered unsuitable nesting habitat for most bird species. More natural habitats that have a greater potential to support nesting birds, including planted grasslands and forested areas, comprise only comprise 1.5% of the total area.

Based on the results of studies conducted at the Timber Road Study Area, the following measures are recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to birds:

• To the extent possible, place turbines and associated infrastructure within tilled agriculture, and minimize impacts to grassland, forest, and wetland areas.

• Place turbines a minimum of 400 m away from raptor nest locations.

• No turbines should be placed within 0.5 miles of Flat Rock Creek, which represents the highest quality habitat for birds within the Timber Road Study Area

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES

The studies of habitat and birds conducted at the Timber Road Study Area exceeded the recommendations by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. The data collected also provide a valuable baseline of wildlife use that can be compared to the results of post-construction studies. Post-construction studies of the Timber Road Study Area may also help to better quantify potential impacts from later developments in the Timber Road Study Area.

Horizon may consider performing a post-construction monitoring study at the Timber Road Study Area to verify the results of the study included in this report. The post-construction monitoring plan has not yet been developed. The details of the plan have not been finalized, but should be coordinated with USFWS and ODNR officials. The results of the bird studies conducted at the Timber Road Study Area indicate that fatality rates for birds are likely to be similar to fatality rates documented at other wind-energy facilities in areas of the Midwest that are dominated by agriculture. However, few post-construction studies of wind-energy facilities have been conducted in the Midwest, and no post-construction studies of bird fatality rates at wind-energy facilities in Ohio have been conducted.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 22 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

REFERENCES

Anderson, R., M. Morrison, K. Sinclair, and D. Strickland. 1999. Studying Wind Energy/Bird Interactions: A Guidance Document. Metrics and Methods for Determining or Monitoring Potential Impacts on Birds at Existing and Proposed Wind Energy Sites. Prepared for the Avian Subcommittee and National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC). December 1999. National Wind Coordinating Committee/RESOLVE. Washington, D.C. 87 pp.

Askins, R.A., M.J. Philbrick, and D.S. Sugeno. 1987. Relationship between Regional Abundance of Forest and the Composition of Forest Bird Communities. Biological Conservation 39: 129-152.

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 2006. Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006. Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) Final Project Report CEC-500-2006-022. Edison Electric Institute, APLIC, and the California Energy Commission. Washington D.C. and Sacramento, California.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). 1940. 16 United States Code § 668-668d. June 8, 1940.

Brawn, J.D. and S.K. Robinson. 1996. Source-Sink Population Dynamics May Complicate the Interpretation of Long-Term Census Data. Ecology 77: 3-12.

Cooper, B.A., R.J. Blaha, T.J. Mabee, and J.H. Plissner. 2004. A Radar Study of Nocturnal Bird Migration at the Proposed Cotterel Mountain Wind Energy Facility, Idaho, Fall 2003. Technical report prepared for Windland, Inc., Boise, Idaho, by ABR, Inc., Forest Grove, Oregon. January 2004.

Crockford, N.J. 1992. A Review of the Possible Impacts of Wind Farms on Birds and Other Wildlife. Joint Nature Conservancy Committee (JNCC) Report No. 27. JNCC. Peterborough, United Kingdom. 60 pp.

Derby, C., K. Bay, and J. Ritzert. 2009. Bird Use Monitoring, Grand Ridge Wind Resource Area, La Salle County, Illinois. Year One Final Report, March 2008 - February 2009. Prepared for Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 29, 2009.

Ecology and Environment. 2009. Application for Certificate of Environmental Compaatibility and Public Need to Site a Wind Powered Electric Generation Facility, Richland and Crawford Counties, Ohio. Prepared for Black Fork Wind LLC, Dever, Colorado by Ecology and Environment, Lancaster, New York. August 2009. http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/CaseRecord.aspx?CaseNo=09-0546

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 23 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Erickson, W.P., D.P. Young, Jr., G. Johnson, J. Jeffrey, K. Bay, R. Good, and H. Sawyer. 2003a. Wildlife Baseline Study for the Wild Horse Wind Project. Summary of Results from 2002-2003 Wildlife Surveys May 10, 2002- May 22, 2003. Draft report prepared for Zilkha Renewable Energy, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. November 2003.

Erickson, W.P., J. Jeffrey, D.P. Young, Jr., K. Bay, R. Good, K. Sernka, and K. Kronner. 2003b. Wildlife Baseline Study for the Kittitas Valley Wind Project: Summary of Results from 2002 Wildlife Surveys. Final Report February 2002– November 2002. Prepared for Zilkha Renewable Energy, Portland, Oregon, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. January 2003.

Erickson, W.P., J. Jeffrey, K. Kronner, and K. Bay. 2004. Stateline Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Final Report: July 2001 - December 2003. Technical report for and peer- reviewed by FPL Energy, Stateline Technical Advisory Committee, and the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. December 2004. http://www.west-inc.com

Erickson, W.P., J. Jeffrey, and V.K. Poulton. 2008. Avian and Bat Monitoring: Year 1 Report. Puget Sound Energy Wild Horse Wind Project, Kittitas County, Washington. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Ellensburg, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 2008.

Erickson, W.P., G.D. Johnson, K. Bay, and K. Kronner. 2002a. Ecological Baseline Study for the Zintel Canyon Wind Project. Final Report April 2001 – June 2002. Technical report prepared for Energy Northwest. Prepared for Energy Northwest by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. June 2002.

Erickson, W.P., G.D. Johnson, D.P. Young, Jr., D. Strickland, R. Good, M. Bourassa, K. Bay, and K. Sernka. 2002b. Synthesis and Comparison of Baseline Avian and Bat Use, Raptor Nesting and Mortality Information from Proposed and Existing Wind Developments. Technical report prepared for Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. December 2002. http://www.bpa.gov/Power/pgc/wind/Avian_and_Bat_Study_12-2002.pdf

Erickson, W.P., G.D. Johnson, M.D. Strickland, D.P. Young, Jr., K.J. Sernka, and R.E. Good. 2001a. Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons to Other Sources of Bird Collision Mortality in the United States. National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC) Publication and Resource Document. Prepared for the NWCC by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 2001. http://www.west- inc.com

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 24 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Erickson, W.P., E. Lack, M. Bourassa, K. Sernka, and K. Kronner. 2001b. Wildlife Baseline Study for the Nine Canyon Wind Project, Final Report May 2000-October 2001 Technical report prepared for Energy Northwest, Richland, Washington.

Gill, J.P., M. Townsley, and G.P. Mudge. 1996. Review of the Impacts of Wind Farms and Other Aerial Structures Upon Birds. Scottish Natural Heritage Review No. 21. Scottish Natural Heritage. Battleby, United Kingdom.

Good, R.E., K. Bay, and M. Carder. 2009. Baseline Wildlife Studies for the Hardin Wind Resource Area, Hardin County, Ohio. Prepared for Invenergy Wind, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. July 2, 2009.

Gruver, J., K. Bay, and W. Erickson. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study Blue Sky Green Field Wind Resource Area, Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin. Prepared for We Energies, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, WY. June 3, 2009.

Hawk Migration Association of North America (HMANA) website. Hawk Watch Site Profiles and Hawk Count Summaries. http://www.hmana.org/sitesel.php

Hawk Watch International (HWI) website. http://www.hawkwatch.org/home/

Howe, R.W., W. Evans, and A.T. Wolf. 2002. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeastern Wisconsin. Prepared by University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, for Wisconsin Public Service Corporation and Madison Gas and Electric Company, Madison, Wisconsin. November 21, 2002. 104 pp.

Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). 2009. Jasper-Pulaski Fish and Wildlife Area. http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3091.htm

Jain, A. 2005. Bird and Bat Behavior and Mortality at a Northern Iowa Windfarm. M.S. Thesis. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.

Jeffrey, J.D., W.P. Erickson, K.J. Bay, V.K. Poulton, W.L. Tidhar, and J.E. Baker. 2008. Wildlife Baseline Studies for the Golden Hills Wind Resource Area, Sherman County, Oregon. Final Report May 2006 – October 2007. Prepared for BP Alternative Energy North America Inc., Houston, Texas, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Johnson, G.D. 2004. Analysis of Potential Wildlife and Habitat Impacts from the Klondike II Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Technical report prepared by WEST, Inc., for CH2M HILL and PPM Energy.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 25 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Johnson, G.D., J. Baker, and K. Bay. 2007a. Baseline Ecological Studies for the Lower Linden Ranch Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, for Northwest Wind Partners, LLC, Goldendale, Washington. July 18, 2007.

Johnson, G.D., J. Eddy, and K. Bay. 2006a. Baseline Avian Use of the Sand Hills Wind Energy Project, Albany County, Wyoming. Summer Breeding Season and Fall Migration 2006. Draft interim report prepared for CH2M Hill, Englewood, Colorado, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. November 6, 2006.

Johnson, G.D. and W.P. Erickson. 2004. Analysis of Potential Wildlife/Wind Plant Interactions, Bighorn Site, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 2004.

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, K. Bay, and K. Kronner. 2002a. Baseline Ecological Studies for the Klondike Wind Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Final report prepared for Northwestern Wind Power, Goldendale, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. May 29, 2002.

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, and J.D. Jeffrey. 2006b. Analysis of Potential Wildlife Impacts from the Windy Point Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Unpublished report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 3, 2006.

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, M.F. Shepherd, and D.A. Shepherd. 2000a. Avian Monitoring Studies at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota: Results of a 4-Year Study. Final report prepared for Northern States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 22, 2000. 212 pp. http://www.west-inc.com

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, M.F. Shepherd, D.A. Shepherd, and S.A. Sarappo. 2002b. Collision Mortality of Local and Migrant Birds at a Large-Scale Wind- Power Development on Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30(3): 879- 887.

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, M.F. Shepherd, D.A. Shepherd, and S.A. Sarappo. 2003a. Mortality of Bats at a Large-Scale Wind Power Development at Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota. The American Midland Naturalist 150: 332-342.

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, and J. White. 2003b. Avian and Bat Mortality During the First Year of Operation at the Klondike Phase I Wind Project, Sherman County, Oregon. March 2003. Technical report prepared for Northwestern Wind Power, Goldendale, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. http://www.west-inc.com

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 26 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Johnson, G.D., J. Jeffrey, J. Baker, and K. Bay. 2007b. Baseline Avian Studies for the Windy Flats Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for Windy Point Partners, LLC., by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. May 29, 2007.

Johnson, G.D., J. Jeffrey, V. Poulton, and K. Bay. 2006c. Baseline Ecological Studies for the DNR Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for Windtricity Ventures, LLC, Goldendale, Washington, by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 5, 2006.

Johnson, G.D., J. Jeffrey, V. Poulton, and K. Bay. 2006d. Baseline Ecological Studies for the Hoctor Ridge Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for Windtricity Ventures, LLC., Goldendale, Washington by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 5, 2006.

Johnson, G.D., J. Jeffrey, V. Poulton, and K. Bay. 2006e. Baseline Ecological Studies for the Imrie Ranch South Wind Energy Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for Windtricity Ventures, LLC, by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 5, 2006.

Johnson, G.D., M.K. Perlik, W.P. Erickson, and M.D. Strickland. 2004. Bat Activity, Composition and Collision Mortality at a Large Wind Plant in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32(4): 1278-1288.

Johnson, G.D., D.P. Young, W.P. Erickson, C.E. Derby, M.D. Strickland, and R.E. Good. 2000b. Wildlife Monitoring Studies, SeaWest Windpower Plant, Carbon County, Wyoming, 1995-1999. Final report prepared for SeaWest Energy Corporation, San Diego, California, and the Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins, Wyoming, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 9, 2000. http://www.west-inc.com and http://www.west-inc.com/reports/fcr_final_baseline.pdf

Kerlinger, P., L. Culp, and R. Curry. 2005. Post-Construction Avian Monitoring Study for the High Winds Wind Power Project, Solano County, California. Year One Report. Prepared for High Winds, LLC and FPL Energy.

Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Jain, C. Wilkerson, B. Fischer, and A. Hasch. 2006. Post- Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring for the High Winds Wind Power Project, Solano County, California: Two Year Report. Prepared for High Winds LLC, FPL Energy by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 2006.

Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, and J. Guarnaccia. 2007. Migratory Bird and Bat Monitoring Study at the Crescent Ridge Wind Power Project, Bureau County, Illinois: September 2005 - August 2006. Final draft prepared for Orrick Herrington and Sutcliffe, LLP. May 2007.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 27 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Kronner, K., B. Gritske, J. Baker, V. Marr, G.D. Johnson, and K.Bay. 2005. Wildlife Baseline Study for the Leaning Juniper Wind Power Project, Gilliam County, Oregon. Prepared for PPM Energy, Portland, Oregon and CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon by NWC, Pendleton, Oregon, and WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. November 3, 2005.

Kronner, K., B. Gritski, and S. Downes. 2008. Big Horn Wind Power Project Wildlife Fatality Monitoring Study: 2006−2007. Final report prepared for PPM Energy and the Big Horn Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Mid-Columbia Field Office, Goldendale, Washington. June 1, 2008.

Larsen, J.K. and J. Madsen. 2000. Effects of Wind Turbines and Other Physical Elements on Field Utilization by Pink-Footed Geese (Anser brachyrhynchus): A Landscape Perspective. Landscape Ecology 15: 755-764.

Lawrence, E.S., S. Painter, and B. Little. 2007. Responses of Birds to the Windfarm at Blyth Harbour, Northumberland, UK. In: Birds and Windfarms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation. M. J. de Lucas, G. F. E. Janss, and M. Ferrer, eds. Quercus, Madrid, Spain. Pp. 47-69.

Leddy, K.L. 1996. Effects of Wind Turbines on Nongame Birds in Conservation Reserve Program Grasslands in Southwestern Minnesota. M.S. Thesis. South Dakota State University, Brookings. 61 pp.

Leddy, K.L., K.F. Higgins, and D.E. Naugle. 1999. Effects of Wind Turbines on Upland Nesting Birds in Conservation Reserve Program Grasslands. Wilson Bulletin 111(1): 100-104.

Mabey, S. and E. Paul. 2007. Impact of Wind Energy and Related Human Activities on Grassland and Shrub-Steppe Birds. A Critical Literature Review Prepared for the National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC) and The Ornithological Council. 183 pp.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). 1918. 16 United States Code § 703-712. July 13, 1918.

National Research Council (NRC). 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. National Academies Press. Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC) and Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2004. Ecological Baseline Studies for the Roosevelt Wind Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report. Prepared by NWC, Pendleton, Oregon, and WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 2004

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 28 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC) and Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2005. Ecological Baseline Studies and Wildlife Impact Assessment for the White Creek Wind Power Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Prepared for Last Mile Electric Cooperative, Goldendale, Washington, by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc., Goldendale, Washington, and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 12, 2005.

Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC) and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2007. Avian and Bat Monitoring Report for the Klondike II Wind Power Project. Sherman County, Oregon. Prepared for PPM Energy, Portland, Oregon. Managed and conducted by NWC, Pendleton, Oregon. Analysis conducted by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 17, 2007.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009a. On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Postconstruction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. An addendum to the Ohio Department of Natural Resource’s Voluntary Cooperative Agreement. http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=S24B8hy2Iu4%3D&tabid=21467

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009b. Wildlife That Are Considered to Be Endangered, Threatened, Species of Concern, Special Interest, Extirpated, or Extinct in Ohio. Updated January 2009. Available at: http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Portals/9/pdf/pub356.pdf

Packett, D.L. and J.B. Dunning, Jr. 2009. Stopover Habitat Selection by Migrant Landbirds in a Fragmented Forest-Agricultural Landscape. Auk: In press.

Pedersen, M.B. and E. Poulsen. 1991. Impact of a 90m/2MW Wind Turbine on Birds - Avian Responses to the Implementation of the Tjaereborg Wind Turbine at the Danish Wadden Sea. Dansek Vildundersogelser 47: 1-44. Miljoministeriet & Danmarks Miljoundersogelser.

Peterjohn, B.G. 2001. The Birds of Ohio; Completely Revised and Updated with Ohio Breeding Bird Atlas Maps. The Wooster Book Company, Wooster, Ohio. 637 pp.

Reynolds, R.T., J.M. Scott, and R.A. Nussbaum. 1980. A Variable Circular-Plot Method for Estimating Bird Numbers. Condor 82(3): 309-313.

Robinson, S.K., F.R. Thompson III, T.M. Donovan, D.R. Whitehead, and J. Faaborg. 1995. Regional Forest Fragmentation and the Nesting Success of Migratory Birds. Science 267: 1987-1990.

Smallwood, K.S. and B. Karas. 2009. Avian and Bat Fatality Rates at Old-Generation and Repowered Wind Turbines in California. Journal of Wildlife Management 73(7): 1062- 1071.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 29 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Smallwood, K.S., L. Rugge, and M.L. Morrison. 2009. Influence of Behavior on Bird Mortality in Wind Energy Developments. Journal of Wildlife Management 73(7): 1082–1098.

Stantec Consulting Inc. (Stantec). 2009. Spring, Summer, and Fall 2008 Bird and Bat Survey Report for the Buckeye Wind Facility, Ohio. Prepared for EverPowerWind Holdings, Inc., by Stantec Consulting, formerly Woodlot Alternatives, Inc., Topsham, Maine. February 2009.

Stehn, T.V. and T. Wassenich. 2007. Whooping Crane Collisions with Power Lines: An Issue Paper. Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop, 2006.

Tacha, T.C., S.A. Nesbitt, and P.A. Vohs. 1992. Sandhill Crane (Grus canadensis). A. Poole, ed. The Birds of North America Online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Ithaca, New York. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/031

URS Corporation, Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC). 2001. Avian Baseline Study for the Stateline Project. Prepared for FPL Energy Vansycle, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida.

US Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). 2006. NAIP Imagery and Status Maps.

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2003. Interim Guidelines to Avoid and Minimize Wildlife Impacts from Wind Turbines. May 13, 2003. USFWS. Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/wind.pdf

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. As amended, and as of May 21, 1999. Accessed November 2009. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/mbpermits/regulations/BGEPA.PDF

US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD). 2001. Land Use/Land Cover NLCD Data. USGS Headquarters, USGS National Center. Reston, Virginia.

Walter, W.D., Leslie, D.M. Jr., and J.A. Jenks. 2006. Response of Rocky Mountain Elk (Cervus elaphus) to Wind-Power Development. American Midland Naturalist 156: 363–375. http://wfs.sdstate.edu/wfsdept/Publications/Jenks/470- W%20Walter%20Rocky%20Mountain%20Elk.pdf

Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2005a. Ecological Baseline Study at the Elkhorn Wind Power Project. Exhibit A. Final report prepared for Zilkha Renewable Energy, LLC., Portland, Oregon, by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 2005.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 30 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2005b. Ecological Baseline Study for the Proposed Reardon Wind Project, Lincoln County, Washington. Draft Final Report. Prepared for Energy Northwest, Richland, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 2005.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2005c. Wildlife and Habitat Baseline Study for the Proposed Biglow Canyon Wind Power Project, Sherman County, Oregon. March 2004 - August 2005. Prepared for Orion Energy LLC., Oakland, California. October, 2005. WEST. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2006a. Diablo Winds Wildlife Monitoring Progress Report, March 2005 - February 2006. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy and Alameda County California. WEST. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2006b. Wildlife Baseline Study for the North Valley County Wind Project: Summary of Results from 2006 Wildlife Surveys. Prepared for POWER Engineers, Boise, Idaho, and Wind Hunter, LLC., Grapevine, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. December 8, 2006.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2007. Wildlife and Habitat Baseline Study for the Vantage Wind Power Project, Kittitas County, Washington. Draft report prepared for Invenergy by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne Wyoming and Walla Walla, Washington. June 2007.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) and Colorado Plateau Research Station (CPRS). 2006. Avian Studies for the Proposed Sunshine Wind Park, Coconino County, Arizona. Prepared for Sunshine Arizona Wind Energy, LLC., Flagstaff, Arizona, by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming, and the CPRS, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona. May 2006.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), EDAW, Inc., and Bloom Biological, Inc. 2007. Baseline Avian Use and Risk Assessment for the Homestead Wind Energy Project, Kern County, California. 2005 – 2006. Prepared for Horizon Wind Energy by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), EDAW, Inc., San Diego, California, and Bloom Biological, Inc., Santa Anna, California. April 19, 2007.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC). 2003. Analysis of Potential Avian/Wind Plant Interactions in Klickitat County, Washington. Supplement to the Klickitat County Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for the Resource Development Department, Klickitat County, Goldendale, Washington, by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming, and NWC, Pendleton, Oregon. May 2003.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 31 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Winkelman, E. 1990. Impact of the Wind Park near Urk, Netherlands, on Birds: Bird Collision Victims and Disturbance of Wintering Fowl. International Ornithological Congress 20: 402-403.

Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, C.S. Brockman, T.D. Gerber, W.D. Hosteter, and S.H. Azevedo. 1998. Ecoregions of Indiana and Ohio. (Color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs.) US Geological Survey (USGS) map (map scale 1:1,500,000). USGS, Reston, Virginia. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/ohin_eco.htm

Woodward-Clyde International-Americas, (WCIA) and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 1997. Avian Baseline Study for the Vansycle Ridge Project - Vansycle Ridge, Oregon and Wildlife Mortality Studies, Vansycle Wind Project, Washington. Prepared for Esi Vansycle Partners, L.P., North Palm Beach, Florida.

Young, D.P. Jr., W.P. Erickson, K. Bay, J. Jeffrey, E.G. Lack, R.E. Good, and H.H. Sawyer. 2003a. Baseline Avian Studies for the Proposed Hopkins Ridge Wind Project, Columbia County, Washington. Final Report, March 2002 - March 2003. Prepared for RES North America, LLC., Portland, Oregon, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc.(WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. April 30, 2003.

Young, D.P. Jr., W.P. Erickson, K. Bay, J. Jeffrey, E.G. Lack, and H.H. Sawyer. 2003b. Baseline Avian Studies for the Proposed Desert Claim Wind Power Project, Kittitas County, Washington. Final Report. Prepared for Desert Claim Wind Power, LLC, Ellensburg, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 2003.

Young, D.P. Jr., W.P. Erickson, J. Jeffrey, K. Bay, and M. Bourassa. 2005. Eurus Combine Hills Turbine Ranch. Phase 1 Post Construction Wildlife Monitoring Final Report February 2004 February 2005. Technical report for Eurus Energy America Corporation and the Combine Hills Technical Advisory Committee, Umatilla County, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon.

Young, D.P. Jr., W.P. Erickson, J. Jeffrey, K. Bay, R.E. Good, and E.G. Lack. 2003c. Avian and Sensitive Species Baseline Study Plan and Final Report. Eurus Combine Hills Turbine Ranch, Umatilla County, Oregon. Technical report prepared for Eurus Energy America Corporation, San Diego, California and Aeropower Services, Inc., Portland, Oregon, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. March 10, 2003.

Young, D.P. Jr., W.P. Erickson, J. Jeffrey, and V.K. Poulton. 2007a. Puget Sound Energy, Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Phase 1, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, First Annual Report, January - December 2006. Technical report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, for Puget Sound Energy.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 32 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Young, D.P. Jr., G.D. Johnson, V.K. Poulton, and K. Bay. 2007b. Ecological Baseline Studies for the Hatchet Ridge Wind Energy Project, Shasta County, California. Prepared for Hatchet Ridge Wind, LLC, Portland, Oregon by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 31, 2007. http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/Departments/Resourcemgmt/drm/Hatchet%20Ridge/DEIR/A pp_C-1.pdf

Young, D.P. Jr., V.K. Poulton, and K. Bay. 2007c. Ecological Baseline Studies Report. Proposed Dry Lake Wind Project, Navajo County, Arizona. Prepared for PPM Energy, Portland, Oregon, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 1, 2007.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 33 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 1. The land cover types, coverage, and composition within the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area. Habitat Acres % Composition Crops 96,587.30 92.2 Developed, Open Space 5,721.12 5.5 Developed, Low Intensity 766.31 0.7 Deciduous Forest 673.42 0.6 Grassland 518.69 0.5 Woody Wetlands 261.47 0.2 Developed, Medium Intensity 91.06 0.1 Developed, High Intensity 46.54 <0.1 Open Water 36.88 <0.1 Emergent Wetlands 11.27 <0.1 Scrub-Shrub 1.35 <0.1 Barren 0.86 <0.1 Total 104,715.27 100 Data from the National Landcover Database (USGS NLCD 2001).

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 34 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 2. Summary of species richness (species/plota/20-min survey), and sample size by season and overall during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area., September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Number # Surveys # Unique Species Richness Season of Visits Conducted Species Large Birds Small Birds Fall 10 183 31 1.31 1.75 Winter 2 44 16 0.64 0.77 Spring 13 281 53 1.45 3.60 Summer 5 110 42 1.58 3.91 Overall 30 618 68 1.21 2.50 a 800-m radius for large birds and 100-m radius for small birds.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 35 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 3. Total number of individuals and groups for each bird type and speciesa, by season and overall, during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Areaa , September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Fall Winter Spring Summer Total # # # # # # # # # # Species/Type Scientific Name grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs Waterbirds 3 4 0 0 26 34 7 7 36 45 great blue heron Ardea herodias 3 4 0 0 21 23 7 7 31 34 ring-billed gull Larus delawarensis 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 0 3 6 sandhill crane Grus canadensis 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 unidentified gull 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 4 Waterfowl 3 104 7 73 62 294 7 25 79 496 Canada goose Branta canadensis 3 104 6 72 31 204 1 6 41 386 common merganser Mergus merganser 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 3 mallard Anas platyrhynchos 0 0 0 0 25 75 4 5 29 80 snow goose Chen caerulescens 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 unidentified duck 0 0 0 0 4 10 2 14 6 24 wood duck Aix sponsa 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 Shorebirds 73 224 0 0 205 571 69 82 347 877 American golden plover Pluvialis dominica 0 0 0 0 7 186 0 0 7 186 killdeer Charadrius vociferus 70 145 0 0 193 236 69 82 332 463 pectoral sandpiper Calidris melanotos 3 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 79 semipalmated sandpiper Calidris minutilla 0 0 0 0 1 10 0 0 1 10 unidentified sandpiper 0 0 0 0 2 37 0 0 2 37 unidentified shorebird 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 1 100 Wilson's snipe Gallinago delicata 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 Raptors 51 55 15 15 85 87 55 61 206 218 Accipiters 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Buteos 20 22 4 4 41 41 36 37 101 104 broad-winged hawk Buteo platypterus 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 36 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 3. Total number of individuals and groups for each bird type and speciesa, by season and overall, during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Areaa , September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Fall Winter Spring Summer Total # # # # # # # # # # Species/Type Scientific Name grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis 20 22 2 2 38 38 34 35 94 97 rough-legged hawk Buteo lagopus 0 0 2 2 3 3 0 0 5 5 Northern Harrier 22 23 1 1 16 16 4 4 43 44 northern harrier Circus cyaneus 22 23 1 1 16 16 4 4 43 44 Eagles 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Falcons 9 10 8 8 27 29 15 20 59 67 American kestrel Falco sparverius 9 10 8 8 27 29 15 20 59 67 Other Raptors 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 unidentified hawk 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Vultures 53 81 0 0 73 106 50 74 176 261 turkey vulture Cathartes aura 53 81 0 0 73 106 50 74 176 261 Doves/Pigeons 54 120 5 7 61 100 94 152 214 379 mourning dove Zenaida macroura 54 120 4 6 55 89 94 152 207 367 rock pigeon Columba livia 0 0 1 1 6 11 0 0 7 12 Large Corvids 10 142 4 13 7 10 4 9 25 174 American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 10 142 4 13 7 10 4 9 25 174 Passerines 468 4,093 72 330 1,735 4,228 890 1,721 3,166 10,372 American goldfinch Carduelis tristis 0 0 0 0 4 5 7 9 11 14 American redstart Setophaga ruticilla 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 American robin Turdus migratorius 9 17 0 0 145 206 45 53 199 276 American tree sparrow Spizella arborea 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 Baltimore oriole Icterus galbula 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 bank swallow Riparia riparia 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 4 10 barn swallow Hirundo rustica 6 17 0 0 67 98 90 132 163 247 blue grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 blue jay Cyanocitta cristata 7 18 0 0 4 5 1 3 12 26

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 37 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 3. Total number of individuals and groups for each bird type and speciesa, by season and overall, during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Areaa , September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Fall Winter Spring Summer Total # # # # # # # # # # Species/Type Scientific Name grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus 0 0 0 0 17 21 14 21 31 42 brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater 7 125 0 0 103 194 42 49 152 368 brown thrasher Toxostoma rufum 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 chipping sparrow Spizella passerina 0 0 0 0 4 6 7 7 11 13 cliff swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota 1 10 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 11 common grackle Quiscalus quiscula 3 27 0 0 186 485 86 143 275 665 dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 dickcissel Spiza americana 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 3 4 eastern meadowlark Sturnella magna 0 0 0 0 4 5 6 8 10 13 European starling Sturnus vulgaris 99 2,006 16 166 197 641 108 464 420 3,276 field sparrow Spizella pusilla 2 2 0 0 1 1 3 3 6 6 horned lark Eremophila alpestris 259 691 51 156 393 609 170 314 873 1,770 house finch Carpodacus mexicanus 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 house sparrow Passer domesticus 5 27 0 0 6 14 38 84 49 125 house wren Troglodytes aedon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 indigo bunting Passerina cyanea 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 11 10 11 Lapland longspur Calcarius lapponicus 0 0 1 3 62 1,049 0 0 63 1,052 northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 1 5 5 northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 northern rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 7 5 10 purple martin Progne subis 0 0 0 0 8 9 3 6 11 15 red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 43 1,077 1 1 384 602 133 189 561 1,869 savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis 20 66 0 0 77 97 54 62 151 225 snow bunting Plectrophenax nivalis 0 0 0 0 6 29 0 0 6 29 song sparrow Melospiza melodia 0 0 0 0 26 33 32 36 58 69 tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor 2 4 0 0 10 15 8 16 20 35 unidentified blackbird 0 0 0 0 1 70 1 66 2 135

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 38 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 39 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 40 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 41 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 4b. Mean use (number of birds/100-m plot/20-min survey), percent of total composition (%), and frequency of occurrence (%) for each small bird type and species by season during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Use % Composition % Frequency Species/Type Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Passerines 21.64 3.73 12.069.42 100.0100.0 99.8 97.2 90.8 61.4 97.6 96.2 American goldfinch 0 0 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.1 0.6 0 0 1.0 4.5 American redstart 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 American robin 0.10 0 0.58 0.30 0.5 0 4.8 3.1 3.9 0 31.3 19.7 American tree sparrow 0 0.05 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 Baltimore oriole 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 bank swallow 0 0 0 0.08 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 3.0 barn swallow 0.18 0 0.34 0.89 0.8 0 2.8 9.2 5.6 0 18.2 50.0 blue grosbeak 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 blue jay 0.03 0 0.01 0 0.2 0 0.1 0 1.8 0 0.7 0 bobolink 0 0 0.03 0.07 0 0 0.3 0.7 0 0 2.4 4.5 brown-headed cowbird 0.47 0 0.63 0.33 2.2 0 5.2 3.4 4.0 0 29.2 24.2 brown thrasher 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 chipping sparrow 0 0 0.02 0.03 0 0 0.2 0.3 0 0 1.4 3.0 cliff swallow 0.07 0 <0.01 0 0.3 0 <0.1 0 0.7 0 0.3 0 common grackle 0.03 0 1.46 0.82 0.1 0 12.1 8.4 2.6 0 35.2 34.1 dark-eyed junco 0 0.02 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 dickcissel 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 1.5 eastern meadowlark 0 0 0.02 0.04 0 0 0.2 0.4 0 0 1.5 2.3 European starling 10.36 1.25 1.72 2.42 47.9 33.5 14.2 25.0 38.4 15.9 38.5 40.9 field sparrow 0.02 0 <0.01 0 0.1 0 <0.1 0 1.9 0 0.3 0 horned lark 3.79 2.27 1.94 1.76 17.5 61.0 16.0 18.1 75.0 50.0 76.5 62.9 house finch 0.02 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 house sparrow 0.16 0 0.05 0.58 0.7 0 0.4 6.0 2.8 0 2.1 18.9 house wren 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 indigo bunting 0 0 0 0.05 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 4.5

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 42 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 4b. Mean use (number of birds/100-m plot/20-min survey), percent of total composition (%), and frequency of occurrence (%) for each small bird type and species by season during the fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Use % Composition % Frequency Species/Type Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Lapland longspur 0 0.07 2.94 0 0 1.8 24.4 0 0 2.3 14.0 0 northern cardinal 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 1.0 0 northern mockingbird 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 northern rough-winged swallow 0 0 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.1 0.5 0 0 0.3 2.3 purple martin 0 0 0.03 0.02 0 0 0.3 0.2 0 0 2.4 0.8 red-winged blackbird 6.00 0.02 1.64 1.03 27.7 0.6 13.6 10.6 21.8 2.3 58.7 40.9 savannah sparrow 0.37 0 0.33 0.45 1.7 0 2.7 4.7 11.0 0 21.8 35.6 snow bunting 0 0 0.05 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 1.0 0 song sparrow 0 0 0.11 0.20 0 0 0.9 2.0 0 0 8.2 15.9 tree swallow 0.01 0 0.05 0.08 <0.1 0 0.4 0.8 0.5 0 3.5 3.8 unidentified blackbird 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 unidentified sparrow 0.01 0.05 0.01 0 <0.1 1.2 0.1 0 0.7 2.3 0.3 0 vesper sparrow 0.02 0 0.04 0.14 0.1 0 0.4 1.4 1.8 0 4.3 12.1 western meadowlark 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 Other Birds 0.01 0 0.02 0.27 <0.1 0 0.2 2.8 0.5 0 2.5 4.5 chimney swift 0 0 0 0.22 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 2.3 hairy woodpecker 0 0 <0.01 0 0 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0.3 0 northern flicker 0.01 0 0.01 0.04 <0.1 0 0.1 0.4 0.5 0 1.0 1.5 red-bellied woodpecker 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 1.1 0 red-headed woodpecker 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.8 ruby-throated hummingbird 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.8 Overall 21.66 3.73 12.08 9.69 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 43 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 5a. Relative exposure index and flight characteristics by large bird species during fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. % Flying # Groups Overall % within ZOR based Exposure % Within Species Flying Mean Use Flying on initial obs Index ZOR at anytime Canada goose 25 0.56 71.8 76.1 0.31 76.1 turkey vulture 115 0.20 100 62.3 0.12 74.9 American golden plover 6 0.17 59.7 40.5 0.04 63.1 red-tailed hawk 74 0.12 96.3 26.0 0.03 39.0 great blue heron 22 0.03 100 32.0 0.01 32.0 American crow 22 0.24 100 1.2 <0.01 44.4 ring-billed gull 3 0.01 100 50.0 <0.01 50.0 unidentified duck 3 0.01 100 25.0 <0.01 25.0 wood duck 1 <0.01 100 100 <0.01 100 northern harrier 41 0.06 95.5 2.4 <0.01 9.5 killdeer 325 0.54 96.8 0.2 <0.01 1.3 mallard 28 0.08 87.5 1.4 <0.01 11.4 sandhill crane 1 <0.01 100 100 <0.01 100 mourning dove 202 0.64 93.7 0 0 0 American kestrel 59 0.13 100 0 0 1.5 pectoral sandpiper 2 0.07 45.6 0 0 0 unidentified sandpiper 2 0.03 100 0 0 0 rock pigeon 7 0.02 100 0 0 0 rough-legged hawk 4 0.02 100 0 0 0 semipalmated sandpiper 1 0.01 100 0 0 0 Cooper's hawk 1 0.01 100 0 0 0 snow goose 1 0.01 100 0 0 0 unidentified gull 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 common merganser 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 44 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 45 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 5b. Relative exposure index and flight characteristics for small birds during fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. % Flying # Groups Overall % within ZOR based Exposure % Within Species Flying Mean Use Flying on initial obs Index ZOR at anytime chimney swift 3 0.05 100 13.8 0.01 66.5 European starling 330 3.20 99.7 0 0 0 horned lark 762 2.33 98.7 0 0 0.1 red-winged blackbird 444 1.70 100 0 0 0 Lapland longspur 52 0.79 100 0 0 0 common grackle 223 0.57 100 0 0 0 barn swallow 151 0.32 99.6 0 0 0 brown-headed cowbird 141 0.32 100 0 0 0 savannah sparrow 144 0.25 98.6 0 0 0 American robin 153 0.24 100 0 0 0 house sparrow 47 0.17 100 0 0 0 song sparrow 46 0.07 98.2 0 0 0 vesper sparrow 31 0.05 100 0 0 0 tree swallow 18 0.03 100 0 0 0 bobolink 16 0.02 100 0 0 0 unidentified sparrow 3 0.02 100 0 0 0 bank swallow 4 0.02 100 0 0 0 American goldfinch 9 0.02 100 0 0 0 American tree sparrow 1 0.02 100 0 0 0 northern rough-winged swallow 5 0.01 100 0 0 0 cliff swallow 2 0.01 100 0 0 0 eastern meadowlark 6 0.01 80.0 0 0 0 chipping sparrow 8 0.01 100 0 0 0 northern flicker 6 0.01 100 0 0 0 indigo bunting 6 0.01 100 0 0 0 snow bunting 4 0.01 100 0 0 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 46 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 5b. Relative exposure index and flight characteristics for small birds during fixed-point bird use surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. % Flying # Groups Overall % within ZOR based Exposure % Within Species Flying Mean Use Flying on initial obs Index ZOR at anytime purple martin 9 0.01 100 0 0 0 dark-eyed junco 1 0.01 100 0 0 0 blue jay 3 0.01 75.0 0 0 0 dickcissel 2 0.01 100 0 0 0 field sparrow 2 <0.01 100 0 0 0 house finch 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 red-bellied woodpecker 3 <0.01 100 0 0 0 northern cardinal 3 <0.01 100 0 0 0 blue grosbeak 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 red-headed woodpecker 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 ruby-throated hummingbird 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 American redstart 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 Baltimore oriole 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 brown thrasher 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 hairy woodpecker 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 northern mockingbird 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 western meadowlark 1 <0.01 100 0 0 0 ZOR: The likely “zone of risk” for potential collision with a turbine blade, or 20-120 m (66-394 ft) above ground level (AGL).

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 47 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 6. Total number of groups and individuals for each bird type and species by season during sandhill crane migration surveys in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, November 3 – December 12, 2008. Species/Type Scientific Name # grps # obs Waterbirds 7 136 great blue heron Ardea herodias 1 1 sandhill crane Grus canadensis 6 135 Waterfowl 10 191 Canada goose Branta canadensis 6 98 snow goose Chen caerulescens 1 1 tundra swan Cygnus columbianus 2 80 unidentified duck 1 12 Shorebirds 10 42 killdeer Charadrius vociferus 10 42 Raptors 71 74 Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii 3 3 red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis 16 17 rough-legged hawk Buteo lagopus 4 4 northern harrier Circus cyaneus 11 11 American kestrel Falco sparverius 34 35 merlin Falco columbarius 3 4 Doves/Pigeons 14 91 mourning dove Zenaida macroura 13 90 rock pigeon Columba livia 1 1 Passerines 209 4,832 American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 12 135 American pipit Anthus rubescens 2 31 American tree sparrow Spizella arborea 1 2 black-capped chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 2 blue jay Cyanocitta cristata 11 314 dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis 3 4 eastern bluebird Sialia sialis 1 3

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 48 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 49 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 7. Flight height characteristics of birds observed during fixed-point bird use surveys and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.. # # Mean Flight Median Flight % in % Within Species/Type grps obs Ht. (m) Ht. (m) Flight ZOR Waterbirds 43 181 34.42 15.0 100 14.9 great blue heron 32 35 18.06 15.0 100 28.6 ring-billed gull 3 6 12.00 15.0 100 50.0 sandhill crane 7 136 121.43 150.0 100 10.3 unidentified gull 1 4 16.00 16.0 100 0 Waterfowl 81 595 17.17 12.0 86.6 75.0 Canada goose 40 402 17.70 15.0 83.1 82.8 common merganser 1 3 15.00 15.0 100 0 mallard 28 70 7.07 7.0 87.5 1.4 snow goose 2 2 22.50 22.5 100 50.0 tundra swan 2 80 100.00 100 100 100 unidentified duck 7 36 28.57 20.0 100 80.6 wood duck 1 2 25.00 25.0 100 100 Shorebirds 348 786 4.91 4.0 85.5 18.6 American golden plover 6 111 6.67 3.0 59.7 40.5 killdeer 335 490 4.56 4.0 97.0 0.2 pectoral sandpiper 2 36 6.50 6.5 45.6 0 semipalmated sandpiper 1 10 1.00 1.0 100 0 unidentified sandpiper 2 37 13.50 13.5 100 0 unidentified shorebird 1 100 90.00 90.0 100 100 Wilson's snipe 1 2 8.00 8.0 100 0 Raptors 270 285 11.45 8.0 97.6 14.7 Accipiters 4 4 9.00 10.5 100 0 Cooper's hawk 4 4 9.00 10.5 100 0 Buteos 116 120 16.04 14.0 96.0 32.5 broad-winged hawk 1 1 3.00 3.0 100 0 red-shouldered hawk 1 1 2.00 2.0 100 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 50 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 7. Flight height characteristics of birds observed during fixed-point bird use surveys and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.. # # Mean Flight Median Flight % in % Within Species/Type grps obs Ht. (m) Ht. (m) Flight ZOR red-tailed hawk 105 109 16.53 15.0 95.6 33.9 rough-legged hawk 9 9 13.33 12.0 100 22.2 Northern Harrier 52 53 6.50 4.5 96.4 1.9 northern harrier 52 53 6.50 4.5 96.4 1.9 Eagles 1 1 60.00 60.0 100 100 bald eagle 1 1 60.00 60.0 100 100 Falcons 96 106 7.68 8.0 100 0 American kestrel 93 102 7.77 8.0 100 0 merlin 3 4 4.67 3.0 100 0 Other Raptors 1 1 60.00 60.0 100 100 unidentified hawk 1 1 60.00 60.0 100 100 Vultures 176 261 28.87 25.0 100 69.7 turkey vulture 176 261 28.87 25.0 100 69.7 Doves/Pigeons 222 446 7.51 7.0 94.9 0 mourning dove 214 433 7.44 7.0 94.7 0 rock pigeon 8 13 9.50 10.0 100 0 Large Corvids 37 309 12.14 12.0 100 1.0 American crow 37 309 12.14 12.0 100 1.0 Passerines 3,318 14,859 5.28 5.0 98.6 1.0 American goldfinch 11 14 7.82 8.0 100 0 American pipit 2 31 5.50 5.5 100 0 American redstart 1 1 5.00 5.0 100 0 American robin 199 276 3.59 3.0 100 0 American tree sparrow 2 4 2.00 2.0 100 0 Baltimore oriole 1 1 7.00 7.0 100 0 bank swallow 4 10 6.25 7.5 100 0 barn swallow 162 246 4.50 3.0 99.6 0 black-capped chickadee 1 2 5.00 5.0 100 0 blue grosbeak 1 2 4.00 4.0 100 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 51 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 7. Flight height characteristics of birds observed during fixed-point bird use surveys and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.. # # Mean Flight Median Flight % in % Within Species/Type grps obs Ht. (m) Ht. (m) Flight ZOR blue jay 18 333 10.83 11.5 97.9 0 bobolink 30 41 5.07 5.0 97.6 0 brown-headed cowbird 152 368 5.91 5.0 100 4.1 brown thrasher 2 2 2.00 2.0 100 0 chipping sparrow 10 12 3.30 2.0 92.3 0 cliff swallow 2 11 6.50 6.5 100 0 common grackle 275 665 7.80 7.0 100 0.3 dark-eyed junco 4 5 5.00 5.0 100 0 dickcissel 3 4 8.67 9.0 100 0 eastern bluebird 1 3 8.00 8.0 100 0 eastern meadowlark 9 11 3.33 3.0 84.6 0 European starling 440 3,669 6.79 7.0 95.8 0.5 field sparrow 3 3 4.00 4.0 50.0 0 horned lark 936 2,356 4.26 3.0 99.1 0.6 house finch 1 1 0 0 100 0 house sparrow 49 125 4.73 5.0 100 0 indigo bunting 10 11 7.20 7.5 100 0 Lpland longspur 117 3,497 7.12 6.0 100 0.1 northern cardinal 6 6 3.67 3.5 75.0 0 northern mockingbird 1 1 13.00 13.0 100 0 northern rough-winged swallow 5 10 5.40 5.0 100 0 purple martin 11 15 7.36 7.0 100 0 red-winged blackbird 560 1,867 5.59 5.0 99.9 1.4 savannah sparrow 147 221 2.03 1.0 98.2 0 snow bunting 25 772 6.16 5.0 100 0 song sparrow 54 66 3.15 3.0 94.2 0 tree swallow 20 35 6.66 5.0 100 0 unidentified blackbird 2 135 32.50 32.5 100 51.9 unidentified sparrow 4 7 3.75 3.0 100 0

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 52 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 53 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 8. Summary of sensitive species observed at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area during fixed-point bird use surveys (FP), sandhill crane surveys (SACR) and as incidental wildlife observations (Inc.), September 2, 2008 – August 19, 2009. FP SACR Inc. Total # of # of # of # of # of # of # of # of Species Scientific Name Status grps obs grps obs grps obs grps obs northern harrier Circus cyaneus SE 43 44 3 3 17 17 63 64 bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus SSC 31 42 0 0 0 0 31 42 sandhill crane Grus canadensis SE 1 1 6 135 1 8 8 144 bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T, EA 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 2 blue grosbeak Guiraca caerulea SSI 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 Wilson's snipe Gallinago delicata SSI 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus SE 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis ST 1 1 4 4 0 0 5 5 western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta SSI 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total 9 Species 80 94 9 26 20 27 108 147 EA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act; ST = state threatened; SE = state endangered; SSC = state species of concern; SSI = state species of interest (Data from BGEPA 1940, ODNR 2009b, USFWS BGEPA 2009).

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 54 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 9. Average time (minutes) spent in rotor swept area (20 – 120 m) for raptor and sensitive species during fixed-point bird use and sandhill crane surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area. Average Time (min) in Rotor Swept Area (20 Species - 120 m) American kestrel 0.02 Cooper's hawk 0 northern harrier 0.08 rough-legged hawk 0.78 red-tailed hawk 0.61 bald eagle 2.00 broad-winged hawk 0 red-shouldered hawk 0 unidentified hawk 0 merlin 0 bobolink 0 sandhill crane 1.07 blue grosbeak 2.00 Wilson's snipe 0 American bittern * dark-eyed junco 0 western meadowlark 0 * = species was not observed flying

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 55 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 10. Habitat types present at the overall Timber Ridge Study Area and Timber Road Wind Farm. Timber Ridge Study Area Timber Road Wind Farm Habitat Acres % Composition Acres % Composition Agriculture 98,167.63 93.7 9,424.63 95.2 Unmowed Grasslands 801.07 0.8 93.42 0.9 Mowed Grasslands 277.16 0.3 0 0 Woodlot 1,665.08 1.6 59.88 0.6 Shelterbelt – Trees 376.66 0.4 25.76 0.3 Shelterbelt - Shrubs 143.28 0.1 5.02 0.1 Wetlands 86.10 0.1 14.32 0.1 Abandoned Structure 0.09 <0.1 0 0 Developed 2,879.20 2.7 279.80 2.8 Railroad Verge 35.35 <0.1 0 0 Quarry 110.16 0.1 0 0 Highway 223.04 0.2 0 0 Total 104,754.81 100 9,902.83 100

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 56 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 11. Incidental wildlife observed while conducting all surveys at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area, September 2, 2008 - August 19, 2009. Species Scientific Name #grps # obs American kestrel Falco sparverius 56 71 Canada goose Branta canadensis 6 61 tundra swan Cygnus columbianus 1 50 red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis 43 44 turkey vulture Cathartes aura 6 38 mallard Anas platyrhynchos 12 31 northern harrier Circus cyaneus 17 17 American golden plover Pluvialis dominica 1 10 great blue heron Ardea herodias 10 10 purple martin Progne subis 1 10 sandhill crane Grus canadensis 1 8 dickcissel Spiza americana 1 2 American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus 1 1 bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 1 1 Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii 1 1 Bird Total 15 Species 158 355 white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus 41 202 woodchuck Marmota monax 7 7 fox squirrel Sciurus niger 1 2 mink Mustela vison 1 2 red fox vulpes vulpes 1 1 Mammal Total 5 Species 51 214 common snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina 1 1

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 57 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Table 12. Comparison of seasonal raptor use at other wind energy facilities in the Midwestern region to the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area. Raptor Use (# raptors/20-min survey) Site Fall Winter Spring Summer Reference Timber Road Study Area, OH 0.33 0.32 0.26 0.42 This study Buffalo Ridge, MN 0.78 0.22 0.64 0.60 Johnson et al. 2000a Black Fork, OH 0.13 0.26 Ecology and Environment 2009 Grand Ridge, IL 0.20 0.10 0.32 - Derby et al. 2009 Hardin, OH 0.08 - 0.11 - Good et al. 2009 Buckeye Wind, OH 0.11 - 0.20 - Stantec 2009

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 58 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 1. Location of the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 59 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 2. Overview of the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 60 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 3. The land cover types and coverage within the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area (USGS NLCD 2001).

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 61 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 4. Fixed-point bird use survey points at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 62 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 5. Sandhill crane migration survey points at the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 63 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

All Large Birds

10 8.20 8 6.75 6.60 6.60 6.38 6 5.42 4.92 4.46 4.27 4.12 4.07 4.07 3.77 3.67 3.63 3.65 Mean use 4 3.00 2.69 2.70 2.73 2.56 2.54 2.50 2.33 2.41 2.50 2.27 2.00 2.07 1.52 1.90 1.88 2 1.67 1.67 0.94 1.43 1.00 0.60

0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Waterbirds

2 Mean use 1

0.20 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.15 000.07 0.07 00 000.03 0000000 0000.06 0.08 0 00000.07 0 0 0.04 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Figure 6. Mean use (number of birds/20-min survey) at each fixed-point bird use survey point for all birds and major bird types at the Timber Road Wind Farm and the surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 64 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Waterfowl

8 6.40 6

Mean use 4 3.35 3.15

2 1.00 0.80 0.96 0.69 0.87 0.77 0.31 0.33 0.50 0.14 0 0.29 00 0 0.08 0.07 0 00 0.15 0 0 0.13 00 0 0 000.20 0000 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A Point

Shorebirds

5.73 6 5.42

Mean use Mean 4 2.57 2.40 2.00 2 1.23 1.23 1.40 0.93 0.92 1.04 1.00 0.94 1.07 1.03 0.80 0.63 0.69 0.69 0.70 0.75 0.64 0.67 0.88 0.52 0.33 0.60 0.33 0.53 0.40 0.50 0.53 0.33 0.50 0.25 0.10 0 0 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Figure 6 (continued). Mean use (number of birds/20-min survey) at each fixed-point bird use survey point for all birds and major bird types at the Timber Road Wind Farm and the surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 65 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

1.07 Mean use 1.00 1 0.70 0.67 0.62 0.54 0.38 0.40 0.44 0.40 0.38 0.28 0.29 0.33 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.37 0.36 0.33 0.27 0.23 0.27 0.23 0.19 0.20 0.27 0.25 0.27 0.15 0.10 0.15 0 0 0 00 0.03 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Accipiters

2 Mean use 1

0.10 0 0000000000000000000 00000000000000000 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 66 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Buteos

2 Mean use

0.42 0.27 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.12 00 0 0 00 0 0.04 000.04 0 0

1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A Point

Falcons

2 Mean use 0.87 1 0.42 0.30 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.12 0.15 0.10 0.03 000 00 0.07 0 00 0.04 0 0.08 0 00000.080.07 000.070.07 00 0 0.04 0

1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A Point

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 67 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Northern Harriers

Mean use 1.00 1 0.67 0.33 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.18 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.07 0.07 0 0000.07 0 0.04 00000.06 0.08 0.04 0.06 0 0 0.08 0000.07 0 0.03 0.08 0 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Other Raptors

2 Mean use 1 0.67 0.58 0.31 0.19 0.27 0.03 00 0000000000000 0 0.04 000000 00000 0000 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 68 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Vultures

2 1.60 Mean use 1 0.80 0.80 0.50 0.46 0.38 0.33 0.33 0.30 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.21 0.21 0.25 0.20 0.27 0.27 0.23 0.27 0.25 0.20 0.27 0.19 0.23 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.04 0 0 0.07 0 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Large Corvids

4.90 5

Mean use 2 1.54 1.00 1.00 1 0.38 0.40 0.21 0.21 0.02 000000 0 0.12 0.10 0 0.10 0000.04 0 0.06 000.04 00 000.13 0000.12 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A Point

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 69 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

All Small Birds

80 70.3

57.9 60

42.3 40.7 40 Mean use 20.8 17.1 20 15.4 14.0 15.7 14.2 14.5 15.1 15.4 16.3 15.7 13.7 13.4 11.7 11.9 8.13 9.25 9.81 9.56 9.85 9.80 8.92 8.27 8.80 8.27 7.80 6.53 6.10 5.80 7.93 7.00 5.00 3.10 4.80 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Passerines

80 70.3

57.9 60

42.3 40.7 40 Mean use 20.5 17.1 20 15.4 14.0 15.7 14.2 14.5 15.1 15.4 16.3 15.7 13.6 13.4 11.5 11.9 8.13 9.25 9.81 9.56 9.85 9.80 8.35 8.27 8.53 8.27 7.80 5.87 6.10 5.80 7.93 7.00 5.00 3.10 4.80 0 1 10 11 11B 12 12A 12B 13 13A 14 15 15A 16A 16B 17A 18A 18B 19A 2 20A 21A 21B 22A 2A 2B 3 3A 4 5 5A 5B 6 6B 7 8 8A 9 9A

Point

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 70 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 7. Location of raptor nests observed in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 71 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 8. Habitat types present in the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area.

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 72 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Mean use (#birds/plot/20-min survey) use (#birds/plot/20-min Mean

Wind-Energy Facility Figure 9. Comparison of fall raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities. Data from the following sources: Timber Road, OH This study. Diablo Winds, CA WEST 2006a Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b North Valley, MT WEST 2006b High Winds, CA Kerlinger et al. 2005 Reardon, WA WEST 2005b Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001 Altamont Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Sand Hills, WY Johnson et al. 2006a Tehachapi Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Cotterel Mtn., ID Cooper et al. 2004 Combine Hills, OR Young et al. 2003c Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b Hopkin's Ridge, WA Young et al. 2003a Homestead, CA WEST et al. 2007 Grand Ridge, IL Derby et al. 2009 Foote Creek Rim, WY Erickson et al. 2002b Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Dry Lake, AZ Young et al. 2007c Windy Flats, WA Johnson et al. 2007b Leaning Juniper, OR Kronner et al. 2005 Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c Buffalo Ridge, MN Erickson et al. 2002b Roosevelt, WA NWC and WEST 2004 Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Elkhorn, OR WEST 2005a Klondike, OR Johnson et al. 2002a Black Fork, OH Ecology and Environment 2009 Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a Condon, OR Erickson et al. 2002b Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c Swauk Ridge, WA Erickson et al. 2003b Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b Buckeye Wind, OH Stantec 2009 Desert Claim, WA Young et al. 2003b Sunshine, AZ WEST and CPRS 2006 San Gorgonio, CA Erickson et al. 2002b White Creek, WA NWC and WEST 2005 Wild Horse, WA Erickson et al. 2003a Hardin, Ohio Good et al. 2009 Golden Hills, OR Jeffrey et al. 2008 Stateline, WA/OR Erickson et al. 2002b

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 73 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Mean use (#birds/plot/20-min survey) use (#birds/plot/20-min Mean

Wind-Energy Facility Figure 10. Comparison of winter raptor use between Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities. Data from the following sources: Timber Road, OH This study. High Winds, CA Kerlinger et al. 2005 Condon, OR Erickson et al. 2002b Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b Diablo Winds, CA WEST 2006a Stateline, WA/OR Erickson et al. 2002b Cotterel Mtn., ID Cooper et al. 2004 Altamont Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b White Creek, WA NWC and WEST 2005 Wild Horse, WA Erickson et al. 2003a Combine Hills, OR Young et al. 2003c Reardon, WA WEST 2005b Tehachapi Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Windy Flats, WA Johnson et al. 2007b Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001 Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Desert Claim, WA Young et al. 2003b Roosevelt, WA NWC and WEST 2004 Dry Lake, AZ Young et al. 2007c Windy Point, WA Johnson et al. 2006b Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b San Gorgonio, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Hopkin's Ridge, WA Young et al. 2003a Leaning Juniper, OR Kronner et al. 2005 Grand Ridge, IL Derby et al. 2009 Golden Hills, OR Jeffrey et al. 2008 Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Klondike, OR Johnson et al. 2002a Foote Creek Rim, WY Erickson et al. 2002b Sunshine, AZ WEST and CPRS 2006 Homestead, CA WEST et al. 2007 Buffalo Ridge, MN Erickson et al. 2002b

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 74 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 Mean use (#birds/plot/20-min survey) use (#birds/plot/20-min Mean

Wind-Energy Facility Figure 11. Comparison of spring raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities. Data from the following sources: Timber Road, OH This study. Altamont Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Hopkin's Ridge, WA Young et al. 2003a Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Golden Hills, OR Jeffrey et al. 2008 White Creek, WA NWC and WEST 2005 Grand Ridge, IL Derby et al. 2009 DNR, WA Johnson et al. 2006c Klickitat Co., EOZ WA WEST and NWC 2003 Homestead, CA WEST et al. 2007 Hoctor Ridge, WA Johnson et al. 2006d Stateline, WA/OR Erickson et al. 2002b Black Fork, OH Ecology and Environment 2009 Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001 Roosevelt, WA NWC and WEST 2004 Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c Reardon, WA WEST 2005b Condon, OR Erickson et al. 2002b Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Cotterel Mtn., ID Cooper et al. 2004 Foote Creek Rim, WY Erickson et al. 2002b Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b High Winds, CA Kerlinger et al. 2005 Sand Hills, WY Johnson et al. 2006a Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a Swauk Ridge, WA Erickson et al. 2003b Wild Horse, WA Erickson et al. 2003a Buckeye Wind, OH Stantec 2009 Combine Hills, OR Young et al. 2003c Klondike, OR Johnson et al. 2002a North Valley, MT WEST 2006b Diablo Winds, CA WEST 2006a Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b Hardin, Ohio Good et al. 2009 Desert Claim, WA Young et al. 2003b Bighorn, WA Johnson and Erickson 2004 San Gorgonio, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Windy Point, WA Johnson et al. 2006b Imrie, WA Johnson et al. 2006e Sunshine, AZ WEST and the CPRS 2006 Elkhorn, OR WEST 2005a Leaning Juniper, OR Kronner et al. 2005 Tehachapi Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Windy Flats, WA Johnson et al. 2007b Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c Dry Lake, AZ Young et al. 2007c Buffalo Ridge, MN Erickson et al. 2002b Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 75 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 Mean use (#birds/plot/20-min survey)

Wind-Energy Facility

Figure 12. Comparison of summer raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities. Data from the following sources: Timber Road, OH This study. DNR, WA Johnson et al. 2006c White Creek, WA NWC and WEST 2005 Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b Elkhorn, OR WEST 2005a Hopkin's Ridge, WA Young et al. 2003a Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001 Diablo Winds, CA WEST 2006a Buffalo Ridge, MN Erickson et al. 2002b Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Lower Linden, WA Johnson et al. 2007a Stateline, WA/OR Erickson et al. 2002b Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c Hoctor Ridge, WA Johnson et al. 2006d Desert Claim, WA Young et al. 2003b Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Leaning Juniper, OR Kronner et al. 2005 Combine Hills, OR Young et al. 2003c Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b Cotterel Mtn., ID Cooper et al. 2004 Klondike, OR Johnson et al. 2002a Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b Imrie, WA Johnson et al. 2006e Bighorn, WA Johnson and Erickson 2004 Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a Roosevelt, WA NWC and WEST 2004 Condon, OR Erickson et al. 2002b Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c Swauk Ridge, WA Erickson et al. 2003b Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001 Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b Klickitat Co., EOZ WA WEST and NWC 2003 Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Wild Horse, WA Erickson et al. 2003a High Winds, CA Kerlinger et al. 2005 Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c North Valley, MT WEST 2006b Golden Hills, OR Jeffrey et al. 2008 Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Dry Lake, AZ Young et al. 2007c Foote Creek Rim, WY Erickson et al. 2002b Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b Homestead, CA WEST et al. 2007 Altamont Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b Tehachapi Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Windy Flats, WA Johnson et al. 2007b Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a San Gorgonio, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Reardon, WA WEST 2005b Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 76 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Raptors

2.50 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 Mean use (#birds/plot/20-min survey) use (#birds/plot/20-min Mean

Wind-Energy Facility

Figure 13. Comparison of annual raptor use between the Timber Road Wind Farm and surrounding Timber Road Study Area and other US wind-energy facilities. Data from the following sources: Timber Road, OH This study. High Winds, CA Kerlinger et al. 2005 Buffalo Ridge, MN Erickson et al. 2002b Hatchet Ridge, CA Young et al. 2007b Diablo Winds, CA WEST 2006a White Creek, WA NWC and WEST 2005 Biglow Canyon, OR WEST 2005c Altamont Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Foote Creek Rim, WY Erickson et al. 2002b Wild Horse, WA Erickson et al. 2003a Elkhorn, OR WEST 2005a Roosevelt, WA NWC and WEST 2004 Biglow Reference, OR WEST 2005c Cotterel Mtn., ID Cooper et al. 2004 Leaning Juniper, OR Kronner et al. 2005 Simpson Ridge, WY Johnson et al. 2000b Swauk Ridge, WA Erickson et al. 2003b Klondike, OR Johnson et al. 2002a Invenergy_Vantage, WA WEST 2007 Golden Hills, OR Jeffrey et al. 2008 Stateline, WA/OR Erickson et al. 2002b North Valley, MT WEST 2006b Windy Flats, WA Johnson et al. 2007b Condon, OR Erickson et al. 2002b Grand Ridge, IL Derby et al. 2009 Combine Hills, OR Young et al. 2003c Zintel Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2002a Tehachapi Pass, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Desert Claim, WA Young et al. 2003b Homestead, CA WEST et al. 2007 Sunshine, AZ WEST and the CPRS 2006 Hopkin's Ridge, WA Young et al. 2003a Nine Canyon, WA Erickson et al. 2001b Dry Lake, AZ Young et al. 2007c Reardon, WA WEST 2005b Maiden, WA Erickson et al. 2002b San Gorgonio, CA Erickson et al. 2002b Stateline Reference URS et al. 2001

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 77 December 3, 2009 Timber Road Final Report

Figure 14. Regression analysis comparing raptor use estimations versus estimated raptor mortality. Data from the following sources: Raptor Use (birds/plot Raptor Mortality Study and Location /20-min survey) Source (fatalities/MW/yr) Source Buffalo Ridge, MN 0.64 Erickson et al. 2002b 0.02 Erickson et al. 2002b Combine Hills, OR 0.75 Young et al. 2003c 0.00 Young et al. 2005 Diablo Winds, CA 2.161 WEST 2006a 0.87 WEST 2006a Foote Creek Rim, WY 0.55 Erickson et al. 2002b 0.04 Erickson et al. 2002b High Winds, CA 2.34 Kerlinger et al. 2005 0.39 Kerlinger et al. 2006 Hopkins Ridge, WA 0.70 Young et al. 2003a 0.14 Young et al. 2007a Klondike II, OR 0.50 Johnson 2004 0.11 NWC and WEST 2007 Klondike, OR 0.50 Johnson et al. 2002a 0.00 Johnson et al. 2003b Stateline, WA/OR 0.48 Erickson et al. 2002b 0.09 Erickson et al. 2002b Vansycle, OR 0.66 WCIA and WEST 1997 0.00 Erickson et al. 2002b Wild Horse, WA 0.29 Erickson et al. 2003a 0.09 Erickson et al. 2008 Zintel, WA 0.43 Erickson et al. 2002a 0.05 Erickson et al. 2002b Bighorn, WA 0.51 Johnson and Erickson 2004 0.15 Kronner et al. 2008

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 78 December 3, 2009 Bat Acoustic Survey for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio

Final Report May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018

Prepared for: EDP Renewables North America, LLC 808 Travis Street, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by: Goniela Iskali and Ashley Matteson Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 408 W. 6th St. Bloomington, Indiana 47401

August 13, 2018

Privileged and Confidential - Not For Distribution Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. initiated a bat acoustic survey for the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm (TRIV) in Paulding County, Ohio, in 2017 and 2018. The bat acoustic surveys that were conducted exceeded recommendations of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post-Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. ODNR protocol recommends that acoustic bat surveys be conducted from March 15 – November 15 at all project meteorological (met) towers with one detector raised at five meters (m; 16 feet [ft]) and one detector raised at 45 m (148 ft).

Surveys at the TRIV were conducted at the only met tower, located in agricultural fields from May 4 – November 15, 2017, and March 14 – July 15, 2018, using AnaBat™ SD2 detectors. One detector was placed approximately one m (three ft) from the ground from May 4 to July 14, 2017, at the location of the met tower before the met tower was erected. When the met tower was constructed on July 15, 2017, three detectors were deployed in total, with microphones raised to five m (16 ft), 45 m (148 ft), and 80 m (263 ft). Acoustic monitoring was conducted with the three raised microphones from July 15 to November 15, 2017, and from March 14 to July 15, 2018, in order to complete one year of acoustic monitoring in accordance with the ODNR protocol. The detector at 80 m exceeded ODNR recommendations, and was added to better estimate levels of bat activity within the rotor-swept zone based on the size of the turbines proposed for TRIV. All bat calls recorded were classified to species or species group by comparing qualitative and quantitative call characteristics to a known call library by a qualified bat biologist.

A total of 1,918 bat passes were analyzed by acoustic bat experts from acoustic data recorded from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018. The majority (51.1%; 980 bat passes) of bat passes were classified as big brown/silver-haired bats, followed by eastern red bats (16.9%; 324 bat passes), and hoary bats (11.8%; 227 bat passes). No Myotis species bat passes were identified.

AnaBat detectors placed at the met tower from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018, recorded 1,626 bat passes during 705 detector-nights. Overall AnaBat detectors recorded a combined mean (± standard error) of 2.27 ± 0.20 bat passes per detector-night. The 5-m detector recorded an average bat pass rate of 4.24 ± 0.48 bat passes per detector-night. The 45-m detector recorded an average bats pass of 1.42 ± 0.14 bat passes per detector-night, and the 80-m detector recorded an average bats pass of 1.15 ± 0.13 bat passes per detector-night.

Bat activity at the met tower varied substantially between seasons, with lowest activity in the spring, intermediate activity in summer, and highest activity in the fall. Bat activity rates peaked in mid-August, largely driven by the presence of big brown/silver-haired bat group bat passes. Higher activity during the late summer and early fall may be due to the presence of migrating bats or to the combined presence of both post-lactating females and newly volant juveniles, and is consistent with the timing of bat activity recorded at other wind projects in Ohio and the Midwest.

WEST, Inc. i August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Western EcoSystems Technology Goniela Iskali Project Manager Ashley Matteson Bat Call Identifier, Data Analyst, Report Writer Kevin Murray Bat Call Identifier and Senior Reviewer Karl DuBridge Field Supervisor Lacey Jeroue Statistician Jeff Fruhwirth GIS Technician Katie Wynne Technical Editing Coordinator Andrea Palochak Technical Editor Kyle Proxmire Field Technician

REPORT REFERENCE

Iskali, G. and A. Matteson. 2018. Bat Acoustic Survey for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm, Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Prepared for EDP Renewables North America, LLC., Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington Indiana. July 26, 2018.17 pp.

WEST, Inc. ii August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i INTRODUCTION ...... 1 STUDY AREA ...... 1 Overview of Bat Diversity ...... 3 METHODS ...... 3 Bat Acoustic Surveys ...... 3 Call Analysis ...... 4 Statistical Analysis ...... 5 RESULTS ...... 5 Bat Acoustic Surveys from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018 ...... 5 Elevational Variation ...... 5 Seasonal Variation ...... 7 Species Composition ...... 9 Bat Acoustic Surveys from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018 ...... 12 CONCLUSIONS ...... 14 REFERENCES ...... 15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Land cover within 1.0 kilometer (0.6 mile) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm’s proposed turbines...... 1 Table 2. Bat species with potential to occur within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (Brack et al. 2010) categorized by echolocation call frequency...... 3 Table 3. Results of acoustic bat surveys conducted at the meteorological tower within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Passes are separated by call frequency: high frequency (HF) and low frequency (LF)...... 6 Table 4. The number of bat passes per detector-night recorded at meteorological tower in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during each season from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018, separated by call frequency: high frequency (HF), low frequency (LF), and all bats (AB)...... 7 Table 5. Periods of peak activity for high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm for the study period July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018...... 8 Table 6. Summary of qualitative call identifications* for each acoustic monitoring detector at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018...... 11

WEST, Inc. iii August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Table 7. Summary of qualitative call identifications* for each acoustic monitoring detector at the metrological tower at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018...... 13 Table 8. Bat activity (number of bat passes per detector night) comparison between Timber Road II, III and IV Wind Farms from 2011 – 2018...... 14

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Land cover in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm and location of the meteorological tower and proposed turbines (US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015)...... 2 Figure 2. Number of high-frequency (HF) and low-frequency (LF) bat passes per detector- night recorded at AnaBat detectors in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. The bootstrapped standard errors are represented by the black error bars on the “All Bats” columns...... 6 Figure 3. Seasonal bat activity by high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. The bootstrapped standard errors are represented on the “All Bats” columns...... 8 Figure 4. Weekly patterns of bat activity by high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm for the study period July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Vertical dashed line indicates end of fall 2017 and beginning of spring 2018 monitoring...... 9 Figure 5. Number of bat passes per detector-night for each species or species group recorded at AnaBat detectors at the metrological tower in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018...... 10 Figure 6. Number of bat passes per detector-night for each species or species group recorded at AnaBat detectors in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018...... 12

WEST, Inc. iv August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

INTRODUCTION

EDP Renewables North America, LLC (EDPR) is proposing development of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (TRIV or Project), in Paulding County, Ohio. EDPR contracted Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to complete a study of bat activity that exceeded the recommendations of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources’ (ODNR) Wind and Wildlife On- Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post-Construction Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio (ODNR 2009). WEST conducted acoustic monitoring surveys to estimate levels of bat activity throughout the TRIV between May 4, 2017, and July 15, 2018. The first objective of this report was to summarize use and species composition and explore spatial and temporal variation for the data recorded from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018 when all raised microphones were deployed. The reason for this primary objective was to summarize a full year of data when microphones were raised at the met tower, as per the ODNR protocol (ODNR 2009). The second objective of this report was to summarize all of the data and species composition recorded for the entire duration of monitoring at TRIV from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018. The reason for this second objective was to provide a comprehensive look at all the data collected during bat acoustic surveys at the TRIV.

STUDY AREA

The Project area is approximately 30,868.9 acres (12,492.2 hectares). Cultivated crops and developed areas are the two most dominant land cover types, totaling 97.2% of the overall TRIV according to the National Land Cover Database (NLCD; US Geological Survey [USGS] NLCD 2011, Homer et al. 2015). Developed areas are generally confined to roads, residences, and farms scattered throughout the Project area. The remaining Project area is composed of deciduous forest, herbaceous lands, open water, hay/pasture, and wetlands that each account for less than 1.0% of the total land cover (Table 1, Figure 1).

Table 1. Land cover within 1.0 kilometer (0.6 mile) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm’s proposed turbines. Land Cover Type Acres % Composition Cultivated Crops 28,235.4 91.5 Developed, Open Space 1,368.8 4.4 Developed, Low Intensity 328.7 1.1 Woody Wetlands 288.2 0.9 Deciduous Forest 271.7 0.9 Herbaceous 208.7 0.7 Open Water 46.7 0.2 Hay/Pasture 38.3 0.1 Developed, Medium Intensity 33.0 0.1 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 31.5 0.1 Developed, High Intensity 18.0 0.1 Total* 30,868.9 100 Data from US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015. Sums may not equal totals shown due to rounding.

WEST, Inc. 1 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Figure 1. Land cover in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm and location of the meteorological tower and proposed turbines (US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015).

WEST, Inc. 2 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Overview of Bat Diversity

The Project occurs within the range of 10 species of bats. Two of these bats are federal- and state-listed endangered or threatened species. The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) is a federal- and state-listed endangered species and the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) is a federal- and state-listed threatened species. Presence/absence mist-net surveys conducted during the summer of 2017 did not capture any Indiana or northern long-eared bats, and therefore presence of these bats during the summer is considered unlikely (Iskali and Bishop- Boros 2017). The remaining bats, with the exception of the Seminole bat (Lasiurus seminolus) are listed as Ohio Species of Concern or Species of Interest (ODNR 2017).

Table 2. Bat species with potential to occur within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (Brack et al. 2010) categorized by echolocation call frequency. Common Name Scientific Name High-Frequency (> 30 kHz) eastern red bat1, 2 Lasiurus borealis little brown bat1 Myotis lucifugus northern long-eared bat1, 3 Myotis septentrionalis Indiana bat1, 4 Myotis sodalis evening bat1 Nycticeius humeralis tri-colored bat1 Perimyotis subflavus Seminole bat1 Lasiurus seminolus Low-Frequency (< 30 kHz) big brown bat1 Eptesicus fuscus hoary bat1, 2 Lasiurus cinereus silver-haired bat1, 2 Lasionycteris noctivagans 1 species known to have been killed at wind energy facilities (species reported as fatalities by Kunz et al. 2007b, Hale and Karsten 2010, Good et al. 2011); 2 long-distance migrant 3 federal- and state listed threatened species (USFWS 2015); and 4 federal- and state listed endangered species (USFWS 1967, 2007).

METHODS

Bat Acoustic Surveys

Three AnaBat™ SD2 ultrasonic bat detectors (Titley Scientific™, Columbia, Missouri) were used during the study at the Project’s only meteorological (met) tower. The ground detector was placed approximately one meter (m; three feet [ft]) from the ground from May 4 to July 14, 2017, before the met tower was constructed. Once the met tower was available on July 15, 2017, three detectors were used in total, with microphones raised at five m (16 ft; ground detector), 45 m (148 ft; raised detector), and 80 m (263 ft; raised detector). The three raised detectors monitored data from July 15 to November 15, 2017 and from March 14 to July 15, 2018. The detector at 80 m exceeded ODNR protocol and was used to better estimate levels of bat activity within the rotor-swept zone based on the size of the turbines proposed to be used at the TRIV. Species activity levels and composition can vary with altitude (Baerwald and Barclay 2009, Collins and Jones 2009, Müeller et al. 2013). Therefore, it can be useful to monitor activity at

WEST, Inc. 3 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey different heights (Kunz et al. 2007a). Ground-based microphones likely detect a more complete sample of the bat species present within the Project area, whereas raised microphones may give a more accurate assessment of risk to bat species flying at rotor swept heights (Kunz et al. 2007a, Müeller et al. 2013; but see Amorim et al. 2012). The met tower was located in cropland, which is representative of the proposed turbine locations.

Each AnaBat unit was placed inside a plastic weather-tight container that had a hole cut in the side through which the microphone extended. Each microphone was encased in a 45-degree angle poly-vinyl chloride (PVC) tube, and holes were drilled in the PVC tube to allow water to drain. Microphones, encased in weatherproofing, were elevated at fixed heights on the met tower.

AnaBat units were calibrated and sensitivity levels were set to six (Larson and Hayes 2000) to standardize acoustic sampling effort across the Project, a level that balanced the goal of recording bat calls against the need to reduce interference from other sources of ultrasonic noise (Brooks and Ford 2005). Detectors were programmed to turn on approximately 30 minutes (min) before sunset and turn off approximately 30 min after sunrise each night. Detectors were checked weekly to ensure that they were functioning properly, and to change batteries and data cards.

Call Analysis

AnaBat detectors used a broadband high-frequency (HF) microphone to detect the echolocation calls of bats. Incoming echolocation calls were digitally processed and stored on a high-capacity compact flash card. The resulting files were viewed in appropriate software (e.g., AnaLook©) as digital sonograms that showed changes in echolocation call frequency over time. Frequency versus time displays were used to separate bat calls from other types of ultrasonic noise (e.g., wind, insects) and to determine the call frequency category and (when possible) the species of bat that generated the calls.

Bat passes were sorted into two groups based on their minimum frequency for each survey location. The HF bats, such as eastern red bats (Lasiurus borealis), evening bats (Nycticeius humeralis), and Myotis species, have minimum call frequencies greater than 30 kilohertz (kHz). The low-frequency (LF) bats, such as big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus), silver-haired bats (Lasionycteris noctivagans), and hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus), typically emit echolocation calls with minimum frequencies below 30 kHz. The HF and LF species that may occur in the study area are listed in Table 2.

Bat calls were classified to species or species group by comparing qualitative and quantitative call characteristics to a known call library (O’Farrell et al. 1999, Murray et al. 2001, Yates and Muzika 2006). Call characteristics such as minimum frequency, slope, and structure were used to identify calls. Bat calls were assigned to individual species or one of four bat species groups: 1) big brown bat/silver-haired bat, 2) eastern red bat/evening bat, 3) eastern red bat/tri-colored bat (Perimyotis subflavus), or 4) Myotis species. Calls that could not be assigned to one of these species groups were classified as unknown.

WEST, Inc. 4 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Statistical Analysis

The number of bat passes per detector-night was used as an index of bat activity in the Project area. A bat pass was defined as a sequence of at least two echolocation calls (pulses) produced by an individual bat with no pause between calls of more than one second (Fenton 1980). A detector-night was defined as one detector operating for one entire night. The terms bat pass and bat call are used interchangeably. Bat passes per detector-night was calculated for all bats, and for HF and LF bats. Bat pass rates represent indices of bat activity and do not represent numbers of individuals. The number of bat passes was determined by an experienced bat biologist using AnaLook.

Periods of high bat activity were defined as the 7-day period with the highest average bat activity. If multiple 7-day periods equaled the peak sustained bat activity rate, all dates in these 7-day periods were reported. This and all multi-detector averages in this report were calculated as an unweighted average of total activity at each detector. To highlight seasonal activity patterns, the analysis was divided into three survey periods: spring (March 14 – May 15), summer (May 16 – July 15), and fall (July 16 – November 15).

Two analyses were conducted on the data. The first analysis was done to summarize the data recorded from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018 when the met tower was up and the microphones were raised at the 5-m, 45-m, and 80-m microphone height. This data incorporated all of the data that was collected to meet ODNR recommendations for acoustic monitoring. The second analysis was done to summarize all of the species recorded for the entire duration of monitoring at TRIV and incorporated all data recorded from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018, from before and after the met tower was erected and the microphones were raised. This second analysis provided a comprehensive look of the species recorded during all acoustic bat monitoring surveys at the TRIV.

RESULTS

Bat Acoustic Surveys from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018

A total of 1,626 total bat passes were recorded during 705 detector-nights from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018, with three AnaBat detectors with microphones placed at 5-m, 45-m, and 80-m heights. AnaBat units operated for 95.1% of the sampling period. The primary cause of lost data was battery and detector failure.

Elevational Variation The 5-m microphone recorded 1,027 bat passes (63.2% of all bat passes) on 242 detector- nights for a mean (± standard error) of 4.24 ± 0.45 bat passes per detector-night. The 45-m microphone recorded 343 bat passes (21.1% of all bat passes) on 241 detector nights for a mean of 1.42 ± 0.14 bat passes per detector-night, and the 80-m microphone recorded 256 bat passes (15.7% of all bat passes) on 222 detector nights for a mean of 1.15 ± 0.13 bat passes per detector-night (Table 3).

WEST, Inc. 5 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Across all microphone heights, LF bat activity was greater than HF bat activity, with 1,331 LF bat passes recorded and 295 HF bat passes recorded. The 5-m microphone recorded 71.2% of all HF bat passes (n=210) and 61.4% of all LF bat passes (n=817). The 45-m microphone recorded 20.0% of all HF bat passes (n=59) and 21.3% of all LF bat passes (n=284). The 80-m microphone recorded 8.8% of all HF bat passes (n=26) and 17.3% of all LF bat passes (n=230; Table 3, Figure 2).

Table 3. Results of acoustic bat surveys conducted at the meteorological tower within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Passes are separated by call frequency: high frequency (HF) and low frequency (LF). # of HF Bat # of LF Bat Total Bat Detector- Bat Passes/ AnaBat Station Location Passes Passes Passes Nights Night* TR4-5m ground 210 817 1,027 242 4.24±0.48 TR4-45m raised 59 284 343 241 1.42±0.14 TR4-80m raised 26 230 256 222 1.15±0.13 Total Ground 210 817 1,027 242 4.24±0.45 Total Raised 85 514 599 463 1.29±0.12 Total 295 1,331 1,626 705 2.27±0.20 *± bootstrapped standard error.

Figure 2. Number of high-frequency (HF) and low-frequency (LF) bat passes per detector-night recorded at AnaBat detectors in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. The bootstrapped standard errors are represented by the black error bars on the “All Bats” columns.

WEST, Inc. 6 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Seasonal Variation Overall bat activity at the TRIV was highest during the fall (3.56 ± 0.36 bat passes per detector- night), followed by summer (1.77 ± 0.20 bat passes per detector-night), and lowest during the spring (0.32 ± 0.08 bat passes per detector-night). This same pattern was observed for both HF and LF bats and at each of the detectors, regardless of microphone height (Table 4, Figure 3).

Table 4. The number of bat passes per detector-night recorded at meteorological tower in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during each season from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018, separated by call frequency: high frequency (HF), low frequency (LF), and all bats (AB). Fall Spring Summer July 16 – March 14 – May 16 – Detector Call Frequency Nov 15, 2017 May 15, 2018 July 15, 2018 LF 5.18 0.32 2.80 TR4-5m HF 1.44 0.13 0.46 AB 6.62 0.45 3.26 LF 1.89 0.16 0.87 TR4-45m HF 0.46 0.02 0.07 AB 2.35 0.17 0.93 LF 1.52 0.30 1.02 TR4-80m HF 0.19 0.03 0.08 AB 1.71 0.33 1.10 LF 5.18±0.71 0.32±0.11 2.80±0.46 Ground Totals HF 1.44±0.21 0.13±0.04 0.46±0.08 AB 6.62±0.86 0.45±0.12 3.26±0.49 LF 1.70±0.20 0.23±0.07 0.94±0.15 Raised Totals HF 0.33±0.06 0.02±0.01 0.07±0.02 AB 2.03±0.21 0.25±0.08 1.02±0.16 LF 2.86±0.30 0.26±0.07 1.56±0.19 Overall HF 0.70±0.10 0.06±0.02 0.20±0.03 AB 3.56±0.36 0.32±0.08 1.77±0.20 Sums may not add up due to rounding

WEST, Inc. 7 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Figure 3. Seasonal bat activity by high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. The bootstrapped standard errors are represented on the “All Bats” columns.

Weekly acoustic activity was highest from August 14 to August 23, 2017 (Table 5). Bat acoustic activity gradually decreased after the last week of August. High-frequency bat activity gradually decreased throughout the remainder of August; by September HF bat activity averaged less than one bat pass per detector-night. LF bat activity gradually declined after mid-October, with the average number of bat passes per detector-night averaged less than one bat pass per detector-night after the week of October 22 (Figure 4).

Table 5. Periods of peak activity for high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm for the study period July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Start Date of End Date of Peak Bat Passes per Frequency Group Peak Activity Activity Detector-Night HF August 14 August 20 4.2 LF August 17 August 23 8.6 All Bats August 14 August 20 12.6

WEST, Inc. 8 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

2017 2018

Figure 4. Weekly patterns of bat activity by high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and all bats at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm for the study period July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Vertical dashed line indicates end of fall 2017 and beginning of spring 2018 monitoring.

Species Composition A total of 1,626 bat passes were recorded at TRIV from July 16, 2017, to July 15, 2018. A total of 1,467 call sequences were categorized via qualitative identification with a species or species group (when similarity between calls of species was too similar to differentiate between two species). A total of 139 LF bat passes and 20 HF bat passes were too poor of a quality to identify to species or species group. Across all microphone heights the majority (52.5%, 854 bat passes) of calls were identified as big brown/silver-haired bats. The next most commonly recorded species were eastern red bat (16.2%, 264 bat passes) and hoary bat (11.4%, 185 bat passes). Activity was generally higher on the 5-m detector with the exception of hoary and silver-haired bat activity, which was higher at the 45-m and 80-m detector compared to the 5-m detector. No bat calls were identified as Myotis species (Table 6, Figure 5).

WEST, Inc. 9 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Figure 5. Number of bat passes per detector-night for each species or species group recorded at AnaBat detectors at the metrological tower in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018.

WEST, Inc. 10 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Table 6. Summary of qualitative call identifications* for each acoustic monitoring detector at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from July 16, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Detector EPFU/LANO EPFU LABO LACI LANO LABO/NYHU LABO/PESU UNHF UNLF Total TR4-5m 618 109 183 30 4 3 6 18 56 1,027 TR4-45m 137 2 55 79 22 1 1 2 44 343 TR4-80m 99 0 26 76 16 0 0 0 39 256 Total 854 111 264 185 42 4 7 20 139 1,626 *EPFU – Eptesicus fuscus - big brown bat; LANO – Lasionycteris noctivagans - silver-haired bat; LABO – Lasiurus borealis - eastern red bat; NYHU – Nycticeius humeralis - evening bat; LACI – Lasiurus cinereus -hoary bat; PESU – Perimyotis subflavus - tri-colored bat; UNHF – unknown high-frequency species; UNLF – unknown low-frequency species

WEST, Inc. 11 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Bat Acoustic Surveys from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018

A total of 1,918 bat passes were recorded at TRIV from May 4, 2017, to July 15, 2018. A total of 1,721 call sequences were categorized via qualitative identification with a species or species group (when similarity between calls of species was too similar to differentiate between two species). A total of 176 LF bat passes and 22 HF bat passes were too poor of a quality to identify to species or species group. Across all microphone heights the majority (56.9%; 980 bat passes) of calls were identified as big brown/silver-haired bats. The next most commonly recorded species was eastern red bat (18.8%, 324 bat passes). Hoary bat activity was similar across all microphone heights (five m, n=68; 45 m, n=82; 80 m, n=77). Additionally, silver-haired bat activity was similar across all microphone heights (5 m, n=20; 45 m, n=22; 80 m, n=16). Big brown bat activity did not follow the same trend as other LF species activity. Big brown bat calls were recorded much more commonly at the ground-based microphone (n=116) than raised microphones (45 m, n=2; 80 m, n=0). Eastern red bats were recorded more commonly at the ground-based microphone (n=242) than raised microphones (45 m, n=55; 80 m, n=27). Evening bat calls were not commonly recorded at any microphone height, and were only recorded at the ground-based microphone (n=2). No bat calls were identified as Myotis species (Figure 6, Table 7).

Figure 6. Number of bat passes per detector-night for each species or species group recorded at AnaBat detectors in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018.

WEST, Inc. 12 July 26, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Table 7. Summary of qualitative call identifications* for each acoustic monitoring detector at the metrological tower at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from May 4, 2017 – July 15, 2018. Detector EPFU/LANO EPFU LABO LACI LANO LABO/NYHU LABO/PESU NYHU UNHF UNLF Total TR4-5m 744 116 242 68 20 4 6 2 19 93 1,314 TR4-45m 137 2 55 82 22 1 1 0 2 44 346 TR4-80m 99 0 27 77 16 0 0 0 0 39 258 Total 980 118 324 227 58 5 7 2 21 176 1,918 *EPFU – Eptesicus fuscus - big brown bat; LANO – Lasionycteris noctivagans - silver-haired bat; LABO – Lasiurus borealis - eastern red bat; NYHU – Nycticeius humeralis - evening bat; LACI – Lasiurus cinereus -hoary bat; PESU – Perimyotis subflavus - tri-colored bat; UNHF – unknown high-frequency species, UNLF – unknown low-frequency species

WEST, Inc. 13 July 26, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

CONCLUSIONS

No known federally and/or state endangered or threatened species calls, or any Myotis species calls were recorded or identified during the study. The majority of calls recorded were from the silver-haired/big brown bat group, followed by eastern red bats. The peak of bat activity was recorded in August, and was mainly attributed to the relatively high number of bat passes identified as silver-haired/big brown bat group. The 5-m detector recorded significantly more calls during all seasons. Overall, the study at the TRVI presents bat species composition and seasonal patterns that are similar to other Midwestern wind energy facilities in similar landscapes.

Acoustic surveys at the Timber Road II Wind Farm (TRII) were conducted at the only met tower within the TRII in the fall of 2011 (August 1 to November 15), 2014 (March 31 to November 17), and 2015 (April 1 – July 31), and at the only met tower within the Timber Road III Wind Farm (TRIII) from March 15 – November 16, 2017. Surveys at both TRII and TRIII were conducted at two detectors with microphones raised at five m (ground) and 45 m (raised), as per ODNR protocol. Bat activity rates at the TRIV were lower or similar to TRII and TRIII (Table 8). Species composition collected at the TRII and TRIII were also similar to TRIV, with the majority of the bat passes classified as LF species and usually belonging to the big brown/silver-haired bat group. However, the composition of bats from acoustic data at the TRII and TRIII differs from the majority of bats found as fatalities at these projects: eastern red, followed by silver-haired, and hoary bat carcasses. In addition, no Indiana or northern long-eared bats calls have been identified from acoustic data, but two Indiana bat fatalities have been found at the TRII (Ritzert et al. 2012; Good et al. 2015, 2016; Iskali and Riser-Espinoza 2018). Standard acoustic surveys are of limited use in predicting risks to bats. Post-construction monitoring data from nearby facilities may provide a better predictor of risk. Therefore, the best predictor of risk to bats at the TRIV may not be acoustic data, but post-construction monitoring from adjacent facilities like TR II and TRIII.

Table 8. Bat activity (number of bat passes per detector night) comparison between Timber Road II, III and IV Wind Farms from 2011 – 2018. Project Season 5-m Detector 45-m Detector Timber Road II Fall 2011 17.40 7.24 Timber Road II Spring-Fall 2014 5.73 6.57 Timber Road II Spring-Summer 2015 3.55 3.50 Timber Road III Spring-Fall 2017 6.50 2.31 Timber Road IV Fall 2017-Summer 2018 4.24 1.42

WEST, Inc. 14 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

REFERENCES

Amorim, F., H. Rebelo, and L. Rodrigues. 2012. Factors Influencing Bat Activity and Mortality at a Wind Farm in the Mediterranean Region. Acta Chiropterologica 14(2): 439-457. AnaLook. 2004. Bat call analysis program. © 2004, C. Corben. Baerwald, E. F. and R. M. R. Barclay. 2009. Geographic Variation in Activity and Fatality of Migratory Bats at Wind Energy Facilities. Journal of Mammalogy 90(6): 1341-1349. Brack, V. W., Jr., D. W. Sparks, J. O. Whitaker, Jr., B. L. Walters, and A. Boyer. 2010. Bats of Ohio. Indiana State University Center for North American Bat Research and Conservation, Terre Haute, Indiana. Brooks, R. T. and W. M. Ford. 2005. Bat Activity in a Forest Landscape of Central Massachusetts. Northeastern Naturalist 12(4): 447-462. Collins, J. and G. Jones. 2009. Differences in Bat Activity in Relation to Bat Detector Height: Implications for Bat Surveys at Proposed Wind Farms. Acta Chiropterologica 11: 343:350. ESRI. 2017. World Imagery and Aerial Photos. ArcGIS Resource Center. ESRI, producers of ArcGIS software. Redlands, California. Information online: http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/ viewer.html?useExisting=1 Fenton, M. B. 1980. Adaptiveness and Ecology of Echolocation in Terrestrial (Aerial) Systems. Pp. 427- 446. In: R. G. Busnel and J. F. Fish, eds. Animal Sonar Systems. Plenum Press, New York. Good, R. E., W. P. Erickson, A. Merrill, S. Simon, K. Murray, K. Bay, and C. Fritchman. 2011. Bat Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Energy Facility, Benton County, Indiana: April 13 – October 15, 2010. Prepared for Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 28, 2011. Good. R. E., G. Iskali, D. Riser-Espinoza, and K. Adachi. 2015. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Timber Road II Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: April 1 – November 15, 2014. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, TX. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Bloomington, Indiana. Good, R.E., G. Iskali, D. Riser-Espinoza, and R. Schmitt. 2016. 2015 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Timber Road II Wind Farm, Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: April 1 – November 15, 2015. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. Hale, A. M. and K. B. Karsten. 2010. Estimating Bird and Bat Mortality at a Wind Energy Facility in North- Central Texas. Presented at the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC) Research Meeting VIII, October 19-21, 2010, Lakewood, Colorado. Available online: http://nationalwind.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/research_meetings/Research_Meeting_VIII _Hale.pdf Homer, C. G., J. A. Dewitz, L. Yang, S. Jin, P. Danielson, G. Xian, J. Coulston, N. D. Herold, J. D. Wickham, and K. Megown. 2015. Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States-Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 81(5): 345-354. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php

WEST, Inc. 15 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

Iskali, G. and L. Bishop-Boros. 2017. Bat Mist-Net Surveys, Timber Road IV Wind Farm. Final Report: July 17 – 19, 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. G. Iskali, and D. Riser-Espinoza. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Timber Road III Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: April 1 – November 15, 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables North America, LLC., Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) Bloomington, Indiana. February 1, 2018. Kunz, T. H., E. B. Arnett, B. M. Cooper, W. P. Erickson, R. P. Larkin, T. Mabee, M. L. Morrison, M. D. Strickland, and J. M. Szewczak. 2007a. Assessing Impacts of Wind-Energy Development on Nocturnally Active Birds and Bats: A Guidance Document. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(8): 2449-2486. Kunz, T. H., E. B. Arnett, W. P. Erickson, A. R. Hoar, G. D. Johnson, R. P. Larkin, M. D. Strickland, R. W. Thresher, and M. D. Tuttle. 2007. Ecological Impacts of Wind Energy Development on Bats: Questions, Research Needs, and Hypotheses. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5(6): 315-324. Available online: https://www.bu.edu/cecb/files/2009/12/kunzbats-wind07.pdf Larson, D. J. and J. P. Hayes. 2000. Variability in Sensitivity of Anabat II Detectors and a Method of Calibration. Acta Chiropterologica 2(2): 209-213. Müeller, J., R. Brandl, J. Buchner, H. Pretzsch, S. Seifert, C. Strätz, M. Veith, and B. Fenton. 2013. From Ground to above Canopy - Bat Activity in Mature Forests Is Driven by Vegetation Density and Height. Forest Ecology and Management 306: 179-184. Murray, K. L., E. R. Britzke, and L. W. Robbins. 2001. Variation in Search-Phase Calls of Bats. Journal of Mammalogy 82: 728-737. North American Datum (NAD). 1983. NAD83 Geodetic Datum. O’Farrell, M. J., B. W. Miller, and W. L. Gannon. 1999. Qualitative Identification of Free-Flying Bats Using the Anabat Detector. Journal of Mammalogy 80: 11-23. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009. On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post- Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. ODNR Division of Wildlife. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2017. Ohio’s Listed Species: Wildlife That Are Considered to Be Endangered, Threatened, Species of Concern, Special Interest, Extirpated, or Extinct in Ohio. Publication 5356 (R0917). ODNR Division of Wildlife, Columbus, Ohio. Updated September 2017. 10 pp. Available online: http://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/portals/wildlife/pdfs/ publications/information/pub356.pdf Ritzert, M., R. E. Good, and M. Sonnenberg. 2012. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Timber Road II Wind Energy Facility, Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: August 1 – November 15, 2012. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1967. The Endangered Species List - 1967. 32 Federal Register (FR) 48: 4001. March 11, 1967. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) Draft Recovery Plan: First Revision. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 3. USFWS. Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 260 pp. Available online: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/070416.pdf

WEST, Inc. 16 August 13, 2018 Timber Road IV Wind Farm Bat Acoustic Survey

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status for the Northern Long-Eared Bat with 4(d) Rule; Final Rule and Interim Rule. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50 CFR Part 17. 80 Federal Register (FR) 63: 17974-18033. April 2, 2015. US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD). 2011. National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011). Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC), National Land Cover Database (NLCD). USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php; Legend: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_leg.php Yates, M. and R. M. Muzika. 2006. Effect of Forest Structure and Fragmentation on Site Occupancy of Bat Species in Missouri Ozark Forests. Journal of Wildlife Management 70: 1238-1248.

WEST, Inc. 17 August 13, 2018 Avian Use Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio

Final Report November 2017 – October 2018

Prepared for: EDP Renewables, LLC Attn: Erin O’Shea 808 Travis Street, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by: Goniela Iskali and Ray Tupling Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 408 West 6th Street Bloomington, Indiana 47401

April 8, 2019

Privileged and Confidential - Not For Distribution Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EDP Renewables, LLC (EDPR) is currently developing phase IV of the Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF). EDPR asked Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. to conduct avian use surveys for a second year to assess current use of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (TRWF IV) by eagles and federally and state-listed bird species. Surveys were consistent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines and USFWS Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance along with the 2016 Revised Eagle Rule. Sixty-minute avian use surveys were conducted at 16 fixed-points in the TRWF IV from November 6, 2017, through October 23, 2018, on a monthly basis, for 192 hours of surveys.

WEST recorded 16 bald eagle observations and one unidentified eagle species during surveys or incidentally. Most eagle observations were recorded during the fall and observations were somewhat concentrated near Flatrock Creek, which bisects the TRWF IV. No confirmed golden eagles or federally listed species were observed during the surveys.

One state-endangered species (northern harrier) and two state species of special concern (sharp-shinned hawk and bobolinks) were observed during the surveys. The potential for collision with turbines for these species is expected to be relatively low due to the comparatively low incidence of observations during surveys and the low numbers of fatalities of these species reported from public data across the Midwest (three bobolinks and five sharp-shinned hawks; no northern harrier fatalities have been reported in the Midwest to date). Breeding bobolinks may be at risk of displacement if the final turbine locations fall within breeding habitat, which includes mainly prairies and grasslands. All bobolinks observed were found within agricultural cropland and the amount of breeding habitat within the TRWF IV is low. In addition, the turbine footprint for the TRWF IV will be even smaller.

WEST, Inc. i April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Goniela Iskali Project Manager Ray Tupling Statistician Rhett Good Senior Reviewer Meredith Rodriguez Report Compiler Carmen Boyd Project Tracking and Data Manager Kristen Klaphake GIS Technician Katie Wynne Technical Editing Coordinator Carissa Goodman Technical Editor Karl DuBridge Field Supervisor Emily Bradway Field Technician Kyle Proxmire Field Technician

REPORT REFERENCE

Iskali, G. and R. Tupling. 2019. Avian Use Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm, Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: November 2017 – October 2018. Prepared for EDP Renewables, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. April 8, 2019.

WEST, Inc. ii April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i INTRODUCTION ...... 1 STUDY AREA ...... 1 METHODS ...... 3 Avian Use Surveys ...... 3 Survey Plots ...... 3 Survey Methods ...... 3 Incidental Observations ...... 4 Statistical Analysis ...... 4 Data Compilation and Storage ...... 4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ...... 4 Statistics for Avian Use Surveys ...... 4 RESULTS ...... 5 Eagles ...... 5 Other Sensitive Species Recorded ...... 9 Mean Use, Seasonal Variation and Spatial Use ...... 9 Flight Height and Behavior ...... 12 DISCUSSION...... 12 Bald eagles ...... 12 Sensitive Species ...... 13 Northern Harrier ...... 13 Bobolink ...... 14 Sharp-Shinned Hawk ...... 15 REFERENCES ...... 16

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Land cover types within 0.6 mi (1.0 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm turbines and excluding 0.5 mi (0.8 km) buffer from Flatrock Creek...... 1 Table 2a. Summary of bald eagle activity by month at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 5 Table 2b. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 m by survey location at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 6

WEST, Inc. iii April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Table 2c. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 m by survey location at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 7 Table 3. Mean use (number of birds/800-meter plot/60-minute survey), percent of use, and frequency of occurrence (%) by season for eagles and sensitive species during the avian use surveys conducted in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 10 Table 4. Mean use (number of birds/60-minute survey) by point for eagles and sensitive species observed during avian use surveys conducted in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 10 Table 5. Flight height characteristics by species during avian use surveys at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 12 Table 6. Substantiated bald eagle take from wind energy facilities from 2013 – 2018 reported by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (2018) and Pagel et al. (2013)...... 12

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Land cover and avian use survey points within the minimum convex polygon (MCP) at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio (US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015)...... 2 Figure 2. Location of active eagle nest and flight paths observed during avian use surveys conducted within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 8 Figure 3. Flight paths of sensitive species recorded during avian use surveys conducted within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018...... 11

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Summary of individual and group observations in all seasons by species and bird type for 60-minute avian use surveys conducted at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Appendix B. Summary of Publicly Available Studies at Modern North American Wind Energy Facilities that Report Fatality and Species Data for Birds

WEST, Inc. iv April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

INTRODUCTION

EDP Renewables, LLC (EDPR) is currently developing phase IV of Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF). EDPR asked Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to conduct avian use surveys for a second year to assess current use of Timber Road IV Wind Farm (TRWF IV) by eagles and sensitive species, defined as federally and state-listed species, including Ohio’s species of concern and special interest (Ohio Department of Natural Resources [ODNR] 2018). WEST performed surveys consistent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance (ECPG; USFWS 2013), the 2016 Revised Eagle Rule (USFWS 2016), and the Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines (WEG; USFWS 2012).

STUDY AREA

The TRWF IV is located in Paulding County near the town of Payne, Ohio. The area surrounding the proposed turbines of TRWF IV is dominated by cultivated crops (93.9%; Table 1). Corn (Zea mays), soybean (Glycine max), and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) are the most common crop types present and usually are rotated within the fields on a year-by-year basis. Developed areas (e.g., farmsteads), grasslands, and forests compose the next most common habitats, but compose a relatively small portion of the TRWF IV (4.7% developed, 0.4% herbaceous, 0.3% deciduous forest). Open water, woody wetlands, and shrub/scrub habitats are also present in the TRWF IV, but compose less than 0.1% of the total land cover, individually (US Geological Survey [USGS] National Land Cover Database [NLCD] 2011, Homer et al. 2015; Table 1; Figure 1). Flatrock Creek intersects the TRWF IV and the Maumee River is located to the north of the TRWF IV proposed turbines, which provide potential nesting and foraging habitat for eagles. The TRWF IV proposed turbines were sited at least 0.5 mile (mi; 0.8 kilometer [km]) from Flatrock Creek and the nearest proposed turbine is 2.4 mi (3.9 km) from the Maumee River to reduce impacts to eagles and other wildlife.

Table 1. Land cover types within 0.6 mi (1.0 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm turbines and excluding 0.5 mi (0.8 km) buffer from Flatrock Creek. Land Cover Type Acres % Composition Cultivated Crops 25,963.2 93.9 Developed, Open Space 1,158.9 4.2 Developed, Low Intensity 230.0 0.8 Herbaceous 125.0 0.5 Deciduous Forest 105.9 0.4 Developed, Medium Intensity 27.9 0.1 Developed, High Intensity 19.4 0.1 Open Water 16.2 0.1 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 1.1 <0.1 Total 27,647.4 100 Data from USGS NLCD 2011, Homer et al. 2015.

WEST, Inc. 1 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

WEST, Inc. 2 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

METHODS

Avian Use Surveys

To estimate the seasonal and spatial use of the study area by eagles and sensitive species, fixed-point count avian use surveys (using circular plots) were conducted in the TRWF IV. The methods used were similar to those described by Reynolds et al. (1980) and were consistent with methods and survey effort recommended in the WEG, the ECPG, and the 2016 Eagle Rule Revision. The study plan, which included locations of survey points and survey methods, was presented to the USFWS during a meeting on December 19, 2017 and feedback from the USFWS was incorporated into the survey methods (pers. comm with Chris Mensing).

Survey Plots Sixteen survey points were established at the TRWF IV, resulting in coverage of approximately 30% of the minimum convex polygon (MCP) area inclusive of the hazardous area around all turbines (Figure 1). Points within the MCP area were chosen randomly. A grid with one-mile by one-mile cells was laid over TRWF IV footprint, and grid cells were selected randomly for placement of points using a spatially balanced sampling method, Balance Acceptance Sampling (Brown et al. 2015). One avian use point was placed within each of the selected grid cells along a public road. Points were separated by at least 1,600 meter (m; 5,249 feet [ft]) to avoid overlap of the 800-m (2,625-ft) plots.

Survey Methods Surveys were conducted for 60-minute (min) on a monthly basis from November 6, 2017 to October 23, 2018. At each fixed point, eagles and sensitive species were recorded within an 800-m radius circular plot. A pre-established schedule was developed to ensure that each point was surveyed the same number of times, to spread survey times throughout daylight hours, and to minimize travel time between plots.

For each avian survey, the following information was recorded: date, start and end time, point number and weather information (e.g., temperature, wind speed and direction, cloud cover, and precipitation). For each bird or flock of birds observed, the observer recorded the following: species or best possible identification, number of individuals, sex and age class, initial and nearest distance from observer, height above ground, behavior, and habitat). Behavior was categorized as soaring flight, flapping-gliding, hunting, kiting-hovering, stooping/diving at prey, stooping or diving in an antagonistic context with other bird species, perching, being mobbed, undulating/territorial flight, nesting, auditory, and other (noted in comments). Observers recorded approximate flight height and distance from plot center at first observation to the nearest 5-m (16-ft) interval. The 10-min interval of the survey during which the observation first occurred was also recorded. Locations and flight paths of eagles and sensitive species recorded during surveys were drawn on field maps and recorded by unique observation number. Additional comments were recorded on the data sheets as necessary. For all eagle observations, risk minutes or additional behavior was recorded during each 1-min interval the

WEST, Inc. 3 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys bird was within view during the 60-min surveys, in accordance with the ECPG and the 2016 Eagle Rule Revision.

Incidental Observations Sensitive species and eagles that were observed in-transit or outside of survey times were recorded as incidental observations. Data recorded for incidental observations was similar to those recorded during scheduled surveys, and included observation number, location, date, time, species, number of individuals, distance from observer in meters, sex/age class, and habitat.

Statistical Analysis

Data Compilation and Storage A Microsoft® SQL database was developed to store and organize survey data. Data were keyed into the database from paper datasheets using a pre-defined protocol to facilitate subsequent QA/QC and data analysis. All data sheets and database files were retained for reference.

Quality Assurance and Quality Control WEST implemented quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures at all stages of the surveys, including in the field, during data entry and analysis, and report writing. Observers inspected data forms for completeness, accuracy, and legibility following each field survey. Data managers worked to identify potentially erroneous using a series of database queries. Irregular codes or data suspected as questionable were discussed with the observer and/or project manager, as appropriate. Errors, omissions, or problems identified in later stages of analysis were traced back to the raw data forms, and appropriate changes in all steps were made.

Statistics for Avian Use Surveys For analysis purposes, a visit was defined as the required length of time (days) to survey all of the plots once within the TRWF IV, which equated to approximately one month.

Mean Use, Seasonal Variations, and Frequency of Occurrence Large birds detected within 800 m (2,625 ft) of survey points were used to calculate mean use and frequency of occurrence. Seasonal 60-minute mean use was calculated by first averaging the total number of birds observed within each survey plot during a visit, then averaging across survey plots within each visit, followed by averaging across visits within the season. Seasons were defined as spring (March – June 5), summer (June 6 – August), fall (September – November) and winter (December – February). Overall mean use was calculated as a weighted average of seasonal values by the number of days in each season. Frequency of occurrence provides a relative measure of species exposure in the TRWF IV and was calculated as the percent of surveys in which a particular bird type or species was observed.

Bird Flight Height and Behavior The flight height recorded during the initial observation was used to calculate the percentage of birds flying within the rotor swept heights (RSH; estimated to be between 25–200 m [82–656 ft]

WEST, Inc. 4 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys above ground level) and mean flight height during the fixed-point count large bird use surveys. The percentage of birds flying within the RSH at any time was calculated using the lowest and highest flight heights recorded. Auditory only observations were excluded from flight height calculations.

Spatial Use and Mapping Spatial use in TRWF IV was evaluated by comparing mean use by point location and qualitative review of flight paths. Flight paths of all eagle and sensitive species were digitized and mapped in order to examine spatial patterns of use within TRWF IV.

RESULTS

A total of 192 60-min avian use surveys were conducted at the TRWF IV across 12 visits. Sixty- eight bird observations in 58 separate groups belonging to four species were recorded during surveys and within 800 m (2,625 ft) (Appendix A). In addition, one northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), two bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and one unknown eagle species observations were recorded incidentally.

Eagles

Fourteen bald eagle observations were recorded during the surveys, regardless of distance from the observer, and two bald eagles and one unidentified eagle were recorded incidentally at TRWF IV (Table 2a). The unidentified eagle observation was likely a bald eagle, but could not be verified due to the distance of the eagle from the observer. Eagle flight paths did not exhibit a strong spatial pattern, but were more prevalent nearest to and south of Flatrock Creek (Figure 2). Six bald eagles were observed within the 800-m (2,625 ft) survey buffer and three of these eagles were recorded flying within 800 m (2,625 ft) of the fixed points and below 200 m (656 ft), for five recorded eagle risk minutes (Table 2b and 2c), as defined within the ECPG (USFWS 2013). All eagle risk minutes were recorded in November 2017 (Table 2b).

Table 2a. Summary of bald eagle activity by month at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Number of Recorded During Observed during Eagles Surveys or Surveys and within Season Observed Incidentally Activity* 800 m Habitat* Fall 1 Surveys Soaring No** Cropland Fall 1 Surveys Flapping Yes Riparian Fall 1 Surveys Soaring No** Cropland Fall 1 Surveys Soaring Yes Cropland Fall 1 Surveys Soaring No** Cropland Fall 1 Surveys Flapping Yes Cropland Winter 1 Surveys Flapping No** Riparian Spring 1 Surveys Soaring No** Forest Spring 1 Surveys Perched No** Forest Summer 1 Surveys Soaring No** Forest Summer 1 Surveys Soaring No** Forest Summer 1 Surveys Soaring Yes Forest Summer 1 Surveys Flapping Yes Cropland

WEST, Inc. 5 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Table 2a. Summary of bald eagle activity by month at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Number of Recorded During Observed during Eagles Surveys or Surveys and within Season Observed Incidentally Activity* 800 m Habitat* Fall 1 Surveys Soaring Yes Cropland Fall 1 Incidentally Flapping No** Riparian Fall 1 Incidentally Flapping No** Riparian Fall 1 Incidentally Flapping No** Riparian Total 17 *Results based on first observed activity or habitat. **Observation not included in the analysis.

Table 2b. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 m by survey location at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Number of Eagle Eagles Observations Eagle Risk Survey Observed within 800 m Eagle Risk Minutes /Survey Month/Year Hours within 800 m /Survey Hour Minutes Hour November 2017 16 3 0.19 5 0.31 December 2017 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 January 2018 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 February 2018 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 March 2018 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 April 2018 8 0 0.00 0 0.00 May 2018 23 0 0.00 0 0.00 June 2018 17 0 0.00 0 0.00 July 2018 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 August 2018 16 2 0.13 0 0.00 September 2018 16 0 0.00 0 0.00 October 2018 16 1 0.06 0 0.00 Total 192 6 0.03 5 0.03

WEST, Inc. 6 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Table 2c. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 m by survey location at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Number of Eagles Eagle Observations Survey Survey Observed within within 800 m Eagle Risk Eagle Risk Minutes Location Hours 800 m* /Survey Hour Minutes /Survey Hour 1 12 0 0.00 0 0 2 12 0 0.00 0 0 3 12 0 0.00 0 0 4 12 0 0.00 0 0 5 12 1 0.08 0 0 6 12 0 0.00 0 0 7 12 1 0.08 1 0.08 8 12 0 0.00 0 0 9 12 1 0.08 3 0.25 10 12 0 0.00 0 0 11 12 2 0.17 1 0.08 12 12 0 0.00 0 0 13 12 1 0.08 0 0 14 12 0 0.00 0 0 15 12 0 0.00 0 0 16 12 0 0.00 0 0 Total 192 6 0.03 5 0.03

WEST, Inc. 7 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Figure 2. Location of active eagle nest and flight paths observed during avian use surveys conducted within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018.

WEST, Inc. 8 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Other Sensitive Species Recorded

No federally listed species and three state-listed species were observed during surveys. Northern harrier, a state-endangered species, was the most recorded species during surveys, with 36 observations. Seventeen bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) and a single sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) were also recorded during surveys; both are Ohio species of special concern (ODNR 2018; Appendix A).

Mean Use, Seasonal Variation and Spatial Use

Northern harrier use was recorded in all seasons, bald eagle was only recorded in summer and fall, sharp-shinned hawk was recorded in fall and bobolink was recorded in spring and summer (Table 3). Eagle use was recorded at Points 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13. Northern harrier use was recorded at all points, with the exception of Point 2, but appeared to be more concentrated in the norther portion of the TRWF IV. Bobolink use was recorded at six points spread throughout the TRWF IV and sharp-shinned hawk use was recorded at Point 9 (Table 4, Figure 3).

WEST, Inc. 9 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Table 3. Mean use (number of birds/800-meter plot/60-minute survey), percent of use, and frequency of occurrence (%) by season for eagles and sensitive species during the avian use surveys conducted in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Mean Use % Use % Frequency Species Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer bald eagle 0.08 0 0 0.04 17.4 0 0 33.3 8.3 0 0 4.2 northern harrier 0.38 0.10 0.19 0.08 78.3 83.3 100 66.7 29.2 10.4 18.8 6.2 sharp-shinned hawk 0.02 0 0 0 4.3 0 0 0 2.1 0 0 0 bobolink 0 0 0.29 0.04 0 0 100 100 0 0 12.5 2.1

Table 4. Mean use (number of birds/60-minute survey) by point for eagles and sensitive species observed during avian use surveys conducted in the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 bald eagle 0 0 0 0 0.08 0 0.08 0 0.08 0 0.17 0 0.08 0 0 0 northern harrier 0.33 0.50 0.08 0.17 0.50 0.08 0 0.08 0.08 0.08 0 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.50 0.17 sharp-shinned hawk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bobolink 0.08 0 0 0 0.58 0 0 0.08 0 0.08 0 0.25 0 0.25 0 0

WEST, Inc. 10 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Figure 3. Flight paths of sensitive species recorded during avian use surveys conducted within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018.

WEST, Inc. 11 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Flight Height and Behavior

Fifty percent of flying bald eagles were observed flying within the RSH. Sharp-shinned hawk and northern harrier were not observed within the RSH, and 7.1% of bobolinks were observed flying within the RSH (Table 5).

Table 5. Flight height characteristics by species during avian use surveys at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 6, 2017 – October 23, 2018. # Groups # Obs Mean Flight % Obs % within Flight height Categories b Bird Type Flying Flying Height (m) Flying 0 - <25 m 25 - 200 m > 200 m bald eagle 6 6 159 100 16.7 50.0 33.3 northern harrier 27 29 7 80.6 100 0 0 sharp-shinned hawk 1 1 5 100 100 0 0 Bobolink 6 14 9 87.5 92.9 7.1 0 a 800-meter (m) radius plot for large birds, 200-m for small birds. b The likely “rotor-swept height” for potential collision with a turbine blade, or 25 to 200 m (82 to 656 ft) above ground level.

DISCUSSION

Bald eagles

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2018) recently released bald eagle fatality numbers from the past five years (2013 – 2018). The substantiated fatality records now equal 55 bald eagles (Pagel et al. 2013 [six records], USFWS 2018 [49 records]; Table 6). Bald eagle fatalities reported by the USFWS (2018) were documented in 16 states, with most records coming from the Upper Midwest (Iowa and Michigan), Intermountain West (Wyoming), and Alaska (USFWS 2018; Table 6). To date no fatalities have been reported from Indiana and Ohio. Of the 49 bald eagle records reported by the USFWS (2018), 45 records (92%) were fatalities and four (8%) were injuries (USFWS 2018). The bald eagle fatalities reported by the USFWS (2018) consisted of adults (41%), juveniles (36%), and eagles of unknown age (23%). Most bald eagle fatalities were discovered in the winter and spring months, but because many eagle remains were very decomposed, estimated time of death may not be accurate (USFWS 2018).

Table 6. Substantiated bald eagle take from wind energy facilities from 2013 – 2018 reported by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (2018) and Pagel et al. (2013). State Region Total Study Alaska 6 USFWS (6) California West Coast 1 USFWS (1) Idaho Intermountain West 1 USFWS (1) Illinois Midwest 1 USFWS (1) Iowa Upper Midwest 14 USFWS (11); Pagel (3) Maryland Northeast 1 Pagel (1) Michigan Upper Midwest 8 USFWS (8) Minnesota Upper Midwest 3 USFWS (3) Missouri Midwest 1 USFWS (1) Montana Intermountain West 1 USFWS (1) New York Northeast 1 USFWS (1)

WEST, Inc. 12 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Table 6. Substantiated bald eagle take from wind energy facilities from 2013 – 2018 reported by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (2018) and Pagel et al. (2013). State Region Total Study North Carolina Southeast 1 USFWS (1) North Dakota Upper Midwest 4 USFWS (4) Oklahoma Southern Plains 2 USFWS (2) Oregon Pacific Northwest 1 USFWS (1) Washington Pacific Northwest 1 USFWS (1) Wyoming Intermountain West 8 USFWS (6); Pagel (2) Total 55

Relatively low levels of eagle use were recorded at TRWF IV. The number of eagle observations and risk minutes was lower during this study compared to the first year of monitoring at TRWF IV, when 13 bald eagle observations were recorded 77 risk minutes were recorded. Part of this decrease in eagle use could be due to the reduction in the size of the project area of TRWF between the first and second year and due to the location of proposed turbines farther away from the Maumee River. Eagles were recorded in all seasons in both years of monitoring, during surveys and incidentally, but the majority of use and risk minutes were recorded during fall 2017 for both survey years (Iskali et al. 2017).

Areas of high concentration were not observed during either year of avian use surveys, although relatively higher use was observed near Flatrock Creek during the second year. Flatrock Creek, which bisects TRWF, provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat, and currently supports one known active eagle nest within the TRWF IV that was discovered in the spring of 2018 (Iskali 2018). Turbines were sited a minimum of 0.5 mi (0.8 km) from Flatrock Creek in order to reduce potential impacts to eagles and other wildlife (E. O’Shea, EDPR, pers. comm.). However, activity by eagles near TRWF IV turbines does not appear to be influenced by nesting bald eagles because activity was mainly recorded outside of the nesting season. This suggests bald eagles are primarily utilizing Flatrock Creek for foraging, which provides more suitable habitat than areas near turbines. Similar to other wind-energy facilities, some risk to collision exists within the TRWF IV due to the presence of a nest on Flatrock Creek, although the risk appears to be limited based on two years of avian surveys. In addition, four other active bald eagle nests occur within 10 mi but these nests are farther than 3 mi (4.8 km) from proposed turbines and activity recorded during this study does not appear to be affected by their presence (16.1 km; Iskali 2018). No bald eagles have been found as fatalities in Ohio or during post-construction monitoring at other phases of the TRWF, which has been conducted annually at TRWF II since 2011 and at TRWF III since 2017.

Sensitive Species

Northern Harrier Northern harriers were observed relatively commonly during surveys during the migration seasons. In past studies, northern harriers have demonstrated mixed reactions to wind development; a study in Europe found that northern harriers reduced flight activity around turbines (Pearce-Higgins et al. 2009). A study in Minnesota found evidence that northern harriers avoided turbines on a small scale (less than 100 m from turbines) and a larger scale

WEST, Inc. 13 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

(105 to 5,365 m [344 to 17,589 ft]) in the year following construction (Johnson et al. 2000). The northern harriers later appeared to habituate to the facility, and no large-scale displacement was detected two years after the facility was built (Johnson et al. 2002).

Publicly available studies have reported low numbers of northern harrier fatalities, although they are commonly observed during avian surveys at these facilities (Erickson et al. 2001, Whitfield and Madders 2006, Smallwood and Karas 2009). No fatalities have been recorded among publicly available studies in the Midwest. Northern harriers typically fly close to the ground (MacWhirter and Bildstein 1996), with some studies reporting up to 97% of flights below 20 m (66; Whitfield and Madders 2006); therefore, risk of collision with turbine blades is considered generally low for this species.

Northern harriers generally occupy a wide range of wetland and upland grassland habitat during their breeding season. They nest on the ground in undisturbed wetlands or grasslands of thick vegetation, but they have also been recorded to use cropland and fallow fields for nesting in the Great Plains (USDA Forest Service 2003). The ODNR defines northern harrier breeding habitat as any grassland patch of 101 hectares (250 acres) or larger (E. Hazelton, ODNR, pers. comm. November 20, 2017). Northern harrier nesting habitat, as defined by the ONDR, is not present at the TRWF IV. All northern harriers were recorded in cropland land cover. Northern harrier was also commonly observed during the first year of avian use surveys during the fall and winter (Iskali et al. 2017). No northern harriers have been found as fatalities during one year of post- construction monitoring at TRWF III and seven years of post-construction monitoring at the TRWF II.

Bobolink TRWF IV lies within the breeding range of bobolinks. Seventeen bobolinks were recorded during the surveys; all were recorded between May and June. No bobolinks were recorded from the first year of avian use surveys (Iskali et al. 2017). Bobolinks typically inhabit grasslands and hayfields, and demonstrate a strong preference for large, open habitat patches (Keyel et al. 2012). Nationwide, three bobolink fatalities have been recorded in the Midwest, in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Iowa from publicly available data (Appendix B). Collision risk for bobolinks at the TRWF IV is considered generally low due to their low flight heights during the summer. One bobolink was found in June 2017 as a fatality during one year of post-construction monitoring at TRWF III but no bobolinks have been found as casualties during seven years of post- construction monitoring at the TRWF II.

A previous study by Shaffer and Buhl (2016) suggested that bobolinks may be vulnerable to displacement from wind turbines on a scale of 300 to 1,000 m. There is some risk of displacement for this species for turbines placed near suitable nesting habitat; however the potential impacts to the species is expected to be limited due to the low occurrence of quality habitats such as large grasslands within the TRWF IV. All bobolink observations were recorded on cropland land cover.

WEST, Inc. 14 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Sharp-Shinned Hawk The use by sharp-shinned hawk was low within the TRWF IV, with only one observation over two years of surveys (Iskali et al. 2017). Across North America, 22 sharp-shinned hawk fatalities have been publicly reported (see summary of publicly available reports examined in Appendix B). Given the low occurrence and relatively low numbers of sharp-shinned hawk fatalities known at North American wind farms with publicly available data, the risk to these species is expected to be comparatively low. Additionally, no sharp-shinned hawks have been found as fatalities during seven years of post-construction monitoring at the TRWF II and one year of post- construction monitoring at TRWF III.

WEST, Inc. 15 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

REFERENCES

AECOM. 2013. Annual Monitoring Report: July 2012 - June 2013. Solano Wind Project - Phase 3. Prepared for SMUD - Environmental Management, Sacramento, California. Prepared by AECOM, Sacramento, California. September 2013. Allison, T. D. 2012. Eagles and Wind Energy: Identifying Research Priorities. American Wind Wildlife Institute, Washington, D.C. May 2012. Available online: https://awwi.org/wp-content/uploads /2013/09/AWWI_White_Paper_Eagles_and_Wind_Energy_May_2012.pdf Anderson, R., N. Neuman, J. Tom, W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. Bourassa, K. J. Bay, and K. J. Sernka. 2004. Avian Monitoring and Risk Assessment at the Tehachapi Pass Wind Resource Area, California. Period of Performance: October 2, 1996 - May 27, 1998. NREL/SR-500-36416. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado. September 2004. Available online at: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36416.pdf Anderson, R., J. Tom, N. Neumann, W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. Bourassa, K. J. Bay, and K. J. Sernka. 2005. Avian Monitoring and Risk Assessment at the San Gorgonio Wind Resource Area. NREL/SR-500-38054. August 2005. Western EcoSytems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. Phase I and II Field Work. Available online at: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti /38054.pdf ARCADIS U.S., Inc. 2013. Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 Avian and Bat Post-Construction Mortality Monitoring Report: Pioneer Trail Wind Farm. Prepared for E.On Climate & Renewables, North America. Prepared by ARCADIS U.S., Inc., Milwaukee, Wisconsin. August 2013. Arnett, E. B., W. P. Erickson, J. Kerns, and J. Horn. 2005. Relationships between Bats and Wind Turbines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia: An Assessment of Fatality Search Protocols, Patterns of Fatality, and Behavioral Interactions with Wind Turbines. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative. March 2005. Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2009a. Effectiveness of Changing Wind Turbine Cut-in Speed to Reduce Bat Fatalities at Wind Facilities: 2008 Annual Report. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. April 2009. Available online: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/Curtailment_2008_Final_Report.pdf Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2009b. Patterns of Bat Fatality at the Casselman Wind Project in South-Central Pennsylvania. 2008 Annual Report. Annual report prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. June 2009. Available online at: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/2008%20Casselman%20Fatality%20Report.pdf Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2010. Patterns of Bat Fatality at the Casselman Wind Project in South-Central Pennsylvania. 2009 Annual Report. Annual report prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. January 2010. Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, C. D. Hein, and M. M. P. Huso. 2011. Patterns of Bird and Bat Fatality at the Locust Ridge II Wind Project, Pennsylvania. 2009-2010 Final Report. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). Prepared by Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. January 2011.

WEST, Inc. 16 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Atwell, LLC. 2012. Fall 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Report for Roth Rock Wind Farm, Garrett County Maryland. Project No. 11001315. Prepared for Gestamp Wind North America, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Atwell, LCC. February 29, 2012. Revised August 15, 2012. Baerwald, E. F. 2008. Variation in the Activity and Fatality of Migratory Bats at Wind Energy Facilities in Southern Alberta: Causes and Consequences. Thesis. University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. BHE Environmental, Inc. (BHE). 2010. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study: Cedar Ridge Wind Farm, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin. Interim Report prepared for Wisconsin Power and Light, Madison, Wisconsin. Prepared by BHE Environmental, Inc. Cincinnati, Ohio. February 2010. BHE Environmental, Inc. (BHE). 2011. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study: Cedar Ridge Wind Farm, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin. Final Report. Prepared for Wisconsin Power and Light, Madison, Wisconsin. Prepared by BHE Environmental, Inc. Cincinnati, Ohio. February 2011. BioResource Consultants, Inc. (BRC). 2012. Avian Mortality Monitoring Report, Pine Tree Wind Farm, Kern County, California. Prepared for the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Report prepared by BioResource Consultants, Inc., Ojai, California. March 26, 2012. Brown, J. A., B. L. Robertson, and T. McDonald. 2015. Spatially Balanced Sampling: Application to Environmental Surveys. Procedia Environmental Sciences 27: 6-9. doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.108. Brown, K., K. S. Smallwood, and B. Karas. 2013. Final 2012-2013 Annual Report, Avian and Bat Monitoring Project, Vasco Winds, LLC. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources, Livermore, California. Prepared by Ventus Environmental Solutions, Portland, Oregon. September 2013. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2004. Bird and Bat Monitoring at the Mcbride Lake Wind Farm, Alberta, 2003-2004. Report for Vision Quest Windelectric, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. September 2004. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2006a. Bird and Bat Interactions with Wind Turbines Castle River Wind Facility, Alberta, 2001-2002. Report for Vision Quest Windelectric, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2006b. Monitoring of Bird and Bat Collisions with Wind Turbines at the Summerview Wind Power Project, Alberta: 2005-2006. Prepared for Vision Quest Windelectric, Calgary, Alberta by TAEM Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, and BLH Environmental Services, Pincher Creek, Alberta. September 2006. Available online: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf /Brown2006.pdf Buehler, D. A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Leucocephalus). No. 506. A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. In: The Birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Chatfield, A., W. Erickson, and K. Bay. 2009. Avian and Bat Fatality Study, Dillon Wind-Energy Facility, Riverside County, California. Final Report: March 26, 2008 - March 26, 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 3, 2009. Chatfield, A., W. P. Erickson, and K. Bay. 2010. Final Report: Avian and Bat Fatality Study at the Alite Wind-Energy Facility, Kern County, California. Final Report: June 15, 2009 – June 15, 2010. Prepared for CH2M HILL, Oakland, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming.

WEST, Inc. 17 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Chatfield, A., M. Sonnenberg, and K. Bay. 2012. Avian and Bat Mortality Monitoring at the Alta-Oak Creek Mojave Project, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation March 22, 2011 – June 15, 2012. Prepared for Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 12, 2012. Chatfield, A. and D. Russo. 2014. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring for the Pinyon Pines I & II Wind Energy Project, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation: March 2013 - March 2014. Prepared for MidAmerican Renewables, LLC, Des Moines, Iowa, and Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 28, 2014. Chatfield, A. and K. Bay. 2014. Post-Construction Studies for the Mustang Hills and Alta Viii Wind Energy Facilities, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation: July 2012 - October 2013. Prepared for EverPower Wind Holdings, Inc. and Brookfield Renewable Energy Group. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 28, 2014. Chatfield, A., D. Riser-Espinoza, and K. Bay. 2014. Bird and Bat Mortality Monitoring at the Alta Wind Energy Center, Phases I - V, Kern County, California. Final Report for the Second Year of Operation: March 4, 2013 - March 6, 2014. Prepared for Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 22, 2014. Chodachek, K., C. Derby, M. Sonnenberg, and T. Thorn. 2012. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Pioneer Prairie Wind Farm I LLC Phase II, Mitchell County, Iowa: April 4, 2011 – March 31, 2012. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 27, 2012. Chodachek, K., C. Derby, K. Adachi, and T. Thorn. 2014. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Pioneer Prairie II Wind Energy Facility, Mitchell County, Iowa. Final Report: July 1 - October 18, 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. April 2014. Chodachek, K., K. Adachi, and G. DiDonato. 2015. Post Construction Fatality Surveys for the Prairie Rose Wind Energy Facility, Rock County, Minnesota. Final Report: April 15 to June 13, 2014, and August 15 to October 29, 2014. Prepared for Enel Green Power, North America, San Diego, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. January 23, 2015. Available online: https://www.edockets.state.mn.us/EFiling/edockets/search Documents.do?method=showPoup&documentId=%7BF38C2FEC-ED84-4813-AF3E-5A397A 954A34%7D&documentTitle=20152-107006-01 Derby, C., A. Dahl, W. Erickson, K. Bay, and J. Hoban. 2007. Post-Construction Monitoring Report for Avian and Bat Mortality at the Nppd Ainsworth Wind Farm. Unpublished report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, for the Nebraska Public Power District. Derby, C., J. Ritzert, and K. Bay. 2010a. Bird and Bat Fatality Study, Grand Ridge Wind Resource Area, Lasalle County, Illinois. January 2009 - January 2010. Prepared for Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. July 13, 2010. Revised January 2011.

WEST, Inc. 18 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and K. Bay. 2010b. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study Crystal Lake II Wind Energy Center, Hancock and Winnebago Counties, Iowa. Final Report: April 2009- October 2009. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 2, 2010. Derby, C., A. Dahl, A. Merrill, and K. Bay. 2010c. 2009 Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Wessington Springs Wind-Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report. Prepared for Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 19, 2010. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010d. Post-Construction Fatality Survey for the Buffalo Ridge I Wind Project. May 2009 - May 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc., Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010e. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Elm Creek Wind Project: March 2009- February 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010f. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Moraine II Wind Project: March - December 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010g. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Winnebago Wind Project: March 2009- February 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., A. Dahl, K. Bay, and L. McManus. 2011a. 2010 Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Wessington Springs Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 9 – November 16, 2010. Prepared for Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. November 22, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011b. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Barton I and II Wind Project: Iri. March 2010 - February 2011. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Version: September 28, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011c. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Rugby Wind Project: Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. March 2010 - March 2011. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Version: October 14, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, T. Thorn, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011d. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Prairiewinds Nd1 Wind Facility, Basin Electric Power Cooperative, March - November 2010. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 2, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and M. Sonnenberg. 2012a. Post-Construction Casualty Surveys for the Buffalo Ridge II Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: March 2011- February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 31, 2012.

WEST, Inc. 19 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and M. Sonnenberg. 2012b. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Elm Creek II Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: March 2011-February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. October 8, 2012. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and A. Merrill. 2012c. Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Prairiewinds Sd1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2011 - February 2012. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. September 27, 2012. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, T. Thorn, and A. Merrill. 2012d. Post-Construction Surveys for the Prairiewinds Nd1 (2011) Wind Facility Basin Electric Power Cooperative: March - October 2011. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 31, 2012. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and D. Fox. 2013a. Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Studies for the Prairiewinds Sd1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2012 - February 2013. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. November 13, 2013. Derby, C., G. Iskali, S. Howlin, T. Thorn, T. Lyon, and A. Dahl. 2013b. Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Big Smile Wind Farm, Roger Mills County, Oklahoma. Final Report: March 2012 to February 2013. Prepared for Acciona Wind Energy, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 12, 2013. Derby, C., G. Iskali, M. Kauffman, T. Thorn, T. Lyon, and A. Dahl. 2013c. Post-Construction Monitoring Results, Red Hills Wind Farm, Roger Mills and Custer Counties, Oklahoma. Final Report: March 2012 to March 2013. Prepared for Acciona Wind Energy, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 12, 2013. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and G. DiDonato. 2014. Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Studies for the Prairiewinds SD1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2013 - February 2014. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Downes, S. and R. Gritski. 2012a. Harvest Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Report: January 2010 – January 2012. Prepared for Harvest Wind Project, Roosevelt, Washington. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc., Pendleton, Oregon. May 1, 2012. Downes, S. and R. Gritski. 2012b. White Creek Wind I Wildlife Monitoring Report: November 2007 - November 2011. Prepared for White Creek Wind I, LLC, Roosevelt, Washington. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc., Pendleton, Oregon. May 1, 2012. Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, J. Baker, M. Kesterke, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2010. Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase I Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring Second Annual Report, Sherman County, Oregon. January 26, 2009 - December 11, 2009. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc.(WEST) Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 2010. Enk, T., C. Derby, K. Bay, and M. Sonnenberg. 2011a. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Report, Elkhorn Valley Wind Farm, Union County, Oregon. January – December 2010. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Walla Walla, Washington, and Cheyenne, Wyoming. December 8, 2011.

WEST, Inc. 20 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, J. Flaig, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2011b. Year 1 Post- Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase II, Sherman County, Oregon. September 10, 2009 - September 12, 2010. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. January 7, 2011. Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and J. R. Boehrs. 2012a. Year 1 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase III, Sherman County, Oregon. September 13, 2010 - September 9, 2011. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 24, 2012. Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and J. R. Boehrs. 2012b. Year 2 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase II, Sherman County, Oregon. September 13, 2010 - September 15, 2011. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 23, 2012. Enz, T. and K. Bay. 2010. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study, Tuolumne Wind Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: April 20, 2009 - April 7, 2010. Prepared for Turlock Irrigation District, Turlock, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 6, 2010. Enz, T. and K. Bay. 2011. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Linden Ranch Wind Farm, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: June 30, 2010 - July 17, 2011. Prepared for EnXco. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. November 10, 2011. Enz, T., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and M. Kesterke. 2011. Bird and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study, Windy Flats and Windy Point II Wind Energy Projects, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: February 1, 2010 - January 14, 2011. Prepared for Windy Flats Partners, LLC, Goldendale, Washington. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 19, 2011. Enz, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and A. Palochak. 2012. Post-Construction Monitoring Studies for the Combine Hills Turbine Ranch, Umatilla County, Oregon. Final Report: January 7 - December 2, 2011. Prepared for Eurus Energy America Corporation, San Diego, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Walla Walla, Washington. Erickson, W. P., G. D. Johnson, M. D. Strickland, and K. Kronner. 2000. Avian and Bat Mortality Associated with the Vansycle Wind Project, Umatilla County, Oregon. Technical Report prepared by WEST, Inc., for Umatilla County Department of Resource Services and Development, Pendleton, Oregon. 21 pp. Erickson, W., Johnson, G., Strickland, D., Young, D., J. Sernka, K. and R. E. Good. (2001). Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States. 10.2172/822418. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and R. Gritski. 2003. Nine Canyon Wind Power Project Avian and Bat Monitoring Report. September 2002 – August 2003. Prepared for the Nine Canyon Technical Advisory Committee and Energy Northwest by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. October 2003. Available online at: http://www.west-inc.com/reports/nine_canyon_monitoring_final.pdf

WEST, Inc. 21 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Erickson, W. P., J. Jeffrey, K. Kronner, and K. Bay. 2004. Stateline Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Annual Report. July 2001 - December 2003. Technical report peer-reviewed by and submitted to FPL Energy, the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, and the Stateline Technical Advisory Committee. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. December 2004. Available online at: http://www.west-inc.com/reports/swp_final_dec04.pdf Erickson, W. P. and L. Sharp. 2005. Phase 1 and Phase 1a Avian Mortality Monitoring Report for 2004- 2005 for the Smud Solano Wind Project. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), Sacramento, California. Prepared by URS Sacramento, California and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). August 2005. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and R. Gritski. 2005. Nine Canyon Wind Project Phase II, Fall 2004 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: July 25 – November 2, 2004. Prepared for the Nine Canyon Technical Advisory Committee, Energy Northwest, by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. March 2005. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and K. J. Bay. 2007. Stateline 2 Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Report, January - December 2006. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy, the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, and the Stateline Technical Advisory Committee. Erickson, W. P., J. D. Jeffrey, and V. K. Poulton. 2008. Puget Sound Energy Wild Horse Wind Facility Avian and Bat Monitoring: First Annual Report: January–December, 2007. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Ellensburg, Washington. Prepared by by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 2008. Fagen Engineering, LLC. 2014. 2013 Avian and Bat Monitoring Annual Report: Big Blue Wind Farm, Blue Earth, Minnesota. Prepared for Big Blue Wind Farm. Prepared by Fagen Engineering, LLC. May 2014. Fagen Engineering, LLC. 2015. 2014 Avian and Bat Monitoring Annual Report: Big Blue Wind Farm, Blue Earth, Minnesota. Prepared for Big Blue Wind Farm. Prepared by Fagen Engineering, LLC. Fiedler, J. K., T. H. Henry, R. D. Tankersley, and C. P. Nicholson. 2007. Results of Bat and Bird Mortality Monitoring at the Expanded Buffalo Mountain Windfarm, 2005. Tennessee Valley Authority. June 28, 2007. Fishman Ecological Services LLC. 2003. Carcass Survey Results for Seawest Windpower, Inc., Condon Site 2002-2003. Prepared for SeaWest WindPower Inc. Golder Associates. 2010. Report on Fall Post-Construction Monitoring, Ripley Wind Power Project, Acciona Wind. Report Number 09-1126-0029. Submitted to Suncor Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta, and Acciona Wind Energy Canada, Toronto, Ontario. February 2010. Good, R. E., W. P. Erickson, A. Merrill, S. Simon, K. Murray, K. Bay, and C. Fritchman. 2011. Bat Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Energy Facility, Benton County, Indiana: April 13 - October 15, 2010. Prepared for Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 28, 2011. Good, R. E., A. Merrill, S. Simon, K. Murray, and K. Bay. 2012. Bat Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm, Benton County, Indiana: April 1 - October 31, 2011. Prepared for the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 31, 2012.

WEST, Inc. 22 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Good, R. E., M. Sonnenburg, and S. Simon. 2013a. Bat Evaluation Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm, Benton County, Indiana: August 1 - October 15, 2012. Prepared for the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 31, 2013. Good, R. E., M. L. Ritzert, and K. Adachi. 2013b. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Rail Splitter Wind Farm, Tazwell and Logan Counties, Illinois. Final Report: May 2012 - May 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. December 16, 2013. Good, R. E., J. P. Ritzert, and K. Adachi. 2013c. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Top Crop Wind Farm, Gundy and Lasalle Counties, Illinois. Final Report: May 2012 - May 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. December 13, 2013. Grehan, J. R. 2008. Steel Winds Bird Mortality Study, Final Report, Lackawanna, New York. Prepared for Steel Winds LLC. April 2008. Gritski, R., K. Kronner, and S. Downes. 2008. Leaning Juniper Wind Power Project, 2006 − 2008. Wildlife Monitoring Final Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp Energy, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. December 30, 2008. Gritski, R. and K. Kronner. 2010a. Hay Canyon Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring Study: May 2009 - May 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Hay Canyon Wind Power Project LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. September 20, 2010. Gritski, R. and K. Kronner. 2010b. Pebble Springs Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring Study: January 2009 - January 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), and the Pebble Springs Advisory Committee. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. April 20, 2010. Gritski, R., S. Downes, and K. Kronner. 2010. Klondike III (Phase 1) Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring: October 2007-October 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon, for Klondike Wind Power III LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. April 21, 2010 (Updated September 2010). Gritski, R., S. Downes, and K. Kronner. 2011. Klondike Iiia (Phase 2) Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring: August 2008 - August 2010. Updated Final. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon, for Klondike Wind Power III LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. Updated April 2011. Grodsky, S. M. and D. Drake. 2011. Assessing Bird and Bat Mortality at the Forward Energy Center. Final Report. Public Service Commission (PSC) of Wisconsin. PSC REF#:152052. Prepared for Forward Energy LLC. Prepared by Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin. August 2011. Gruver, J., M. Sonnenberg, K. Bay, and W. Erickson. 2009. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study at the Blue Sky Green Field Wind Energy Center, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin July 21 - October 31, 2008 and March 15 - June 4, 2009. Unpublished report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. December 17, 2009. Harvey & Associates. 2013. Montezuma II Wind Energy Center: Post Construction Monitoring Report, Year-1. Prepared by NextEra Montezuma II Wind, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by H.T. Harvey & Associates, Los Gatos, California. September 3, 2013.

WEST, Inc. 23 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Hein, C. D., A. Prichard, T. Mabee, and M. R. Schirmacher. 2013a. Avian and Bat Post-Construction Monitoring at the Pinnacle Wind Farm, Mineral County, West Virginia, 2012. Final Report. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, and ABR, Inc., Forest Grove, Oregon. April 2013. Hein, C. D., A. Prichard, T. Mabee, and M. R. Schirmacher. 2013b. Effectiveness of an Operational Mitigation Experiment to Reduce Bat Fatalities at the Pinnacle Wind Farm, Mineral County, West Virginia, 2012. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, and ABR, Inc., Forest Grove, Oregon. April 2013. Homer, C. G., J. A. Dewitz, L. Yang, S. Jin, P. Danielson, G. Xian, J. Coulston, N. D. Herold, J. D. Wickham, and K. Megown. 2015. Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States-Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 81(5): 345-354. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php Howe, R. W., W. Evans, and A. T. Wolf. 2002. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeastern Wisconsin. Prepared by University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, for Wisconsin Public Service Corporation and Madison Gas and Electric Company, Madison, Wisconsin. November 21, 2002. 104 pp. ICF International. 2012. Montezuma Wind LLC (Montezuma I) 2011 Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources. Prepared by ICF International, Sacramento, California. May 17, 2012. ICF International. 2013. Montezuma Wind LLC (Montezuma I) 2012 Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources. Prepared by ICF International, Sacramento, California. May 2013. Insignia Environmental. 2009. 2008/2009 Annual Report for the Buena Vista Avian and Bat Monitoring Project. Prepared for Contra Costa County, Martinez, California. Prepared by Insignia Environmental, Palo Alto, California. September 4, 2009. Iskali, G. 2018. Raptor Nest Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm, Paulding County, Ohio. Draft Report: Spring 2018. Prepared for EDP Renewables North America, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. May 14, 2018. Iskali, G., R.Good, M. Kauffman, and K. DuBridge. 2017. Avian Use Surveys for the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio. Final Report: November 2016 – October 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 8, 2018. Jacques Whitford Stantec Limited (Jacques Whitford). 2009. Ripley Wind Power Project Postconstruction Monitoring Report. Project No. 1037529.01. Report to Suncor Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta, and Acciona Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta. Prepared for the Ripley Wind Power Project Post-Construction Monitoring Program. Prepared by Jacques Whitford, Markham, Ontario. April 30, 2009. Jain, A. 2005. Bird and Bat Behavior and Mortality at a Northern Iowa Windfarm. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slobodnik. 2007. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study – 2006. Final Report. Prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study.

WEST, Inc. 24 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slobodnik. 2009a. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2007. Final report prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. May 6, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, and M. Lehman. 2009b. Maple Ridge Wind Power Avian and Bat Fatality Study Report - 2008. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Post-construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc, Horizon Energy, and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. May 14, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, J. Quant, and D. Pursell. 2009c. Annual Report for the Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, J. Histed, and J. Meacham. 2009d. Annual Report for the Noble Clinton Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, A. Fuerst, and C. Hansen. 2009e. Annual Report for the Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2010a. Annual Report for the Noble Clinton Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 9, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2010b. Annual Report for the Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 14, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, A. Fuerst, and A. Harte. 2010c. Annual Report for the Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 9, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2011a. Annual Report for the Noble Altona Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2011b. Annual Report for the Noble Chateaugay Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and A. Harte. 2011c. Annual Report for the Noble Wethersfield Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011.

WEST, Inc. 25 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

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. January 2008. Jeffrey, J. D., W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, M. Sonneberg, J. Baker, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2009a. Horizon Wind Energy, Elkhorn Valley Wind Project, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, First Annual Report, January-December 2008. Technical report prepared for Telocaset Wind Power Partners, a subsidiary of Horizon Wind Energy, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. May 4, 2009. Jeffrey, J. D., K. Bay, W. P. Erickson, M. Sonneberg, J. Baker, M. Kesterke, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2009b. Portland General Electric Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase I Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring First Annual Report, Sherman County, Oregon. January 2008 - December 2008. Technical report prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST) Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 29, 2009. Johnson, G., W. Erickson, and J. White. 2003. Avian and Bat Mortality During the First Year of Operation at the Klondike Phase I Wind Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Technical report prepared for Northwestern Wind Power, Goldendale, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. March 2003. Johnson, G. D., W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. F. Shepherd, and D. A. Shepherd. 2000. Final Report: Avian Monitoring Studies at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota: Results of a 4-Year Study. Final report prepared for Northern States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 22, 2000. 212 pp. Johnson, G. D., W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. F. Shepherd, D. A. Shepherd, and S. A. Sarappo. 2002. Collision Mortality of Local and Migrant Birds at a Large-Scale Wind-Power Development on Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30(3): 879-887. Johnson, G. D., M. K. Perlik, W. P. Erickson, and M. D. Strickland. 2004. Bat Activity, Composition and Collision Mortality at a Large Wind Plant in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32(4): 1278-1288. Johnson, G. D., M. Ritzert, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2010a. Bird and Bat Fatality Studies, Fowler Ridge I Wind-Energy Facility Benton County, Indiana. Unpublished report prepared for British Petroleum Wind Energy North America Inc. (BPWENA) by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). Johnson, G. D., M. Ritzert, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2010b. Bird and Bat Fatality Studies, Fowler Ridge III Wind-Energy Facility, Benton County, Indiana. April 2 - June 10, 2009. Prepared for BP Wind Energy North America. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. Kerlinger, P. 2002a. An Assessment of the Impacts of Green Mountain Power Corporation’s Wind Power Facility on Breeding and Migrating Birds in Searsburg, Vermont: July 1996-July 1998. NREL/SR- 500-28591. Prepared for Vermont Public Service, Montpelier, Vermont. US Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado. March 2002. 95 pp. Available online: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/28591.pdf Kerlinger, P. 2002b. Avian Fatality Study at the Madison Wind Power Project, Madison, New York. Report to PG&E Generating.

WEST, Inc. 26 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Jain, C. Wilkerson, B. Fischer, and A. Hasch. 2006. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study for the High Winds Wind Power Project, Solano County, California: Two Year Report. Prepared for High Winds LLC, FPL Energy. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, MacLean, Virginia. April 2006. Available online: http://www.co.solano.ca.us /civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8915 Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, and J. Guarnaccia. 2007. Migratory Bird and Bat Monitoring Study at the Crescent Ridge Wind Power Project, Bureau County, Illinois: September 2005 - August 2006. Final draft prepared for Orrick Herrington and Sutcliffe, LLP. May 2007. Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Hasch, and A. Jain. 2009. Revised Post-Construction Avian Monitoring Study for the Shiloh I Wind Power Project, Solano County, California. Final Report: October 2009. Third Year Report (Revised 2010). Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC., McLean, Virginia. Available online: https://www.solanocounty.com /civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8914 Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Hasch, and A. Jain. 2010. Post-Construction Avian Monitoring Study for the Shiloh II Wind Power Project, Solano County, California. Year One Report. Prepared for enXco Development Inc. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. September 2010. Available online: https://www.solanocounty.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid= 12118 Kerlinger, P., J. Guarnaccia, L. Slobodnik, and R. Curry. 2011a. A Comparison of Bat Mortality in Farmland and Forested Habitats at the Noble Bliss and Wethersfield Windparks, Wyoming County, New York. Report Prepared for Noble Environmental Power. Report prepared by Curry & Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May Point, New Jersey. November 2011. Kerlinger, P., D. S. Reynolds, J. Guarnaccia, L. Slobodnik, and R. Curry. 2011b. An Examination of the Relationship between Bat Abundance and Fatalities at the Noble Altona Windpark, Clinton County, New York. Report prepared for Noble Environmental Power. Report prepared by Curry & Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May Point, New Jersey, and North East Ecological Services. December 2011. Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, J. Guarnaccia, and D. Riser-Espinoza. 2013a. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Studies at the Shiloh II Wind Project, LLC, Solano County, California. Final Report. Prepared for EDF Renewable Energy (formerly known as enXco). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. December 2012 (Revised June 2013). Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, J. Guarnaccia, and D. Riser-Espinoza. 2013b. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Studies at the Shiloh III Wind Project, LLC, Solano County, California. Report on Year 1 Results. Prepared for EDF Renewable Energy (formerly known as enXco). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. August 2013. Kerlinger, P., J. Guarnaccia, R. Curry, and C. J. Vogel. 2014. Bird and Bat Fatality Study, Heritage Garden I Wind Farm, Delta County, Michigan: 2012-2014. Prepared for Heritage Sustainable Energy, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. November 2014. Kerns, J. and P. Kerlinger. 2004. A Study of Bird and Bat Collision Fatalities at the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, Tucker County, West Virginia: Annual Report for 2003. Prepared for FPL Energy and the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center Technical Review Committee. February 14, 2004. 39 pp.

WEST, Inc. 27 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Keyel, A. C., C. M. Bauer, C. R. Lattin, L. M. Romero, J. M. Reed. 2012. Testing the Role of Patch Openness as a Casual Mechanism for Apparent Area Sensitive in a Grassland Specialist. Oecologia 169: 407-418. Kronner, K., B. Gritski, and S. Downes. 2008. Big Horn Wind Power Project Wildlife Fatality Monitoring Study: 2006−2007. Final report prepared for PPM Energy and the Big Horn Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Mid-Columbia Field Office, Goldendale, Washington. June 1, 2008. MacWhirter, R. B. and K. L. Bildstein. 1996. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus). Pp. In: A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, No. 210. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. 32 pp. Martin, C., E. Arnett, and M. Wallace. 2013. Evaluating Bird and Bat Post-Construction Impacts at the Sheffield Wind Facility, Vermont: 2012 Annual Report. Prepared for Bat Conservation International and First Wind. Prepared by Department of Natural Resources Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. March 25, 2013. Miller, A. 2008. Patterns of Avian and Bat Mortality at a Utility-Scaled Wind Farm on the Southern High Plains. Texas Tech University, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). 2012. Lakefield Wind Project Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring. MPUC Site Permit Quarterly Report and USFWS Special Purpose – Utility (Avian Take Monitoring) 30-Day Report: April 1 – September 30, 2012. USFWS Permit No: MB70161A- 0; MDNR Permit No: 17930; MPUC Permit No: IP-6829/WS-09-1239, Permit Special Condition VII.B. October 15, 2012. Natural Resource Solutions Inc. (NRSI). 2011. Harrow Wind Farm 2010 Post-Construction Monitoring Report. Project No. 0953. Prepared for International Power Canada, Inc., Markham, Ontario. Prepared by NRSI. August 2011. New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2008a. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Periodic Report Covering Work Conducted between 1 August and 30 September 2008. Submitted to New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, New Jersey Clean Energy Program, Newark, New Jersey. Submitted by New Jersey Audubon Society, Center for Research and Education, Cape May Court House, New Jersey. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/Wind/ACUA_ Interim%20Report_Jan-Sep08_all.pdf New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2008b. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Periodic Report Covering Work Conducted between 20 July and 31 December 2007. Submitted to New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, New Jersey Clean Energy Program, Newark, New Jersey. Submitted by New Jersey Audubon Society, Center for Research and Education, Cape May Court House, New Jersey. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/CORE/ACUA Reportwithimages123107LowRes.pdf New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2009. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Project Status Report IV. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/Wind/ACUA_Quarterly%20report_t o-date_Jan-Aug09_1c.pdf

WEST, Inc. 28 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Nicholson, C. P., J. R.D. Tankersley, J. K. Fiedler, and N. S. Nicholas. 2005. Assessment and Prediction of Bird and Bat Mortality at Wind Energy Facilities in the Southeastern United States. Final Report. Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2010. Stetson Mountain II Wind Project Year 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Mortality Monitoring Study, T8 R4 Nbpp, Maine. Prepared for First Wind, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Falmouth, Maine. December 2, 2010. Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2011. Year 3 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Casualty Monitoring at the Stetson I Wind Farm, T8 R4 Nbpp, Maine. Prepared for First Wind Energy, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Falmouth, Maine. December 2011. North American Datum (NAD). 1983. NAD83 Geodetic Datum. Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC) and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2007. Avian and Bat Monitoring Report for the Klondike II Wind Power Project. Sherman County, Oregon. Prepared for PPM Energy, Portland, Oregon. Managed and conducted by NWC, Pendleton, Oregon. Analysis conducted by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 17, 2007. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2018. Ohio’s Listed Species: Wildlife That Are Considered to Be Endangered, Threatened, Species of Concern, Special Interest, Extirpated, or Extinct in Ohio. Publication 5356 (R0917). ODNR Division of Wildlife, Columbus, Ohio. Updated July 2018. 10 pp. Available online: http://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/portals/wildlife/pdfs/publications /information/pub356.pdf Osborn, R. G., K. F. Higgins, C. D. Dieter, and R. E. Usgaard. 1996. Bat Collisions with Wind Turbines in Southwestern Minnesota. Bat Research News 37: 105-108. Osborn, R. G., K. F. Higgins, R. E. Usgaard, C. D. Dieter, and R. G. Neiger. 2000. Bird Mortality Associated with Wind Turbines at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota. American Midland Naturalist 143: 41-52. Pagel, J. E., K. J. Kritz, B. A. Millsap, R. K. Murphy, E. L. Kershner, and S. Covington. 2013. Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Mortalities at Wind Energy Facilities in the Contiguous United States. Journal of Raptor Research 47(3): 311-315. Pearce-Higgins, J. W., L. Stephen, R. H. W. Langston, I. P. Bainbridge, and R. Bullman. 2009. The Distribution of Breeding Birds around Upland Wind Farms. Journal of Applied Ecology 46(6): 1323-1331. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01715.x. Available online: https://besjournals.online library.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01715.x Piorkowski, M. D. and T. J. O’Connell. 2010. Spatial Pattern of Summer Bat Mortality from Collisions with Wind Turbines in Mixed-Grass Prairie. American Midland Naturalist 164: 260-269. Poulton, V. and W. P. Erickson. 2010. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study, Judith Gap Wind Farm, Wheatland County, Montana. Final Report: Results from June-October 2009 Study and Comparison with 2006-2007 Study. Prepared for Judith Gap Energy, LLC. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. March 2010. Reynolds, R. T., J. M. Scott, and R. A. Nussbaum. 1980. A Variable Circular-Plot Method for Estimating Bird Numbers. Condor 82(3): 309-313. Sapphos Environmental, Inc. (Sapphos). 2014. Pacific Wind Energy Project: Year I Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for Pacific Wind, LLC, San Diego, California. Prepared by Sapphos, Pasadena, California. September 15, 2014.

WEST, Inc. 29 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Shaffer, J. A. and D. A. Buhl. 2016. Effects of Wind-Energy Facilities on Breeding Grassland Bird Distributions. Conservation Biology 30(1): 59-71. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12569. Smallwood, K. S. and B. Karas. 2009. Avian and Bat Fatality Rates at Old-Generation and Repowered Wind Turbines in California. Journal of Wildlife Management 73(7): 1062-1071. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2008. 2007 Spring, Summer, and Fall Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study at the Mars Hill Wind Farm, Maine. Prepared for UPC Wind Management, LLC, Cumberland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec (formerly Woodlot Alternatives, Inc.), Topsham, Maine. January 2008. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009a. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Mars Hill Wind Farm, Maine - Year 2, 2008. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. January 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009b. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Munnsville Wind Farm, New York: 2008. Prepared for E.ON Climate and Renewables, Austin, Texas. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. January 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009c. Stetson I Mountain Wind Project: Year 1 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2009 for the Stetson Mountain Wind Project in Penobscot and Washington Counties, Maine. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC. Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. December 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2010. Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms Year 1 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2009, for the Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms in Cohocton, New York. Prepared for Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC and Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. January 2010. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2011a. Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms Year 2 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2010, for the Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms in Cohocton, New York. Prepared for Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC, and Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. October 2011. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2011b. Post-Construction Monitoring 2010 Final Annual Report – Year 1, Milford Wind Corridor Phase I, Milford, Utah. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. August 2011. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2012a. 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, Kibby Wind Power Project, Franklin County, Maine. Prepared for TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc., North Walpole, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2012. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2012b. Post-Construction Monitoring 2011 - 2012, Milford Wind Corridor Phase I and II, Milford, Utah. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. May 2012. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013a. Palouse Wind Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, 2012-2013. Prepared for Palouse Wind, Whitman County, Washington. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. December 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013b. Record Hill Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for Record Hill Wind LLC, Lyme, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013.

WEST, Inc. 30 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013c. Rollins Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013d. Steel Winds I and II Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012, Lackwanna and Hamburg, New York. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. April 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013e. Stetson II Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2014. Stetson I Wind Project 2013 Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, Year 5. Stetson I Wind Project, Washington County, Maine. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. February 2014. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2015. Record Hill Wind Project Year 2 Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, 2014. Prepared for Record Hill Wind LLC and Wagner Forest Management, Ltd., Lyme, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. March 2015. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2008. Melancthon I Wind Plant Post-Construction Bird and Bat Monitoring Report: 2007. File No. 160960220. Prepared for Canadian Hydro Developers, Inc., Guelph, Ontario. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. June 2008. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2010a. Wolfe Island Ecopower Centre Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 1: May - June 2009. File No. 160960494. Prepared for Canadian Hydro Developers, Inc.’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. February 2010. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2010b. Wolfe Island Ecopower Centre Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 2: July - December 2009. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. May 2010. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011a. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Follow-up Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 3: January - June 2010. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. January 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011b. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 4: July - December 2010. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. July 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011c. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 5: January - June 2011. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. December 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2012. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Follow-up Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 6: July-December 2011. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. July 2012.

WEST, Inc. 31 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2014. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Follow-up Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 7: January - June 2012. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. April 2014. Available online: http://www.transalta.com/sites/default/files/WolfeIsland_TransAlta_PostConstruction_BirdBat_Re port_7.pdf Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec Consulting). 2012. Post-Construction Monitoring, Summer 2011 - Spring 2012. Year 1 Annual Report. Kittitas Valley Wind Power Project, Cle Elum, Washington. Prepared for Sagebrush Power Partners, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Salt Lake City, Utah. Tetra Tech. 2013. Spruce Mountain Wind Project Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality and Raptor Monitoring: Year 1 Annual Report. Prepared for Patriot Renewables. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Portland, Maine. May 2013. Thompson, J., D. Solick, and K. Bay. 2011. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Dry Lake Phase I Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: September 2009 - November 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 10, 2011. Thompson, J. and K. Bay. 2012. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Dry Lake II Wind Project: February 2011 – February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 6, 2012. Tidhar, D., W. Tidhar, and M. Sonnenberg. 2010. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for Lempster Wind Project, Iberdrola Renewables. Prepared for Lempster Wind, LLC, Lempster Wind Technical Advisory Committee, and Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. September 30, 2010. Tidhar, D., W. L. Tidhar, L. McManus, and Z. Courage. 2011. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Lempster Wind Project, Lempster, New Hampshire. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. and the Lempster Wind Technical Committee. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., Waterbury, Vermont. May 18, 2011. Tidhar, D., L. McManus, Z. Courage, and W. L. Tidhar. 2012a. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Study and Bat Acoustic Study for the High Sheldon Wind Farm, Wyoming County, New York. Final Report: April 15 - November 15, 2010. Prepared for High Sheldon Wind Farm, Sheldon Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. April 15, 2012. Tidhar, D., L. McManus, D. Solick, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2012b. 2011 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Study and Bat Acoustic Study for the High Sheldon Wind Farm, Wyoming County, New York. Final Report: April 15 - November 15, 2011. Prepared for High Sheldon Wind Farm, Sheldon Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. April 25, 2012. Tidhar, D., M. Sonnenberg, and D.P. Young, Jr. 2013. 2012 Post-Construction Carcass Monitoring Study for the Beech Ridge Wind Farm, Greenbrier County, West Virginia. Final Report: April 1 - October 28, 2012. Prepared for Beech Ridge Wind Farm, Beech Ridge Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), NE/Mid-Atlantic Branch, Waterbury, Vermont. January 18, 2013.

WEST, Inc. 32 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Tierney, R. 2007. Buffalo Gap I Wind Farm Avian Mortality Study: February 2006-January 2007. Final Survey Report. Prepared for AES SeaWest, Inc. TRC, Albuquerque, New Mexico. TRC Report No. 110766-C-01. May 2007. Tierney, R. 2009. Buffalo Gap 2 Wind Farm Avian Mortality Study: July 2007 - December 2008. Final Survey Report. Submitted by TRC, Albuquerque, New Mexico. TRC Report No. 151143-B-01. June 2009. TRC Environmental Corporation. 2008. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring and Grassland Bird Displacement Surveys at the Judith Gap Wind Energy Project, Wheatland County, Montana. Prepared for Judith Gap Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. TRC Environmental Corporation, Laramie, Wyoming. TRC Project 51883-01 (112416). January 2008. URS Corporation. 2010a. Final Goodnoe Hills Wind Project Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 16, 2010. URS Corporation. 2010b. Final Marengo I Wind Project Year One Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 22, 2010. URS Corporation. 2010c. Final Marengo II Wind Project Year One Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 22, 2010. US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2003. Eastern Region: Conservation Assessment for Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus). USDS Forest Service, Washington, D. C. 11 pp. Available online http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsm91_054294.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2012. Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines. March 23, 2012. 82 pp. Available online: http://www.fws.gov/cno/pdf/Energy/2012_Wind_Energy_Guidelines_final.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance: Module 1 - Land- Based Wind Energy, Version 2. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management. April 2013. Executive Summary and frontmatter + 103 pp. Available online: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/eagleconservationplan guidance.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. Eagle Permits; Revisions to Regulations for Eagle Incidental Take and Take of Eagle Nests; Final Rule. 50 CFR 13 and 22. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. 81 Federal Register (FR) 242: 91494-91554. December 16, 2016. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Bald Eagle Mortalities and Injuries at Wind Energy Facilities in the United States. Poster. The Wildlife Society 25th Annual Conference. October 7 – 11, 2018. Cleveland, Ohio. Information online: http://twsconference.org/ US Geological Survey (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). 2018. USGS NHD Extracts by State. Accessed November 2018. Information online: http://nhd.usgs.gov/; State data available online: https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=nhd&title=NHD%20View #productSearch

WEST, Inc. 33 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD). 2011. National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011). Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC), National Land Cover Database (NLCD). USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php; Legend: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_leg.php USA Topo. 2018. USA Topo Maps. US Geological Survey (USGS) topographical maps for the United States. ArcGIS. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), producers of ArcGIS software. Redlands, California. Ventus Environmental Solutions (Ventus). 2012. Vantage Wind Energy Center Avian and Bat Monitoring Study: March 2011- March 2012. Prepared for Vantage Wind Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Ventus, Portland, Oregon. May 16, 2012. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2006. Diablo Winds Wildlife Monitoring Progress Report, March 2005 - February 2006. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy and Alameda County California. WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2008. Diablo Winds Wildlife Monitoring Progress Report: March 2005 – February 2007. Prepared by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 2008. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2011. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Barton Chapel Wind Project: Iberdrola Renewables. Version: July 2011. Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Whitfield, D. P. and M. Madders. 2006. A Review of the Impacts of Wind Farms on Hen Harriers Circus cyaneus and an Estimation of Collision Avoidance Rates. Natural Research Information Note 1 (revised), Natural Research Ltd., Banchory, United Kingdom. Young, D.P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, R. E. Good, M. D. Strickland, and G. D. Johnson. 2003. Avian and Bat Mortality Associated with the Initial Phase of the Foote Creek Rim Windpower Project, Carbon County, Wyoming, Final Report, November 1998 - June 2002. Prepared for Pacificorp, Inc. Portland, Oregon, SeaWest Windpower Inc. San Diego, California, and Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins District Office, Rawlins, Wyoming. January 10, 2003. Available online at: http://west-inc.com/reports/fcr_final_mortality.pdf Young, D.P., Jr., J. Jeffrey, W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, V. K. Poulton, K. Kronner, R. Gritski, and J. Baker. 2006. Eurus Combine Hills Turbine Ranch. Phase 1 Post Construction Wildlife Monitoring First Annual Report: February 2004 - February 2005. Technical report prepared for Eurus Energy America Corporation, San Diego, California, and the Combine Hills Technical Advisory Committee, Umatilla County, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla Washington, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. February 21, 2006. Available online at: http://wind.nrel.gov /public/library/young7.pdf Young, D.P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, J. Jeffrey, and V. K. Poulton. 2007. Puget Sound Energy Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Phase 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring First Annual Report, January - December 2006. Technical report for Puget Sound Energy, Dayton, Washington and Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee, Columbia County, Washington. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. 25 pp.

WEST, Inc. 34 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Young, D.P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2009a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: March - June 2009. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 17, 2009. Young, D.P., Jr., J. D. Jeffrey, K. Bay, and W. P. Erickson. 2009b. Puget Sound Energy Hopkins Ridge Wind Project, Phase 1, Columbia County, Washington. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, Second Annual Report: January - December, 2008. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Dayton, Washington, and the Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee, Columbia County, Washington. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. May 20, 2009. Young, D.P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2009c. Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Phase 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, July - October 2008. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 17, 2009. Young, D.P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2010a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: April - July 2010. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 27, 2010. Young, D.P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2010b. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2009. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 12, 2010. Young, D.P., Jr., S. Nomani, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2011a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: April - July 2011. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 29, 2011. Young, D.P., Jr., S. Nomani, W. Tidhar, and K. Bay. 2011b. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2010. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 10, 2011. Young, D.P., Jr., S. Nomani, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2012a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2011. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 27, 2012. Young, D.P., Jr., M. Lout, Z. Courage, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2012b. 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland: April - November 2011. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. April 20, 2012. Revised November 25, 2013. Young, D.P., Jr., C. Nations, M. Lout, and K. Bay. 2013. 2012 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland. April - November 2012. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. January 15, 2013.

WEST, Inc. 35 April 2019 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys

Young, D.P., Jr., M. Lout, L. McManus, and K. Bay. 2014a. 2013 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Beech Ridge Wind Energy Project, Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia. Final Report: April 1 - November 15, 2013. Prepared for Beech Ridge Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Burlington, Vermont. January 28, 2014. Young, D.P., Jr., M. Kauffman, M. Lout, and K. Bay. 2014b. 2013 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland. April - November 2013. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. February 18, 2014.

WEST, Inc. 36 April 2019

Appendix A. Summary of individuals and group observations by species during avian use surveys at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm. Fall Winter Spring Summer Total

Species Scientific Name # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 northern harrier Circus cyaneus 16 18 5 5 9 9 4 4 34 36 bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 7 7 1 1 2 2 4 4 14 14 bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus 0 0 0 0 7 14 2 3 9 17 Overall 24 26 6 6 18 25 10 11 58 68

Appendix B. Summary of Publicly Available Studies at Modern North American Wind Energy Facilities that Report Fatality and Species Data for Birds

Appendix B. Summary of publicly available studies at modern North American wind energy facilities that report fatality and species data for birds. Data from the following sources: Project, Location Reference Project, Location Reference Alite, CA (09-10) Chatfield et al. 2010 Marengo I, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010b Alta Wind I, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Marengo II, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010c Alta Wind I-V, CA (13-14) Chatfield et al. 2014 Mars Hill, ME (07) Stantec 2008 Alta Wind II-V, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Mars Hill, ME (08) Stantec 2009a Brown and Hamilton Alta VIII, CA (12-13) Chatfield and Bay 2014 McBride, Alb (04) 2004 Melancthon, Ont (Phase I; Barton I & II, IA (10-11) Derby et al. 2011b Stantec Ltd. 2008 07) Barton Chapel, TX (09-10) WEST 2011 Meyersdale, PA (04) Arnett et al. 2005 Beech Ridge, WV (12) Tidhar et al. 2013 Milford I, UT (10-11) Stantec 2011b Beech Ridge, WV (13) Young et al. 2014a Milford I & II, UT (11-12) Stantec 2012b Big Blue, MN (13) Fagen Engineering 2014 Montezuma I, CA (11) ICF International 2012 Big Blue, MN (14) Fagen Engineering 2015 Montezuma I, CA (12) ICF International 2013 Montezuma II, CA (12-13) Harvey & Associates Big Horn, WA (06-07) Kronner et al. 2008 2013 Big Smile, OK (12-13) Derby et al. 2013b Moraine II, MN (09) Derby et al. 2010f Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 08) Jeffrey et al. 2009b Mount Storm, WV (Fall 08) Young et al. 2009c Young et al. 2009a, Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 09) Enk et al. 2010 Mount Storm, WV (09) 2010b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 09- Young et al. 2010a, Enk et al. 2011b Mount Storm, WV (10) 10) 2011b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 10- Young et al. 2011a, Enk et al. 2012b Mount Storm, WV (11) 11) 2012a Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase III; 10- Kerns and Kerlinger Enk et al. 2012a Mountaineer, WV (03) 11) 2004 Blue Sky Green Field, WI (08; 09) Gruver et al. 2009 Mountaineer, WV (04) Arnett et al. 2005 Insignia Environmental Buena Vista, CA (08-09) Munnsville, NY (08) Stantec 2009b 2009 Buffalo Gap I, TX (06) Tierney 2007 Mustang Hills, CA (12-13) Chatfield and Bay 2014 Buffalo Gap II, TX (07-08) Tierney 2009 Nine Canyon, WA (02-03) Erickson et al. 2003 Buffalo Mountain, TN (00-03) Nicholson et al. 2005 Nine Canyon II, WA (04) Erickson et al. 2005 Buffalo Mountain, TN (05) Fiedler et al. 2007 Noble Altona, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011a Buffalo Ridge, MN (94-95) Osborn et al. 1996, 2000 Noble Altona, NY (11) Kerlinger et al. 2011b Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 96) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Bliss, NY (08) Jain et al.2009c Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 97) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Bliss, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010c Noble Bliss/Wethersfield, NY Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 98) Johnson et al. 2000 Kerlinger et al. 2011a (11) Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 99) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Chateaugay, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011b Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 98) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Clinton, NY (08) Jain et al. 2009d Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 99) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Clinton, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010a Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Ellenburg, NY (08) Jain et al. 2009e 01/Lake Benton I) Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Ellenburg, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010b 02/Lake Benton I) Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; 99) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Wethersfield, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011c Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; Johnson et al. 2004 NPPD Ainsworth, NE (06) Derby et al. 2007 01/Lake Benton II) Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; Oklahoma Wind Energy Piorkowski and Johnson et al. 2004 02/Lake Benton II) Center, OK (04; 05) O’Connell 2010 Buffalo Ridge I, SD (09-10) Derby et al. 2010d Pacific, CA (12-13) Sapphos 2014 Buffalo Ridge II, SD (11-12) Derby et al. 2012a Palouse Wind, WA (12-13) Stantec 2013a Gritski and Kronner Casselman, PA (08) Arnett et al. 2009b Pebble Springs, OR (09-10) 2010b BioResource Casselman, PA (09) Arnett et al. 2010 Pine Tree, CA (09-10, 11) Consultants 2012 Casselman Curtailment, PA (08) Arnett et al. 2009a Pinnacle, WV (12) Hein et al. 2013a Brown and Hamilton Pinnacle Operational Castle River, Alb. (01) Hein et al. 2013b 2006a Mitigation Study (12) Brown and Hamilton Pinyon Pines I & II, CA (13- Chatfield and Russo Castle River, Alb. (02) 2006a 14) 2014 BHE Environmental Pioneer Prairie I, IA (Phase Cedar Ridge, WI (09) Chodachek et al. 2012 2010 II; 11-12)

Appendix B. Summary of publicly available studies at modern North American wind energy facilities that report fatality and species data for birds. Data from the following sources: Project, Location Reference Project, Location Reference BHE Environmental Cedar Ridge, WI (10) Pioneer Prairie II, IA (13) Chodachek et al. 2014 2011 Cohocton/Dutch Hill, NY (09) Stantec 2010 Pioneer Trail, IL (12-13) ARCADIS 2013 Cohocton/Dutch Hills, NY (10) Stantec 2011a Prairie Rose, MN (14) Chodachek et al. 2015 PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), Combine Hills, OR (Phase I; 04-05) Young et al. 2006 Derby et al. 2011d ND (10) PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), Combine Hills, OR (11) Enz et al. 2012 Derby et al. 2012d ND (11) Fishman Ecological PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Condon, OR Derby et al. 2012c Services 2003 Lake), SD (11-12) PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Crescent Ridge, IL (05-06) Kerlinger et al. 2007 Derby et al. 2013a Lake), SD (12-13) PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Criterion, MD (11) Young et al. 2012b Derby et al. 2014 Lake), SD (13-14) Criterion, MD (12) Young et al. 2013 Rail Splitter, IL (12-13) Good et al. 2013b Criterion, MD (13) Young et al. 2014b Record Hill, ME (12) Stantec 2013b Crystal Lake II, IA (09) Derby et al. 2010b Record Hill, ME (14) Stantec 2015 Diablo Winds, CA (05-07) WEST 2006, 2008 Red Canyon, TX (06-07) Miller 2008 Dillon, CA (08-09) Chatfield et al. 2009 Red Hills, OK (12-13) Derby et al. 2013c Dry Lake I, AZ (09-10) Thompson et al. 2011 Ripley, Ont (08) Jacques Whitford 2009 Dry Lake II, AZ (11-12) Thompson and Bay 2012 Ripley, Ont (08-09) Golder Associates 2010 Elkhorn, OR (08) Jeffrey et a. 2009a Rollins, ME (12) Stantec 2013c Elkhorn, OR (10) Enk et al. 2011a Roth Rock, MD (11) Atwell 2012 Elm Creek, MN (09-10) Derby et al. 2010e Rugby, ND (10-11) Derby et al. 2011c San Gorgonio, CA (97-98; Elm Creek II, MN (11-12) Derby et al. 2012b Anderson et al. 2005 99-00) Erie Shores, Ont. (06) James 2008 Searsburg, VT (97) Kerlinger 2002a Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 99) Young et al. 2003 Sheffield, VT (12) Martin et al. 2013 Sheffield Operational Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 00) Young et al. 2003 Martin et al. 2013 Mitigation Study (12) Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 01- Young et al. 2003 Shiloh I, CA (06-09) Kerlinger et al. 2009 02) Forward Energy Center, WI (08-10) Grodsky and Drake 2011 Shiloh II, CA (09-10) Kerlinger et al. 2010 Fowler I, IN (09) Johnson et al. 2010a Shiloh II, CA (10-11) Kerlinger et al. 2013a Fowler I, II, III, IN (10) Good et al. 2011 Shiloh III, CA (12-13) Kerlinger et al. 2013b Erickson and Sharp Fowler I, II, III, IN (11) Good et al. 2012 SMUD Solano, CA (04-05) 2005 Fowler I, II, III, IN (12) Good et al. 2013a Solano III, CA (12-13) AECOM 2013 Fowler III, IN (09) Johnson et al. 2010b Spruce Mountain, ME (12) Tetra Tech 2013 Goodnoe, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010a Stateline, OR/WA (01-02) Erickson et al. 2004 Grand Ridge I, IL (09-10) Derby et al. 2010a Stateline, OR/WA (03) Erickson et al. 2004 Natural Resource Harrow, Ont (10) Stateline, OR/WA (06) Erickson et al. 2007 Solutions 2011 Downes and Gritski Harvest Wind, WA (10-12) Steel Winds I, NY (07) Grehan 2008 2012a Gritski and Kronner Hay Canyon, OR (09-10) Steel Winds I & II, NY (12) Stantec 2013d 2010a Heritage Garden I, MI (12-14) Kerlinger et al. 2014 Stetson Mountain I, ME (09) Stantec 2009c Normandeau Associates High Sheldon, NY (10) Tidhar et al. 2012a Stetson Mountain I, ME (11) 2011 High Sheldon, NY (11) Tidhar et al. 2012b Stetson Mountain I, ME (13) Stantec 2014 Normandeau Associates High Winds, CA (03-04) Kerlinger et al. 2006 Stetson Mountain II, ME (10) 2010 High Winds, CA (04-05) Kerlinger et al. 2006 Stetson Mountain II, ME (12) Stantec 2013e Brown and Hamilton Hopkins Ridge, WA (06) Young et al. 2007 Summerview, Alb (05-06) 2006b Hopkins Ridge, WA (08) Young et al. 2009b Summerview, Alb (06; 07) Baerwald 2008 NJAS 2008a, 2008b, Jersey Atlantic, NJ (08) Tehachapi, CA (96-98) Anderson et al. 2004 2009 Judith Gap, MT (06-07) TRC 2008 Top Crop I & II, IL (12-13) Good et al. 2013c Poulton and Erickson Judith Gap, MT (09) Top of Iowa, IA (03) Jain 2005 2010

Appendix B. Summary of publicly available studies at modern North American wind energy facilities that report fatality and species data for birds. Data from the following sources: Project, Location Reference Project, Location Reference Kewaunee County, WI (99-01) Howe et al. 2002 Top of Iowa, IA (04) Jain 2005 Tuolumne (Windy Point I), Kibby, ME (11) Stantec 2012a Enz and Bay 2010 WA (09-10) Kittitas Valley, WA (11-12) Stantec Consulting 2012 Vansycle, OR (99) Erickson et al. 2000 Ventus Environmental Klondike, OR (02-03) Johnson et al. 2003 Vantage, WA (10-11) Solutions 2012 Klondike II, OR (05-06) NWC and WEST 2007 Vasco, CA (12-13) Brown et al. 2013 Klondike III (Phase I), OR (07-09) Gritski et al. 2010 Wessington Springs, SD (09) Derby et al. 2010c Klondike IIIa (Phase II), OR (08-10) Gritski et al. 2011 Wessington Springs, SD (10) Derby et al. 2011a Downes and Gritski Lakefield Wind, MN (12) MPUC 2012 White Creek, WA (07-11) 2012b Leaning Juniper, OR (06-08) Gritski et al. 2008 Wild Horse, WA (07) Erickson et al. 2008 Lempster, NH (09) Tidhar et al. 2010 Windy Flats, WA (10-11) Enz et al. 2011 Lempster, NH (10) Tidhar et al. 2011 Winnebago, IA (09-10) Derby et al. 2010g Wolfe Island, Ont (May-June Linden Ranch, WA (10-11) Enz and Bay 2011 Stantec Ltd. 2010a 09) Wolfe Island, Ont (July- Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 09) Arnett et al. 2011 Stantec Ltd. 2010b December 09) Wolfe Island, Ont (January- Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 10) Arnett et al. 2011 Stantec Ltd. 2011a June 10) Wolfe Island, Ont (July- Madison, NY (01-02) Kerlinger 2002b Stantec Ltd. 2011b December 10) Wolfe Island, Ont (January- Maple Ridge, NY (06) Jain et al. 2007 Stantec Ltd. 2011c June 11) Wolfe Island, Ont (July- Maple Ridge, NY (07) Jain et al. 2009a Stantec Ltd. 2012 December 11) Wolfe Island, Ont (January- Maple Ridge, NY (07-08) Jain et al. 2009b Stantec Ltd. 2014 June 12)

Bat Mist-Net Surveys Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio

Final Report July 17 – 19, 2017

Prepared for: EDP Renewables, LLC 808 Travis, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by: Goniela Iskali and Larisa Bishop-Boros Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 408 West 6th Street Bloomington, Indiana 47404

September 14, 2017

Privileged and Confidential – Not for Distribution Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EDP Renewables, LLC contracted Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. to complete bat mist- net surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (Project) in Paulding County, Ohio. The principal objective of the proposed work was to determine the presence or probable absence of the federally threatened northern long-eared bat in the Project during the summer maternity season.

Mist-nest surveys were completed at one site in the Project between July 17 and 19, 2017, following a study plan approved by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Twenty-six bats were captured of the same species: big brown bat. No northern long-eared bats or other federally listed species were captured during the surveys.

WEST, Inc. i September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Goniela Iskali Project Manager Rhett Good Senior Review Rebecca Schmitt Bat Projects Data Coordinator Larisa Bishop-Boros Research Bat Biologist Virginia Jaquish Mist-net Technician Wendy Bruso Technical Editing Manager Katie Michaels Technical Editing Coordinator Carissa Goodman Technical Editor

REPORT REFERENCE

Iskali, G. and L. Bishop-Boros. 2017. Bat Mist-net Surveys, Timber Road IV Wind Farm. Final Report: July 17 – 19, 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana.

WEST, Inc. ii September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i BACKGROUND AND PROJECT OVERVIEW ...... 1 TECHNICAL APPROACH ...... 1 Mist-Net Surveys ...... 1 RESULTS ...... 5 REFERENCES ...... 6

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Locations and site descriptions of 2017 mist-net surveys at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm...... 5

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of the proposed boundary for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm and the location of the mist-net site...... 3 Figure 2. Location of the mist-nets at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm...... 4

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Site Specific Authorization Appendix B. Photographs of Mist-Net Survey Sites (Separate Attachment) Appendix C. Details of Bat Captures and Mist-Net Sites (Separate Attachment) Appendix D. Photographs of Representative Bat Captures (Separate Attachment)

WEST, Inc. iii September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

BACKGROUND AND PROJECT OVERVIEW

EDP Renewables, LLC contracted Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to complete bat mist-net surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (Project) in Paulding County, Ohio (Figure 1). The principal objective of the survey was to determine the presence or probable absence of the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (NLEB, Myotis septentrionalis) in the Project during the summer maternity season.

TECHNICAL APPROACH

A study plan was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) on June 1, 2017. USFWS recommendations were incorporated into a revised study plan, and submitted to the USFWS and ODNR on June 7, 2017. The USFWS and ODNR reviewed and approved the final study plan prior to work being completed (Angela Boyer, USFWS; Erin Hazelton, ODNR; Appendix A). Mist-net surveys were conducted under WEST’s ODNR Scientific Collection Permit (no. 18-30) and USFWS Native Endangered and Threatened Species Recovery Permit (no. TE234121-8 and no. TE88823B-0).

Mist-Net Surveys

Based upon the 2011 National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD), there were 66.4 acres (ac; 26.9 hectares [ha]) of potential forested habitat within the Project. Current USFWS guidelines (USFWS 2017) required nine net-nights per 123 ac (49.8 ha) of forested area to determine presence or probable absence, which exceeded the effort required under ODNR guidelines (ODNR 2009). A total of nine net-nights at one site over two non-consecutive nights were surveyed to determine the presence or probable absence of NLEB within the Project per the USFWS and ODNR guidelines.

Mist-net surveys were completed at one site on July 17 and 19, 2017, using methods outlined in the USFWS 2017 Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines (USFWS 2017) and ODNR wind project specific bat survey protocols (ODNR 2009; Figures 1-2). Surveys were conducted for two non-consecutive nights using four nets on the first night and five nets on the second night for a total of nine net-nights. Standard 2 ply, 75 denier, polyester mist-nets with a mesh size of 38 millimeters (mm; 1.30 inches). Two nets were stacked to reach the canopy/sub- canopy and three mist-nets were stacked three high. Mist-nets were placed in suitable bat habitat and positioned perpendicularly across flight corridors, filling the corridor from side-to-side and extending from ground-level up to the overhanging canopy.

Mist-netting began at sunset and continued for at least five hours. Nets were checked every 10 minutes. Net locations were established at least 30 meters (m; 98.4 feet [ft]) apart within each mist-net site. Disturbance in the form of noise and movement were minimized at all net locations. If weather conditions such as persistent (greater than 30 minutes) rain, drizzle, or fog, strong winds (greater than 14 kilometers per hour [9 miles per hour] for more than 30 minutes),

WEST, Inc. 1 September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

or cold temperature (below 10° Celsius [50° Fahrenheit]) occurred during the netting period, then those net nights were to be resurveyed. The aforementioned weather conditions did not occur during surveys.

For each mist-net night, the date, start and end time, site description, site coordinates, and weather data (temperature, cloud cover, wind speed, precipitation, and moon phase) were recorded. All captured bats were identified to species. In addition, sex, age, reproductive condition, body mass (grams), forearm length (mm), and capture status (recapture/new) were recorded. To assess exposure to White-Nose Syndrome (WNS), a Reichard Index score (0-3) was recorded for all captured bats (Reichard 2009). The USFWS WNS decontamination protocol (USFWS 2016) was followed during all mist-netting efforts to prevent cross contamination of captured bats with Pseudogymnoascus destructans, the fungus that causes WNS. Captured bats were measured and processed immediately and released within 15 minutes. Species of bats captured were photo-documented with voucher photographs.

WEST, Inc. 2 September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

Figure 1. Map of the proposed boundary for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm and the location of the mist-net site.

WEST, Inc. 3 September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

Figure 2. Location of the mist-nets at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm.

WEST, Inc. 4 September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

RESULTS

No NLEB were captured during the 2017 mist-net surveys. A total of twenty-six bats were captured comprising of one species: big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus). Mist-nest survey site descriptions are listed in Table 1, and photographs and information of mist-net sites are included in Appendix B. Bat measurement and capture data forms are included Appendix C. Photographs of bat capture species are included in Appendix D. Telemetry surveys were not completed due to the lack of NLEB captures or any other trackable bat, as per our study plan.

Table 1. Locations and site descriptions of 2017 mist-net surveys at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm. Mist-Net Site ID Net UTM* Site Description A 697248 4554507 Forested edge B 697460 4554540 Forested edge Mist net Site 1 C 697560 4554571 Forested corridor D 697599 4554589 Forested corridor E1 697649 4554583 Forested edge *UTM Zone 16N, North American Datum 1983 1 Four nets (A-D) were used the first night of surveys and five nets (A-E) were used the second night of surveys.

WEST, Inc. 5 September 14, 2017 Timber Road IV Bat Mist-Net Survey Report

REFERENCES

ESRI. 2017. World Imagery and Aerials Photos. ArcGIS Resource Center. ESRI, producers of ArcGIS software. Redlands, California. Information available online from: http://www.arcgis.com/home /webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1 North American Datum (NAD). 1983. NAD83 Geodetic Datum. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009. On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post- Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. ODNR Division of Wildlife. Reichard, J. E. 2009. Wing-Damage Index Used for Characterizing Wing Condition of Bats Affected by White-Nose Syndrome. Center for Ecology and Conservation, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. National White-Nose Syndrome Decontamination Protocol - Version 04.12.2016. White-Nose Syndrome.org, a partnership of federal, local, and state governmental agencies, non-governmental agencies, and universities. White-Nose Syndrome.org homepage at: http://whitenosesyndrome.org/; White-Nose Syndrome decontamination protocol homepage at: https://www.whitenosesyndrome.org/news/national-white-nose-syndrome-deconta mination-protocol-april-2016; USFWS April 2016 decontamination protocol available online at: https://www.whitenosesyndrome.org/sites/default/files/files/national_wns_decon_protocol_04.12.2 016.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. 2017 Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines. May 9, 2017. Available online: https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys /pdf/2017INBASummerSurveyGuidelines9May2017.pdf

WEST, Inc. 6 September 14, 2017

Appendix A. Site Specific Authorization

Appendix B. Photographs of Mist-Net Survey Sites (Separate Attachment)

Net A

Net B

Net C

Net D

Net E

Appendix C. Details of Bat Captures and Mist-Net Sites (Separate Attachment)

Appendix D. Photographs of Representative Bat Captures (Separate Attachment)

EPFU

TR4-EPFU2

Raptor Nest Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio

Spring 2018

Prepared for: EDP Renewables North America, LLC Attention: Erin O’Shea 808 Travis, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by: Goniela Iskali Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 408 West 6th Street Bloomington, Indiana 47404

May 14, 2018

Privileged and Confidential – Not for Distribution Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Goniela Iskali Project Manager Rhett Good Senior Reviewer Jeff Fruhwirth GIS Technician Katie Wynne Technical Editing Coordinator Jeanette Haddock Technical Editor Emily Andrews Field Technician

REPORT REFERENCE

G. Iskali. 2018. Raptor Nest Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm, Paulding County, Ohio. Draft Report: Spring 2018. Prepared for EDP Renewables North America, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. May 14, 2018.

WEST, Inc. i May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ...... 1 STUDY AREA ...... 1 METHODS ...... 3 RESULTS ...... 4 Eagles ...... 4 Other Raptors ...... 4 REFERENCES ...... 8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Landcover types within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (NLCD 2011, Homer et al.2015)...... 1 Table 2. Raptor nests found within 10.0 mi (16.1 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during March 12 – 14, 2018...... 6 Table 3. Proximity of proposed turbine locations to bald eagle nests found within 10.0 mi (16.1 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during March 12 – 14, 2018...... 7

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Landcover within survey areas and predominant riparian areas at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (USGS NLCD 2011, Homer et al. 2015)...... 2 Figure 2. Areas surveyed and locations of raptor nests found at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm...... 5

WEST, Inc. ii May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

INTRODUCTION

EDP Renewables North America, LLC (EDPR) is planning the development of Phase IV (TRIV) of the Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF; Figure 1). EDPR began examining wildlife use and potential impacts to wildlife at the TRWF in the fall of 2008. EDPR coordinated closely with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) throughout the development process.

EDPR conducted the first year of raptor nests surveys at TRIV in spring of 2017 at a smaller turbine layout and 2.0 mile (mi; 3.2 kilometer [km]) buffer, and within 3.0 mi (4.8 km) of the Maumee River and Flatrock Creek (Iskali and Good 2017). The USFWS has recommended EDPR complete a raptor nest survey during the spring of 2018 to locate any new or historic eagle nests that have been constructed within 10.0 mi (16.1 km) of the TRIV proposed turbines, as per the USFWS Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance (ECPG; USFWS 2013, 2016). In addition, all raptor nests within 2.0 mi (3.2 km) of TRIV were recorded as per ODNR guidelines (ODNR 2009). Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) prepared a study plan for surveys in 2018 that was reviewed by the USFWS and ODNR, and changes suggested by the agencies were incorporated into the final study plan. The following report describes the results of the requested survey. Survey efforts exceeded the ODNR suggested survey effort for raptor nest searching by surveying additional eagle habitat within 10.0 mi (16.1 km; ODNR 2009).

STUDY AREA

The TRIV is located in Paulding County, Ohio, and includes approximately 21,054.4 acres (8,520.4 hectares). According to the US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD 2011, Homer et al. 2015), cultivated cropland and developed areas are the two most dominant landcover types, totaling 93.6% of the overall TRIV area (Table 1, Figure 1). The remaining TRIV area is composed of deciduous forest, herbaceous lands, open water, and wetlands, that each account for less than 1.0% of total landcover types.

Table 1. Landcover types within the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (NLCD 2011, Homer et al.2015). Land Cover Type Acres % Composition Cultivated Crops 19,716.7 93.6 Developed, Open Space 890.8 4.2 Developed, Low Intensity 168.0 <0.1 Deciduous Forest 94.1 <0.1 Herbaceous 92.0 <0.1 Woody Wetlands 26.5 <0.1 Developed, Medium Intensity 24.7 <0.1 Developed, High Intensity 19.9 <0.1 Open Water 14.5 <0.1 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 4.0 <0.1 Hay/Pasture 3.3 <0.1 Total 21,054.4 100.0 Values may not add up due to rounding

WEST, Inc. 1 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

Figure 1. Landcover within survey areas and predominant riparian areas at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm (USGS NLCD 2011, Homer et al. 2015).

WEST, Inc. 2 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

METHODS

ODNR protocol (2009) suggests that “a 2-mile buffer should be used if the site is within one mile of large water bodies (lakes, rivers, or reservoirs) or wetlands greater than five hectares as these areas have a higher potential for use by threatened or endangered species of raptors.” Proposed turbine locations for TRIV are within 2.0 mi (3.2 km) of Flatrock Creek and wetlands associated with it. All forested areas within 2.0 mi (3.2 km) of turbine locations were searched for raptor and eagle nests by flying transects spaced approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) from a helicopter. Areas of potentially suitable eagle nesting habitat, including mature forested areas adjacent to fish bearing rivers and lakes were searched for eagle nests within two to ten mi (3.2-16.1 km) of turbine locations. This protocol exceeded the ODNR protocol (2009) recommendations, and was consistent with USFWS ECPG (2013, 2016) recommendations. Surveys were conducted from March 12 – 14, 2018.

Potential nesting habitat for the northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) was also identified within 0.6 mi (1.0 km) of turbine locations. The northern harrier is state-endangered and ODNR defines norther harrier habitat as grassland or herbaceous areas larger than 250.0 ac (101.7 ha; WEST pers. comm. with Erin Hazelton dated November 20, 2017). The nesting season for northern harriers begins in mid-March to early April, and they nest on the ground, typically in large marshes and grasslands (ODNR 2009, Slater and Rock 2005). If potential nesting habitat for northern harriers was identified via aerial photographs or identified in the field, technicians were to monitor the potential habitat from public roads for one hour to determine if northern harriers were present.

All potential nest sites were classified by species, or as unknown species if undeterminable. Locations of each nest were accurately recorded on aerial photographs, and locations digitized into Geographical Information Systems (North American Datum 83, Universal Transverse Mercator Zone 16). Species, nest status, nest condition, nest height, aspect, size, and substrate of each nest were recorded. Status was classified as Occupied, Unoccupied, or Unknown and nest condition was categorized as Good, Fair, or Poor. Nests were classified as occupied if any of the following were observed at the nest structure: (1) an adult in an incubating position, (2) eggs, (3) nestlings or fledglings, (4) occurrence of a pair of adults (or sometimes sub-adults), (5) freshly molted feathers or plucked down or current year’s mutes. Occupied nests were further classified as active if any eggs or nestlings were observed or inactive if no eggs or chicks were present. A nest that did not meet the above criteria for occupied was classified as unoccupied. In addition, a follow-up visit was completed on April 24, 2018 to determine if the unoccupied potential eagle nests found during the survey were inactive. The technician observed these nests for two to four hours each to confirm their status.

WEST, Inc. 3 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

RESULTS

Eagles

Five active bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests and two unoccupied potential bald eagle nests were recorded during surveys. Three of these nests (nests 1, 2, and 7) were previously known and the other four, three active (nests 3, 4 and 6) and one unoccupied (nest 5), were discovered this year. Three of the active nests occurred along the Maumee River and two active nests occurred along Flatrock Creek (Table 2; Figure 2). Both of the unoccupied nests were in fair condition, deemed to be large enough to accommodate eagles and were located near one another along the Maumee River (Figure 2). The follow-up visit to these eagle nests did not yield any eagle activity and the nests were determined to be inactive. Eagle nests occurred within 0.7 – 6.8 mi (1.1 – 10.9 km) of proposed turbine locations (Table 3). Nest 4 occurred approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) from the historic bald eagle nest previously located on the Maumee that fell last year, and could be a replacement of that nest.

Other Raptors

No nests of federally or state-listed species were detected during surveys. Fourteen active and occupied red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) nests, two active and occupied great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) nests, and seven unoccupied raptor nests were observed within 2.0 mi (3.2 km) of TRIV proposed turbine locations (Table 2, Figure 2). The unoccupied raptor nests were too small to accommodate eagles and were most likely constructed by red-tailed hawks, based on the relative abundance of this species in the TRIV, the size of the nests, and the habitat surrounding each nest; however, the nests could also be used by other raptor species or great horned owls. Suitable nesting habitat for northern harrier was not present within the survey area as defined by the ODNR and additional surveys to detect northern harrier nests were not conducted.

WEST, Inc. 4 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

Figure 2. Areas surveyed and locations of raptor nests found at the Timber Road IV Wind Farm.

WEST, Inc. 5 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

Table 2. Raptor nests found within 10.0 mi (16.1 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during March 12 – 14, 2018. Nest # of # of # of Nest ID Species Nest Status Condition Nest Substrate Adults Eggs Young UTM1 1 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 698184 4568016 Inactive and 2 Potential bald eagle nest Fair Deciduous Tree Unoccupied 0 0 0 697855 4567898 3 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 681994 4558812 4 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 689572 4562100 Inactive and 5 Potential bald eagle nest Good Deciduous Tree Unoccupied 0 0 0 698541 4566878 6 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 2 0 0 696881 4553199 7 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 2 0 0 684965 4544882 8 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 695668 4541093 9 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 694420 4538952 10 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 3 0 693113 4540967 12 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Unoccupied Good Deciduous Tree 0 0 0 701968 4546619 13 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 690644 4545868 14 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Unoccupied Good Deciduous Tree 0 0 0 693394 4547336 15 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 0 0 0 703124 4548222 16 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 703454 4549124 17 Great-horned owl Unoccupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 698338 4551395 18 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 0 0 0 701294 4551040 19 Great-horned owl Unoccupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 701379 4551076 20 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Active and occupied Fair Deciduous Tree 0 0 0 691982 4552254 21 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 697831 4562388 22 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 696229 4562403 23 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 697448 4560635 24 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 694487 4559813 25 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 2 0 692978 4552120 26 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 696494 4553127 27 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 699285 4555393 28 Unknown raptor (non-eagle) Unoccupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 696430 4555448 29 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 690462 4556178 30 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 694217 4557923 31 Red-tailed hawk Active and occupied Good Deciduous Tree 1 0 0 691287 4559898 1 UTM = Universal Transverse Mercator, North American Datum 83

WEST, Inc. 6 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

Table 3. Proximity of proposed turbine locations to bald eagle nests found within 10.0 mi (16.1 km) of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm during March 12 – 14, 2018. Nest ID Species Nest Status Nest Condition Proximity to Proposed Turbines (mi) 1 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good 5.2 2 Potential eagle Inactive and unoccupied Fair 5.1 3 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good 6.8 4 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good 3.0 5 Potential eagle Inactive and unoccupied Good 4.6 6 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good 0.7 7 Bald eagle Active and occupied Good 5.0

WEST, Inc. 7 May 14, 2018 Timber Road IV Raptor Nest Surveys

REFERENCES

ESRI. 2018. World Imagery and Aerial Photos. ArcGIS Resource Center. ESRI, producers of ArcGIS software. Redlands, California. Information online: http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1 G. Iskali and R. E. Good. 2017. Raptor Nest Surveys for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio. Draft Report: Spring 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. Homer, C. G., J. A. Dewitz, L. Yang, S. Jin, P. Danielson, G. Xian, J. Coulston, N. D. Herold, J. D. Wickham, and K. Megown. 2015. Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States-Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 81(5): 345-354. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php North American Datum (NAD). 1983. NAD83 Geodetic Datum. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009. On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post-Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. ODNR Division of Wildlife. Slater, G. L. and C. Rock. 2005. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Prepared for USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. September 30, 2005. 39 pp. Available online: https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5182007.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance: Module 1 - Land-Based Wind Energy, Version 2. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management. April 2013. Executive Summary and frontmatter + 103 pp. Available online: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/eagleconservationplanguidance.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Eagle Rule Revision. December 2016. Available online: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/FINAL-PEIS-Permits-to-Incidentally-Take- Eagles.pdf US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD). 2011. National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011). Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC), National Land Cover Database (NLCD). USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php; Legend: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_leg.php Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2017. Personal communication with Erin Hazelton, dated November 20, 2017.

WEST, Inc. 8 May 14, 2018 Avian Use Surveys for the Proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm Paulding County, Ohio

Final Report November 2016 – October 2017

Prepared for: EDP Renewables, LLC Attn: Erin O’Shea 808 Travis Street, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77002

Prepared by: Goniela Iskali, Rhett Good, Mandy Kauffman, and Karl DuBridge Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 408 West 6th Street Bloomington, Indiana 47401

January 8, 2018

Final Pre-Decisional Document - Privileged and Confidential - Not For Distribution Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EDP Renewables, LLC (EDPR) is currently operating phases II and III of the Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF), and is proposing development of phase IV (Project). EDPR asked Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. to conduct avian use surveys to assess current use of the Project by eagles and other bird species. Surveys were consistent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance and USFWS Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines. Sixty-minute avian use surveys were conducted at the Project at 30 fixed-points monthly from November 2, 2016 to October 30, 2017 for a total of 360 hours of surveys. In addition, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) recommends surveys for the state-endangered sandhill crane if they are known to migrate through the proposed project. Observers were in the field weekly during the sandhill crane migration period (November 1 – December 15, 2016). Sandhill crane surveys were conducted in conjunction with the avian use surveys and were consistent the ODNR On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre-and Post-Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. The primary objectives of the study were to assess use and risk by eagles and sensitive species including the sandhill cranes during migration at the Project. A secondary objective was to assess use of the Project by other large birds and raptors.

Nineteen bald eagle observations in 17 groups were observed during surveys or incidentally; 13 of which were observed during surveys and within 800 m (2,265 ft) of avian use points. A total of 77 eagle risk minutes as defined within the ECPG were recorded during surveys but only 54 of these minutes were recorded within the currently proposed turbine layout. The majority of the eagle observations and risk minutes were recorded during the fall.

The Project and the general area within the TRWF lacks foraging, nesting or wintering habitat for bald eagles, and no bald eagle fatalities have been recorded during six years of post-construction monitoring at TRWF II and one year of post-construction monitoring at TRWF III. Three active bald eagle nests are known to occur outside of the Project. The closest of these nests was located 1.6 kilometers (km; one mile (mi]) north of TRWF III turbines along the Maumee River but it fell and became inactive in April 2017. Two other active bald eagle nests were located approximately 3.2 km (two mi) from the Project, one along Flatrock Creek and one along the Maumee River. Most observations of bald eagles were mapped to the north and outside of the current layout and near the Maumee River. The current proposed turbine layout of the Project has a smaller footprint and is located farther away from the two active eagle nests (approximately 8 km [5 mi]) than the original boundary. Avian surveys will continue in 2018 to assess the potential collision risk of bald eagles.

No species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act were observed during the surveys. Three Ohio endangered species (northern harrier [n=64], sandhill crane [n=37], and upland sandpiper [n=1]), and one Ohio species of special concern (sedge wren [n=1]) were observed during the avian surveys. The potential for collision with turbines for these species is expected to be low because no northern harrier fatalities have been documented in the Midwest at other wind energy facilities with publically available data. The sandhill cranes were observed incidentally in

WEST, Inc. ii January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

one group flying during migration in December. Stopover habitat such as ponds or lakes are limited within the TRWF; sandhill cranes are rarely found as fatalities at wind-projects in the Midwest. The upland sandpiper and sedge wren had low incidences of occurrence with only one individual of each species observed during surveys. Lastly, none of these species have been recorded as fatalities during six years of post-construction monitoring at the TRWF II and one year of post-construction monitoring at the TRWF III.

WEST, Inc. iii January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Goniela Iskali Project Manager Rhett Good Senior Reviewer Mandy Kauffman Statistician Jeff Fruhwirth GIS Technician Wendy Bruso Technical Editing Manager Katie Michaels Technical Editing Coordinator Jeanette Haddock Technical Editor Karl DuBridge Field Supervisor / Field Technician Joel Throckmorton Field Technician Kyle Proxmire Field Technician

REPORT REFERENCE

G. Iskali, R.Good, M. Kauffman, and K. DuBridge. 2017. Avian Use Surveys for the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio. Draft Final Report: November 2016 – October 2017. Prepared for EDP Renewables, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 8, 2018.

WEST, Inc. iv January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ii INTRODUCTION ...... 8 STUDY AREA ...... 8 METHODS ...... 10 Fixed-Point Count Avian Use Surveys ...... 10 Survey Plots ...... 10 Survey Methods ...... 10 Observation Schedule ...... 11 Incidental Observations ...... 11 Statistical Analysis ...... 11 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ...... 11 Data Compilation and Storage ...... 11 Fixed-Point Count Avian Use Surveys ...... 11 Mean Use, Seasonal Variations, and Frequency of Occurrence ...... 11 Bird Flight Height and Behavior ...... 12 Spatial Use and Mapping...... 12 RESULTS ...... 12 Eagles ...... 12 Sensitive Species ...... 16 Other Raptors and Large Birds ...... 18 Mean Use, Seasonal Variation, and Spatial Use ...... 18 Flight Height and Behavior ...... 22 DISCUSSION...... 23 Eagles ...... 23 Sensitive Species ...... 23 Northern Harrier ...... 23 Upland Sandpiper, Sedge Wren and Sandhill Crane ...... 24 Other Raptors and Large Birds ...... 24 REFERENCES ...... 25

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Land cover types within the proposed boundary of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm. .... 8

WEST, Inc. v January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Table 2. Number of bald eagle observations and associated risk minutes within 800 meter (m; 2,625 feet [ft]) of the observer and below 200 m (656 ft) flight height observed during by season surveys at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 13 Table 3. Number of bald eagle risk minutes within 800 meter (m; 2,625 feet [ft]) of the observer and below 200 m (656 ft) flight height observed by month during surveys at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 13 Table 4. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 meter (2,625 feet) plots at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 13 Table 5. Summary of sensitive species observed incidentally and during the avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 16 Table 6. Mean bird use (number of birds/800-meter plot/60-minute survey), percent of use, and frequency of occurrence (%) by season for all large birds by type and/or subtype during the avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 19 Table 7. Mean use (number of birds/60-minute survey) by point for large birds observed during avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 20 Table 8. Flight height characteristics of large birds by bird type and raptor subtype during the avian use surveysa conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 22

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Previously proposed boundary and currently proposed turbine locations, and avian use survey points for the Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio (US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015)...... 9 Figure 2. Location of active eagle nests and risk minutes of eagles observed during fixed- point count avian use surveys conducted within the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 14 Figure 3. Location of active eagle nests and flight paths of eagles observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys conducted within the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 15 Figure 4. Flight paths of sensitive species observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017...... 17

WEST, Inc. vi January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Descriptive Statistics for the Species Recorded during the 60-minute Fixed-Point Count Avian Use Surveys conducted at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 2, 2016, to October 30, 2017 Appendix B. North American Fatality Summary Tables Appendix C. Summary of Publicly Available Studies at Modern North American Wind Energy Facilities that Report Fatality and Species Data for Birds

WEST, Inc. vii January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

INTRODUCTION

EDP Renewables, LLC (EDPR) is currently operating phases II and III of the Timber Road Wind Farm (TRWF), and is proposing development of phase IV (Project). EDPR asked Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to conduct avian use surveys to assess current use of the proposed phase IV by eagles and other birds using methods outlined in the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance (ECPG; 2013), USFWS Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines (WEG; USFWS 2012), and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre-and Post-Construction Monitoring Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio (ODNR 2009). When surveys were initiated, the Project included a larger boundary but a more condensed turbine layout was recently proposed (Figure 1). The survey effort was based on the larger boundary but we also compare results of these surveys to the current proposed turbine layout to more accurately assess potential risk to eagles and sensitive species such as federally and state-listed species and Ohio species of special concern or special interest, including the state-endangered sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) during migration. A secondary objective was to assess use of the Project by other large birds and raptors.

STUDY AREA

The Project is located in Paulding County between the towns of Payne, Ohio and Paulding, Ohio. The Project has a flat topography that is dominated by cultivated agriculture (91.2%; Table 1, Figure 1). Corn (Zea mays), soy bean (Glycine max), and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) are the most common crop types present. Developed areas (6.5%), compose the next most common habitats but comprise a very small portion of the Project. All other land use types comprise less than 0.1%, individually (US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2011, Homer et al. 2015; Table 1; Figure 1).

Table 1. Land cover types within the proposed boundary of the Timber Road IV Wind Farm. Land Cover Type Acres % Composition Cultivated crops 53,256.3 91.2% Developed, open space 2,315.2 4.0% Developed, low intensity 939.8 1.6% Deciduous forest 554.1 0.9% Developed, med intensity 393.9 0.7% Barren land 358.3 0.6% Herbaceous 335.4 0.6% Open water 106.7 0.2% Developed, high intensity 99.5 0.2% Hay/pasture 24.9 <0.1% Woody wetlands 5.1 <0.1% Emergent herbaceous wetlands 2.4 <0.1% Total 58,391.7 100% Data from US Geological Survey National Land Cover Database 2011, Homer et al. 2015.

WEST, Inc. 8 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

WEST, Inc. 9 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

METHODS

Fixed-Point Count Avian Use Surveys

The objective of the fixed-point count avian use surveys was to estimate the seasonal and spatial use of the study area by eagles; sensitive species; other large bird species were also recorded. Fixed-point count avian use surveys (using circular plots) were conducted within the Project using methods described by Reynolds et al. (1980) and were consistent with methods and survey effort recommended in the WEG (USFWS 2012) and ECPG (USFWS 2013).

Survey Plots Thirty points were surveyed within the Project resulted in coverage of 30% of the Project (Figure 1). Points were placed along public roads and were at least 1,600 meters (m; 5,249 feet [ft]) apart to keep survey areas from overlapping.

Survey Methods Surveys were conducted from November 4, 2016 through October 30, 2017. The surveys consisted of 60-minute point counts and focused on eagles within an 800-m (2,625-ft) radius circular plot, and were consistent with the ECPG (USFWS 2013). Other large birds were recorded if observers could do so without taking their focus from recording eagles. Large birds were defined as waterbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds, diurnal raptors, vultures, upland game birds, doves and pigeons, large corvids, and goatsuckers. Species protected under the federal or Ohio endangered species acts and Ohio species of special concern or special interest, regardless of size were always recorded if observed. Sandhill cranes were also to be recorded weekly during surveys from November 1 – December 15, 2016, satisfying the ODNR request to complete sandhill crane migration surveys.

The date, start and end time, and weather information (e.g., temperature, wind speed and direction, and cloud cover) were recorded for each survey. Species, or best possible identification, number of individuals, sex and age class (if identifiable), distance from plot center when first observed, closest distance, altitude above ground, activity (behavior), and habitat(s) were recorded for each observation. Bird behavior and habitat type were recorded based on the point of first observation. Behavior categories included soaring flight, flapping-gliding, hunting, kiting- hovering, stooping/diving at prey, stooping or diving in an antagonistic context with other bird species, perched, being mobbed, undulating/territorial flight, auditory, and other (noted in comments). Approximate flight height and distance from plot center at first observation were recorded to the nearest five-m (16-ft) interval. Other information collected included if the observation was auditory only, as well as the 10-minute interval of the survey during which the observation first occurred. Locations and flight paths of eagles and threatened and endangered species recorded during surveys were drawn on field maps and recorded by unique observation number. Comments were recorded on the data sheet. Additional behavior and habitat data was recorded for all eagle observations during each one-minute interval the bird was within view during

WEST, Inc. 10 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information the 60-minute surveys, in accordance with ECPG (USFWS 2013). Similarly, minute-by-minute data and flight paths of sandhill cranes were to be recorded if observed during surveys.

Observation Schedule A pre-established schedule was developed prior to the field surveys and the starting survey point for each visit was randomly chosen to ensure that each point was surveyed approximately the same number of times, to spread survey times throughout daylight hours, and to minimize travel time between plots.

Incidental Observations Eagles and species protected under the federal or Ohio endangered species acts observed within the Project but outside of scheduled survey times were recorded on in-transit or incidental wildlife observation data sheets. The data recorded was similar to those recorded during scheduled surveys, including observation number, location, date, time, species, number of individuals, distance from observer (m), sex/age class, and habitat.

Statistical Analysis

Quality Assurance and Quality Control Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures were implemented at all stages of the surveys, including in the field, during data entry and analysis, and report writing. Observers were responsible for inspecting data forms for completeness, accuracy, and legibility following each field survey. Potentially erroneous data were identified using a series of database queries. Irregular codes or data suspected as questionable were discussed with the observer and/or project manager. Errors, omissions, or problems identified in later stages of analysis were traced back to the raw data forms, and appropriate changes in all steps were made.

Data Compilation and Storage A Microsoft® SQL database was developed to store and organize survey data. Data were keyed into the database using a pre-defined protocol to facilitate subsequent QA/QC and data analysis. All data sheets and database files were retained for reference.

Fixed-Point Count Avian Use Surveys For analysis purposes, a visit was defined as the required length of time (days) to survey all of the plots once within the Project, which equated to approximately one month.

Mean Use, Seasonal Variations, and Frequency of Occurrence Large birds detected within 800 m (2,625 ft) of survey points were used to calculate mean use and frequency of occurrence. Seasonal 60-minute mean use was calculated by first averaging the total number of birds observed within each survey plot during a visit, then averaging across survey plots within each visit, followed by averaging across visits within the season. Seasons were defined as spring (March – May), summer (June – August), fall (September – November) and winter (December – February). Overall mean use was calculated as a weighted average of seasonal values by the number of days in each season. Frequency of occurrence provides a

WEST, Inc. 11 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information relative measure of species exposure in the Project and was calculated as the percent of surveys in which a particular bird type or species was observed. Bird Flight Height and Behavior The flight height recorded during the initial observation was used to calculate the percentage of birds flying within the rotor swept heights (RSH; estimated to be between 25–50 m [82–492 ft] above ground level) and mean flight height during the fixed-point count large bird use surveys. The percentage of birds flying within the RSH at any time was calculated using the lowest and highest flight heights recorded. Auditory only observations were excluded from flight height calculations.

Spatial Use and Mapping Spatial use in the Project was evaluated by comparing mean use by point location and qualitative review of flight paths. Flight paths of all eagle and sensitive species were digitized and mapped in order to examine spatial patterns of use within the Project.

RESULTS

A total of 360 60-minute fixed-point avian use surveys were conducted during 12 visits between November 2, 2016 and October 30, 2017. A total of 4,969 bird observations were recorded within 788 separate groups belonging to 21 unique bird species (Appendix A).

Eagles

Nineteen adult bald eagles were observed during the avian use surveys and incidentally at the Project. Thirteen eagles in 11 separate observations were observed flying within 800 m (2,625 ft) of the fixed-points and within the RSH, for a total of 77 eagle risk minutes as defined within the ECPG (Table 2; USFWS 2013); 54 of these minutes were recorded within the currently proposed turbine layout (Figure 2). The majority of the eagle risk minutes were recorded during the fall and predominately during October 2017 (Tables 2 and 3).

Six adults, three sub-adults, three juveniles and one unknown aged eagle were recorded during surveys and within 800 m (2,625 ft). All of these eagles were recorded on cropland habitat (Table 4). Eagle use occurred throughout the Project, but mapped sightings were concentrated along the north border of the Project, within 3.2 km (2.0 miles) of the Maumee River. Two known active eagle nests occur north of the Project along the Maumee River (nests 2 and 3). However, one of these nests (nest 3) fell and became inactive in April 2017. Nest 2 along the Maumee River remained active during the nesting season and was located approximately 8 km (5 mi) from the nearest proposed turbine. A third known active eagle nest (nest 1) occurred along the Flatrock Creek and was located within approximately 8 km (5 mi) of the nearest proposed turbine (Figures 2 and 3).

WEST, Inc. 12 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Table 3. Number of bald eagle risk minutes within 800 meter (m; 2,625 feet [ft]) of the observer and below 200 m (656 ft) flight height observed by month during surveys at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Bald Eagle Risk Season Minutes Survey Effort (hours) Bald Eagle Risk Minutes/Hour January 0 30 0.00 February 0 22 0.00 March 0 35 0.00 April 0 23 0.00 May 5 32 0.16 June 0 23 0.00 July 0 29 0.00 August 8 27 0.30 September 0 41 0.00 October 53 30 1.77 November 6 34 0.18 December 5 34 0.15 Total 77 360 0.21

Table 4. Summary of bald eagle activity within 800 meter (2,625 feet) plots at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Age of Number of Eagles Eagles Observed during Activity of Eagles Season observed Surveys Observed* Habitat Spring Sub-adult 1 Soaring Cropland Summer Juvenile 1 Soaring Cropland Fall Adult 1 Flapping Cropland Fall Adult 1 Feeding Cropland Fall Adult 2 Perched Cropland Fall Adult 2 Soaring Cropland Fall Juvenile 1 Soaring Cropland Winter Juvenile 1 Soaring Cropland Winter Sub-adult 2 Perched Cropland Winter Unknown 1 Antagonistic Cropland Total 13 *Results based on first activity observed.

WEST, Inc. 13 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Figure 2. Location of active eagle nests and risk minutes of eagles observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys conducted within the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017.

WEST, Inc. 14 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Figure 3. Location of active eagle nests and flight paths of eagles observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys conducted within the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm in Paulding County, Ohio, from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017.

WEST, Inc. 15 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Sensitive Species

No federally listed species were observed during surveys. Three Ohio endangered species (northern harrier, sandhill crane [Antigone canadensis], and upland sandpiper [Bartramia longicauda]), and one Ohio species of special concern (sedge wren [Cistothorus platensis]) were observed during the avian surveys. Northern harriers were a relatively common observation at avian points across the Project and had the highest number of observations for a sensitive species. A single group of sandhill cranes was recorded incidentally flying through the Project. One sedge wren and one upland sandpiper were observed during surveys. These are tallies might represent repeated observations of the same individual (Table 5). Sensitive species use was not concentrated on a particular area of the Project (Figure 4).

Table 5. Summary of sensitive species observed incidentally and during the avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Avian Use Incidental Total # of # of # of # of # of # of Species Scientific Name Statusa grps obs grps obs grps obs northern harrier Circus cyaneus SE 64 64 0 0 64 64 sandhill crane Antigone canadensis SE 0 0 1 37 1 37 sedge wren Cistothorus platensis SC 1 1 0 0 1 1 upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda SE 1 1 0 0 1 1 Total 4 species 66 66 1 37 67 103 a SE= state endangered, SC=state species of concern (Ohio Department of Natural Resources 2016) Note: groups (grps); observations (obs)

WEST, Inc. 16 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Figure 4. Flight paths of sensitive species observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017.

WEST, Inc. 17 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Other Raptors and Large Birds

Canada goose (Branta canadensis; 49 observations of 1,969 individuals) was the most abundant bird species observed during avian surveys, followed by rock pigeon (Columba livia; 27 observations of 935 individuals), killdeer (Charadrius vociferous; 233 observations of 722 individuals) and turkey vulture (Cathartes aura; 115 observations of 327 individuals).. Red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis; 76 observations of 84 individuals) and northern harrier (Circus cyaneus; 66 observations of 66 individuals) were the most commonly observed raptors (Appendix A).

Mean Use, Seasonal Variation, and Spatial Use Eagle use was observed in all seasons and mean use was highest in the fall (0.08 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey). Overall mean large bird 60-minute use was highest in the winter (27.2 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey), followed by fall (8.6), then spring (7.2), and finally, summer (4.6; Table 3). Canada geese migrating through the Project comprised most of winter bird use. Raptor use was relatively higher in the fall (0.9 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey), but low during all seasons (Table 6).

Eagles were observed at seven of the 30 points, but eagle use was relatively low at each of these points and ranged between 0.1 to 0.3 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey. Large bird 60-minute use was highest at fixed-point 3 (116.7 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey) and fixed-point 10 (44.7 birds/800-m plot/60-minute survey), comprised primarily of Canada goose observations at point 3 and rock pigeon observations at point 10. Raptor use during the fixed-point count avian use surveys was low at all point locations in the Project (Table 7).

WEST, Inc. 18 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Table 6. Mean bird use (number of birds/800-meter plot/60-minute survey), percent of use, and frequency of occurrence (%) by season for all large birds by type and/or subtype during the avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Mean Use % Use % Frequency Bird Species Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Waterbirds 0.04 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.6 2.4 0.8 <0.1 4.4 8.9 6.7 1.1 Waterfowl 0.74 0.38 0.49 17.94 10.4 8.1 5.7 65.9 18.9 6.7 6.7 14.4 Shorebirds 2.67 1.36 3.43 0.58 37.3 29.2 39.8 2.1 82.2 55.6 37.8 13.3 Diurnal Raptors 0.36 0.44 0.92 0.59 5 9.6 10.7 2.2 27.8 32.2 50 35.6 Accipiters - - 0.06 0.01 - - 0.6 <0.1 3.3 1.1 Buteos 0.21 0.2 0.28 0.17 3 4.3 3.2 0.6 15.6 17.8 23.3 11.1 Northern Harrier 0.09 0.1 0.28 0.22 1.2 2.2 3.2 0.8 7.8 8.9 22.2 11.1 Eagles 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.2 1.1 1.1 4.4 2.2 Falcons 0.04 0.09 0.23 0.14 0.6 1.9 2.7 0.5 4.4 6.7 16.7 13.3 Osprey - 0.02 - - - 0.5 - - - 1.1 - - Other Raptors - 0.02 - - - 0.5 - - - 2.2 - - Vultures 0.48 1.34 1.06 0.01 6.7 28.9 12.2 <0.1 18.9 36.7 17.8 1.1 Doves/Pigeons 2.81 1 0.99 7.83 39.3 21.5 11.5 28.8 24.4 28.9 18.9 15.6 Large Corvids 0.06 0.01 1.67 0.26 0.8 0.2 19.3 0.9 4.4 1.1 5.6 8.9 Overall Large Birds 7.16 4.64 8.62 27.22 100 100 100 100 “-“ = 0 observations

WEST, Inc. 19 January 8, 2018 Timber Road-IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Table 7. Mean use (number of birds/60-minute survey) by point for large birds observed during avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Survey Point Bird Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Waterbirds 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 - 0.1 - - - - 0.2 0.3 - - 0.1 Waterfowl 2.8 7.2 105.9 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 11.1 1.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 - - 0.2 Shorebirds 1.0 1.9 4.9 2.2 0.6 1.8 11.2 0.9 1.4 1.5 0.3 1.3 2.2 0.9 1.3 Diurnal Raptors 0.7 1.0 0.9 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.4 1.3 0.8 0.5 - 0.8 0.5 Accipiters - - 0.2 0.1 ------0.1 0.2 - - - Buteos 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.8 - 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 Northern Harrier 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 - 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 - 0.2 0.3 Eagles - 0.3 0.3 ------0.1 - - - - - Falcons - 0.2 - 0.2 0.1 0.1 - 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 - 0.3 0.1 Osprey - 0.2 ------Other Raptors ------Vultures 2.0 1.1 3.3 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.1 1.8 1.1 0.5 0.1 1.8 0.1 2.7 0.5 Doves/Pigeons 0.7 0.3 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.8 - 11.4 0.2 41.1 27.4 0.1 0.2 - - Large Corvids 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.6 - 0.3 0.1 ------Overall Large Birds 7.4 12.0 116.7 6.7 2.2 4.7 12.2 25.9 4.4 44.7 29.1 3.9 2.4 4.3 2.6 “-“ = 0 observations

WEST, Inc. 20 January 8, 2018 Timber Road-IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Table 7 (continued). Mean use (number of birds/60-minute survey) by point for large birds observed during avian use surveys conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. Survey Point Bird Type 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Waterbirds - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.1 - - - Waterfowl - 0.5 - - 0.3 - 0.2 - - 6.3 0.3 2.8 - - 6.3 Shorebirds 1.8 2.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.1 2.4 3.3 1.3 1.2 1.7 2.7 1.8 3.8 0.7 Diurnal Raptors 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.1 1.0 0.2 Accipiters ------Buteos 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 - - 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 Northern Harrier 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 - 0.3 - 0.6 0.1 Eagles 0.1 - - - - - 0.1 - 0.1 - - 0.2 - - - Falcons 0.3 - - 0.1 0.3 - 0.1 - 0.3 - 0.2 0.1 - 0.3 - Osprey ------Other Raptors - - 0.1 - - - - 0.1 ------Vultures 0.3 1.3 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 - 0.1 - Doves/Pigeons 0.1 1.1 0.3 2.2 - 0.9 0.4 2.8 0.1 0.2 0.8 1.0 - 0.3 0.1 Large Corvids - 0.2 - - 0.3 - - - 0.1 - - 0.1 8.7 2.5 - Overall Large Birds 2.8 6.5 2.4 3.8 1.9 2.4 4.0 6.8 3.2 8.1 3.2 7.7 10.6 7.8 7.2 “-“ = 0 observations

WEST, Inc. 21 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Flight Height and Behavior Nine bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) were observed flying within 800-m during the avian use surveys, and were recorded within the rotor-swept heights (RSH) 66.7% of the time observed. Approximately 23.8% of flying diurnal raptors were initially observed flying within the RSH, 75.5% were observed flying below the RSH, and 0.7% were observed flying above the RSH during the 60-minute fixed-point count avian use surveys. Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and other raptors (100% of only two observations and one observation, respectively) and vultures (75.2%) had the highest percentage of observations recorded within RSH in the Project (Table 8).

Table 8. Flight height characteristics of large birds by bird type and raptor subtype during the avian use surveysa conducted in the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016 – October 30, 2017. % within Flight Height # Groups # Obs Mean Flight % Obs Categories Bird Type Flying Flying Height (m) Flying 0 - 25 m 25 - 150 mb > 150 m Waterbirds 18 18 22.83 85.7 66.7 33.3 0 Waterfowl 60 1656 20.5 94.1 74.6 25.4 0 Shorebirds 151 575 8.19 79.5 95.5 4.5 0 Diurnal Raptors 135 147 18.61 70.7 75.5 23.8 0.7 Accipiters 4 5 17.5 83.3 60 40 0 Buteos 37 43 32.16 55.8 48.8 48.8 2.3 Northern Harrier 59 59 4.37 95.2 98.3 1.7 0 Eagles 8 9 58.88 69.2 33.3 66.7 0 Falcons 25 28 12.96 60.9 92.9 7.1 0 Osprey 1 2 100 100 0 100 0 Other Raptors 1 1 100 50 0 100 0 Vultures 94 246 44.3 94.6 21.5 75.2 3.3 Doves/Pigeons 90 1005 11.82 88.4 92.6 7.4 0 Large Corvids 18 171 15.17 95.5 80.1 19.9 0 Overall Large Birds 566 3818 19.24 89 79.3 20.4 0.2 a. 800-meter (m; 2,625 feet [ft]) radius plot for large birds. b.The likely RSH for potential collision with a turbine blade, or 25 – 150 m (82 – 492 ft) above ground level. Note: groups (grps); observations (obs)

WEST, Inc. 22 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

DISCUSSION

Eagles

Bald eagles were recorded more commonly than expected based on the lack of suitable nesting and foraging habitat within the Project. The majority of recorded use was not related to the presence of active nests along the Maumee River and Flat Rock Creek; rather most observations were recorded in October, which coincides with the fall migration period for bald eagles.

Bald eagle collisions with wind turbines are relatively rare compared to the collision with turbine from golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos). Eighteen bald eagles have been found as fatalities at wind farms (USFWS 2016). This indicates that the risk for collision of bald eagles with wind turbines is low, despite this species’ large and increasing population and widespread distribution across North America (Buehler 2000, Allison 2012). No bald eagles have been found as casualties during seven years of post-construction monitoring at all phases. However, bald eagle populations have increased over the last 6 years, as evidenced by the discovery of two new bald eagle nests within five miles of the Project, and the number of bald eagle observations recorded in October of 2017. Avian surveys at the Project are continuing in 2017 – 2018 to further assess potential risk to bald eagles.

Golden eagles are rare in the Midwest and eastern US, as they are most commonly found west of Texas and nest in Alaska and Canada. However, golden eagles have a wide winter distribution and a small proportion of the population migrate towards the eastern states during the winter (USFWS 2011b, 2016). During the last 10 years, one golden eagle observation was reported near the TRWF on October 24, 2013 near the Paulding Reservoir, which is approximately 3.2 km (two mi) from the Project and 5.6 km (3.5 mi) form the nearest proposed turbine (eBird 2017). No golden eagles were observed within the TRWF during the 360 hours of avian use surveys and no golden eagles have been found as fatalities in the seven years of post-construction monitoring at TRWF. Golden eagles prefer open shrublands and grasslands, which are not found in the TRWF and are rare in the Midwest (USFWS 2011a 2016). The risk of mortality to golden eagles is considered extremely low and unlikely to occur.

Sensitive Species

Northern Harrier Northern harriers were commonly observed within the Project and are also commonly observed during fixed-point count avian use surveys at most Midwest wind energy projects, yet no fatalities of this species have been recorded in the Midwest (Appendix B). The lack of fatalities is likely due to the northern harrier hunting and flight habits; northern harriers generally hunt and fly at low elevations, and therefore, have a low risk of collision with modern wind turbines (Whitfield and Madders 2005).

WEST, Inc. 23 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Northern harriers were most commonly observed during fall migration and winter. However, nine individuals were observed during the summer at the Project. Northern harriers generally occupy a wide range of wetland and upland grassland habitat during their breeding season. They nest on the ground in undisturbed wetlands or grasslands of thick vegetation, but they have also been recorded to use cropland and fallow fields for nesting in the Great Plains (USFWS 2003). The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) has defined northern harrier breeding habitat as grassland patches of 101 hectares (250 acres; pers. conv. with Erin Hazelton of ODNR on November 20, 2017). Northern harrier nesting habitat as defined by the ODNR does not occur within the Project or TRWF; observations of northern harriers in the summer are likely birds that are nesting within wetlands along the Maumee and Flat Rock Creek where more suitable habitat is present. In addition, no northern harriers have been found as fatalities during six years of post- construction monitoring at the TRWF II and one year at TRWF III.

Upland Sandpiper, Sedge Wren and Sandhill Crane The use by both upland sandpiper and sedge wren was low within the Project, with only one observation of each species for the entire year of surveys. In addition, no sedge wrens or uplands sandpipers have been found as fatalities during six years of post-construction monitoring at the TRWF II and one year at TRWF III. Given the small proportion of sedge wren and upland observed during surveys and the lack of fatalities found during post-construction monitoring, the risk to these species is expected to be low.

One group of 37 of sandhill cranes was recorded incidentally. The sandhill cranes were observed flying during migration in December and are unlikely to use the Project as stopover habitat due to the lack of ponds or lakes. Less than 0.4% of the Project is open water or wetland. Given the low incidence of sandhill crane observations during the migration period and throughout the study period, and the lack of fatalities found during post-construction monitoring, the risk to these species is expected to be low.

Other Raptors and Large Birds

Large bird species most often observed during the large bird surveys included Canada goose, rock pigeon, killdeer and turkey vulture. The most common raptor observed was red-tailed hawk. Most large bird species observed were common, geographically abundant species likely to be unaffected by any potential habitat fragmentation related to the Project. Therefore, impacts to large bird populations during all seasons are unlikely to be significant.

WEST, Inc. 24 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

REFERENCES

AECOM. 2013. Annual Monitoring Report: July 2012 - June 2013. Solano Wind Project - Phase 3. Prepared for SMUD - Environmental Management, Sacramento, California. Prepared by AECOM, Sacramento, California. September 2013. Allison, T. D. 2012. Eagles and Wind Energy: Identifying Research Priorities. American Wind Wildlife Institute, Washington, D.C. May 2012. Available online: https://awwi.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/09/AWWI_White_Paper_Eagles_and_Wind_Energy_May_2012.pdf Anderson, R., N. Neuman, J. Tom, W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. Bourassa, K. J. Bay, and K. J. Sernka. 2004. Avian Monitoring and Risk Assessment at the Tehachapi Pass Wind Resource Area, California. Period of Performance: October 2, 1996 - May 27, 1998. NREL/SR-500-36416. September 2004. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Golden, Colorado. Available online: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36416.pdf Anderson, R., J. Tom, N. Neumann, W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. Bourassa, K. J. Bay, and K. J. Sernka. 2005. Avian Monitoring and Risk Assessment at the San Gorgonio Wind Resource Area. NREL/SR-500-38054. August 2005. Western EcoSytems Technology, Inc. (WEST). Cheyenne, Wyoming. Available online: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/38054.pdf ARCADIS U.S., Inc. 2013. Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 Avian and Bat Post-Construction Mortality Monitoring Report: Pioneer Trail Wind Farm. Prepared for E.On Climate & Renewables, North America. Prepared by ARCADIS U.S., Inc., Milwaukee, Wisconsin. August 2013. Arnett, E. B., W. P. Erickson, J. Kerns, and J. Horn. 2005. Relationships between Bats and Wind Turbines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia: An Assessment of Fatality Search Protocols, Patterns of Fatality, and Behavioral Interactions with Wind Turbines. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative. March 2005. Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2009a. Effectiveness of Changing Wind Turbine Cut-in Speed to Reduce Bat Fatalities at Wind Facilities: 2008 Annual Report. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. April 2009. Available online: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/Curtailment_2008_Final_Report.pdf Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2009b. Patterns of Bat Fatality at the Casselman Wind Project in South-Central Pennsylvania: 2008 Annual Report. Annual report prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. June 2009. Available online: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/2008%20Casselman%20Fatality%20Report.pdf Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, M. M. P. Huso, and J. P. Hayes. 2010. Patterns of Bat Fatality at the Casselman Wind Project in South-Central Pennsylvania. 2009 Annual Report. Annual report prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. January 2010. Arnett, E. B., M. R. Schirmacher, C. D. Hein, and M. M. P. Huso. 2011. Patterns of Bird and Bat Fatality at the Locust Ridge II Wind Project, Pennsylvania. 2009-2010 Final Report. Prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) and the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). Prepared by Bat Conservation International (BCI), Austin, Texas. January 2011.

WEST, Inc. 25 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Atwell, LLC. 2012. Fall 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Report for Roth Rock Wind Farm, Garrett County Maryland. Project No. 11001315. Prepared for Gestamp Wind North America, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Atwell, LCC. February 29, 2012. Revised August 15, 2012. Baerwald, E. F. 2008. Variation in the Activity and Fatality of Migratory Bats at Wind Energy Facilities in Southern Alberta: Causes and Consequences. Thesis. University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. BHE Environmental, Inc. (BHE). 2010. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study: Cedar Ridge Wind Farm, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin. Interim Report prepared for Wisconsin Power and Light, Madison, Wisconsin. Prepared by BHE Environmental, Inc. Cincinnati, Ohio. February 2010. BHE Environmental, Inc. (BHE). 2011. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study: Cedar Ridge Wind Farm, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin. Final Report. Prepared for Wisconsin Power and Light, Madison, Wisconsin. Prepared by BHE Environmental, Inc. Cincinnati, Ohio. February 2011. BioResource Consultants, Inc. (BRC). 2012. Avian Mortality Monitoring Report, Pine Tree Wind Farm, Kern County, California. Prepared for the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Report prepared by BioResource Consultants, Inc., Ojai, California. March 26, 2012. Brown, K., K. S. Smallwood, and B. Karas. 2013. Final 2012-2013 Annual Report, Avian and Bat Monitoring Project, Vasco Winds, LLC. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources, Livermore, California. Prepared by Ventus Environmental Solutions, Portland, Oregon. September 2013. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2004. Bird and Bat Monitoring at the Mcbride Lake Wind Farm, Alberta, 2003-2004. Report for Vision Quest Windelectric, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. September 2004. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2006a. Bird and Bat Interactions with Wind Turbines Castle River Wind Facility, Alberta, 2001-2002. Report for Vision Quest Windelectric, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Brown, W. K. and B. L. Hamilton. 2006b. Monitoring of Bird and Bat Collisions with Wind Turbines at the Summerview Wind Power Project, Alberta: 2005-2006. Prepared for Vision Quest Windelectric, Calgary, Alberta by TAEM Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, and BLH Environmental Services, Pincher Creek, Alberta. September 2006. Available online: http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/Brown2006.pdf Buehler, D. A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). P. G. Rodewald, ed. The Birds of North America Online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/baleag; doi: 10.2173/bna.506 Chatfield, A., W. Erickson, and K. Bay. 2009. Avian and Bat Fatality Study, Dillon Wind-Energy Facility, Riverside County, California. Final Report: March 26, 2008 - March 26, 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 3, 2009. Chatfield, A., W. P. Erickson, and K. Bay. 2010. Final Report: Avian and Bat Fatality Study at the Alite Wind-Energy Facility, Kern County, California. Final Report: June 15, 2009 – June 15, 2010. Prepared for CH2M HILL, Oakland, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. Chatfield, A., M. Sonnenberg, and K. Bay. 2012. Avian and Bat Mortality Monitoring at the Alta-Oak Creek Mojave Project, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation March 22, 2011 – June 15, 2012. Prepared for Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 12, 2012.

WEST, Inc. 26 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Chatfield, A. and D. Russo. 2014. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring for the Pinyon Pines I & II Wind Energy Project, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation: March 2013 - March 2014. Prepared for MidAmerican Renewables, LLC, Des Moines, Iowa, and Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 28, 2014. Chatfield, A. and K. Bay. 2014. Post-Construction Studies for the Mustang Hills and Alta VIII Wind Energy Facilities, Kern County, California. Final Report for the First Year of Operation: July 2012 - October 2013. Prepared for EverPower Wind Holdings, Inc. and Brookfield Renewable Energy Group. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 28, 2014. Chatfield, A., D. Riser-Espinoza, and K. Bay. 2014. Bird and Bat Mortality Monitoring at the Alta Wind Energy Center, Phases I - V, Kern County, California. Final Report for the Second Year of Operation: March 4, 2013 - March 6, 2014. Prepared for Alta Windpower Development, LLC, Mojave, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 22, 2014. Chodachek, K., C. Derby, M. Sonnenberg, and T. Thorn. 2012. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Pioneer Prairie Wind Farm I LLC Phase II, Mitchell County, Iowa: April 4, 2011 – March 31, 2012. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 27, 2012. Chodachek, K., C. Derby, K. Adachi, and T. Thorn. 2014. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Pioneer Prairie II Wind Energy Facility, Mitchell County, Iowa. Final Report: July 1 - October 18, 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. April 2014. Chodachek, K., K. Adachi, and G. DiDonato. 2015. Post Construction Fatality Surveys for the Prairie Rose Wind Energy Facility, Rock County, Minnesota. Final Report: April 15 to June 13, 2014, and August 15 to October 29, 2014. Prepared for Enel Green Power, North America, San Diego, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. January 23, 2015. Derby, C., A. Dahl, W. Erickson, K. Bay, and J. Hoban. 2007. Post-Construction Monitoring Report for Avian and Bat Mortality at the NPPD Ainsworth Wind Farm. Unpublished report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, for the Nebraska Public Power District. Derby, C., J. Ritzert, and K. Bay. 2010a. Bird and Bat Fatality Study, Grand Ridge Wind Resource Area, Lasalle County, Illinois. January 2009 - January 2010. Prepared for Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. July 13, 2010. Revised January 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and K. Bay. 2010b. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study Crystal Lake II Wind Energy Center, Hancock and Winnebago Counties, Iowa. Final Report: April 2009- October 2009. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 2, 2010. Derby, C., A. Dahl, A. Merrill, and K. Bay. 2010c. 2009 Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Wessington Springs Wind-Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report. Prepared for Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 19, 2010.

WEST, Inc. 27 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010d. Post-Construction Fatality Survey for the Buffalo Ridge I Wind Project. May 2009 - May 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc., Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010e. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Elm Creek Wind Project: March 2009- February 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010f. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Moraine II Wind Project: March - December 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and A. Merrill. 2010g. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Winnebago Wind Project: March 2009- February 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Derby, C., A. Dahl, K. Bay, and L. McManus. 2011a. 2010 Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Wessington Springs Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 9 – November 16, 2010. Prepared for Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. November 22, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011b. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Barton I and II Wind Project: Iri. March 2010 - February 2011. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Version: September 28, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011c. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Rugby Wind Project: Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. March 2010 - March 2011. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Version: October 14, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, T. Thorn, K. Bay, and S. Nomani. 2011d. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the PrairieWinds ND1 Wind Facility, Basin Electric Power Cooperative, March - November 2010. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 2, 2011. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and M. Sonnenberg. 2012a. Post-Construction Casualty Surveys for the Buffalo Ridge II Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: March 2011- February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 31, 2012. Derby, C., K. Chodachek, and M. Sonnenberg. 2012b. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Elm Creek II Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: March 2011-February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. October 8, 2012. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and A. Merrill. 2012c. Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the PrairieWinds SD1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2011 - February 2012. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. September 27, 2012.

WEST, Inc. 28 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Derby, C., K. Chodachek, T. Thorn, and A. Merrill. 2012d. Post-Construction Surveys for the PrairieWinds ND1 (2011) Wind Facility Basin Electric Power Cooperative: March - October 2011. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. August 31, 2012. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and D. Fox. 2013a. Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Studies for the PrairieWinds SD1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2012 - February 2013. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. November 13, 2013. Derby, C., G. Iskali, S. Howlin, T. Thorn, T. Lyon, and A. Dahl. 2013b. Post-Construction Monitoring Results for the Big Smile Wind Farm, Roger Mills County, Oklahoma. Final Report: March 2012 to February 2013. Prepared for Acciona Wind Energy, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 12, 2013. Derby, C., G. Iskali, M. Kauffman, T. Thorn, T. Lyon, and A. Dahl. 2013c. Post-Construction Monitoring Results, Red Hills Wind Farm, Roger Mills and Custer Counties, Oklahoma. Final Report: March 2012 to March 2013. Prepared for Acciona Wind Energy, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. June 12, 2013. Derby, C., A. Dahl, and G. DiDonato. 2014. Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Studies for the PrairieWinds SD1 Wind Energy Facility, South Dakota. Final Report: March 2013 - February 2014. Prepared for Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bismarck, North Dakota. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bismarck, North Dakota. Downes, S. and R. Gritski. 2012a. Harvest Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Report: January 2010 – January 2012. Prepared for Harvest Wind Project, Roosevelt, Washington. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc., Pendleton, Oregon. May 1, 2012. Downes, S. and R. Gritski. 2012b. White Creek Wind I Wildlife Monitoring Report: November 2007 - November 2011. Prepared for White Creek Wind I, LLC, Roosevelt, Washington. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc., Pendleton, Oregon. May 1, 2012. eBird. 2017. Golden Eagle, Iowa. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Ithaca, New York. August 2017. Information online: http://ebird.org/ebird/map/goleag?neg=true&env.minX=- 92.40234185104981&env.minY=41.78689538879865&env.maxX=- 87.78808403854981&env.maxY=43.49200286341395&zh=true&gp=false&ev=Z&mr=1- 12&bmo=1&emo=12&yr=all&byr=1900&eyr=2016 Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, J. Baker, M. Kesterke, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2010. Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase I Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring Second Annual Report, Sherman County, Oregon. January 26, 2009 - December 11, 2009. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc.(WEST) Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 2010. Enk, T., C. Derby, K. Bay, and M. Sonnenberg. 2011a. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Report, Elkhorn Valley Wind Farm, Union County, Oregon. January – December 2010. Prepared for EDP Renewables, North America LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Walla Walla, Washington, and Cheyenne, Wyoming. December 8, 2011.

WEST, Inc. 29 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, J. Flaig, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2011b. Year 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase II, Sherman County, Oregon. September 10, 2009 - September 12, 2010. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. January 7, 2011. Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and J. R. Boehrs. 2012a. Year 1 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase III, Sherman County, Oregon. September 13, 2010 - September 9, 2011. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 24, 2012. Enk, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and J. R. Boehrs. 2012b. Year 2 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase II, Sherman County, Oregon. September 13, 2010 - September 15, 2011. Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 23, 2012. Enz, T. and K. Bay. 2010. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study, Tuolumne Wind Project, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: April 20, 2009 - April 7, 2010. Prepared for Turlock Irrigation District, Turlock, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 6, 2010. Enz, T. and K. Bay. 2011. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Linden Ranch Wind Farm, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: June 30, 2010 - July 17, 2011. Prepared for EnXco. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. November 10, 2011. Enz, T., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and M. Kesterke. 2011. Bird and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study, Windy Flats and Windy Point II Wind Energy Projects, Klickitat County, Washington. Final Report: February 1, 2010 - January 14, 2011. Prepared for Windy Flats Partners, LLC, Goldendale, Washington. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 19, 2011. Enz, T., K. Bay, M. Sonnenberg, and A. Palochak. 2012. Post-Construction Monitoring Studies for the Combine Hills Turbine Ranch, Umatilla County, Oregon. Final Report: January 7 - December 2, 2011. Prepared for Eurus Energy America Corporation, San Diego, California. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Walla Walla, Washington. Erickson, W. P., G. D. Johnson, M. D. Strickland, and K. Kronner. 2000. Avian and Bat Mortality Associated with the Vansycle Wind Project, Umatilla County, Oregon: 1999 Study Year. Prepared for Umatilla County Department of Resource Services and Development, Pendleton, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., (WEST). February 7, 2000. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and R. Gritski. 2003. Nine Canyon Wind Power Project Avian and Bat Monitoring Report. September 2002 – August 2003. Prepared for the Nine Canyon Technical Advisory Committee and Energy Northwest by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. October 2003. Available online: http://www.west-inc.com/reports/nine_canyon_monitoring_final.pdf

WEST, Inc. 30 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Erickson, W. P., J. Jeffrey, K. Kronner, and K. Bay. 2004. Stateline Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Annual Report. July 2001 - December 2003. Technical report peer-reviewed by and submitted to FPL Energy, the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, and the Stateline Technical Advisory Committee. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. December 2004. Available online: http://www.west-inc.com/reports/swp_final_dec04.pdf Erickson, W. P. and L. Sharp. 2005. Phase 1 and Phase 1a Avian Mortality Monitoring Report for 2004- 2005 for the Smud Solano Wind Project. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), Sacramento, California. Prepared by URS Sacramento, California and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). August 2005. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and R. Gritski. 2005. Nine Canyon Wind Project Phase II, Fall 2004 Avian and Bat Monitoring Report: July 25 – November 2, 2004. Prepared for the Nine Canyon Technical Advisory Committee, Energy Northwest, by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. March 2005. Erickson, W. P., K. Kronner, and K. J. Bay. 2007. Stateline 2 Wind Project Wildlife Monitoring Report, January - December 2006. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy, the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, and the Stateline Technical Advisory Committee. Erickson, W. P., J. D. Jeffrey, and V. K. Poulton. 2008. Puget Sound Energy Wild Horse Wind Facility Avian and Bat Monitoring: First Annual Report: January–December, 2007. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Ellensburg, Washington. Prepared by by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 2008. ESRI. 2017. World Imagery and Aerial Photos. ArcGIS Resource Center. ESRI, producers of ArcGIS software. Redlands, California. Information online: http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1 Fagen Engineering, LLC. 2014. 2013 Avian and Bat Monitoring Annual Report: Big Blue Wind Farm, Blue Earth, Minnesota. Prepared for Big Blue Wind Farm. Prepared by Fagen Engineering, LLC. May 2014. Fagen Engineering, LLC. 2015. 2014 Avian and Bat Monitoring Annual Report: Big Blue Wind Farm, Blue Earth, Minnesota. Prepared for Big Blue Wind Farm. Prepared by Fagen Engineering, LLC. Fiedler, J. K., T. H. Henry, R. D. Tankersley, and C. P. Nicholson. 2007. Results of Bat and Bird Mortality Monitoring at the Expanded Buffalo Mountain Windfarm, 2005. Tennessee Valley Authority. June 28, 2007. Fishman Ecological Services LLC. 2003. Carcass Survey Results for Seawest Windpower, Inc., Condon Site 2002-2003. Prepared for SeaWest WindPower Inc. Golder Associates. 2010. Report on Fall Post-Construction Monitoring, Ripley Wind Power Project, Acciona Wind. Report Number 09-1126-0029. Submitted to Suncor Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta, and Acciona Wind Energy Canada, Toronto, Ontario. February 2010. Good, R. E., W. P. Erickson, A. Merrill, S. Simon, K. Murray, K. Bay, and C. Fritchman. 2011. Bat Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Energy Facility, Benton County, Indiana: April 13 - October 15, 2010. Prepared for Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. January 28, 2011.

WEST, Inc. 31 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Good, R. E., A. Merrill, S. Simon, K. Murray, and K. Bay. 2012. Bat Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm, Benton County, Indiana: April 1 - October 31, 2011. Prepared for the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 31, 2012. Good, R. E., M. Sonnenburg, and S. Simon. 2013a. Bat Evaluation Monitoring Studies at the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm, Benton County, Indiana: August 1 - October 15, 2012. Prepared for the Fowler Ridge Wind Farm. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. January 31, 2013. Good, R. E., M. L. Ritzert, and K. Adachi. 2013b. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Rail Splitter Wind Farm, Tazwell and Logan Counties, Illinois. Final Report: May 2012 - May 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. October 22, 2013. Good, R. E., J. P. Ritzert, and K. Adachi. 2013c. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Top Crop Wind Farm, Gundy and Lasalle Counties, Illinois. Final Report: May 2012 - May 2013. Prepared for EDP Renewables, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Bloomington, Indiana. October 22, 2013. Grehan, J. R. 2008. Steel Winds Bird Mortality Study, Final Report, Lackawanna, New York. Prepared for Steel Winds LLC. April 2008. Gritski, R., K. Kronner, and S. Downes. 2008. Leaning Juniper Wind Power Project, 2006 − 2008. Wildlife Monitoring Final Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp Energy, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. December 30, 2008. Gritski, R. and K. Kronner. 2010a. Hay Canyon Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring Study: May 2009 - May 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Hay Canyon Wind Power Project LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. September 20, 2010. Gritski, R. and K. Kronner. 2010b. Pebble Springs Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring Study: January 2009 - January 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), and the Pebble Springs Advisory Committee. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. April 20, 2010. Gritski, R., S. Downes, and K. Kronner. 2010. Klondike III (Phase 1) Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring: October 2007-October 2009. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon, for Klondike Wind Power III LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. April 21, 2010 (Updated September 2010). Gritski, R., S. Downes, and K. Kronner. 2011. Klondike IIIa (Phase 2) Wind Power Project Wildlife Monitoring: August 2008 - August 2010. Updated Final. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI), Portland, Oregon, for Klondike Wind Power III LLC. Prepared by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. Updated April 2011. Grodsky, S. M. and D. Drake. 2011. Assessing Bird and Bat Mortality at the Forward Energy Center. Final Report. Public Service Commission (PSC) of Wisconsin. PSC REF#:152052. Prepared for Forward Energy LLC. Prepared by Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin- Madison, Madison, Wisconsin. August 2011. Gruver, J., M. Sonnenberg, K. Bay, and W. Erickson. 2009. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study at the Blue Sky Green Field Wind Energy Center, Fond Du Lac County, Wisconsin July 21 - October 31, 2008 and March 15 - June 4, 2009. Unpublished report prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. December 17, 2009.

WEST, Inc. 32 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Harvey & Associates. 2013. Montezuma II Wind Energy Center: Post Construction Monitoring Report, Year- 1. Prepared by NextEra Montezuma II Wind, LLC, Juno Beach, Florida. Prepared by H.T. Harvey & Associates, Los Gatos, California. September 3, 2013. Hein, C. D., A. Prichard, T. Mabee, and M. R. Schirmacher. 2013a. Avian and Bat Post-Construction Monitoring at the Pinnacle Wind Farm, Mineral County, West Virginia, 2012. Final Report. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, and ABR, Inc., Forest Grove, Oregon. April 2013. Hein, C. D., A. Prichard, T. Mabee, and M. R. Schirmacher. 2013b. Effectiveness of an Operational Mitigation Experiment to Reduce Bat Fatalities at the Pinnacle Wind Farm, Mineral County, West Virginia, 2012. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, and ABR, Inc., Forest Grove, Oregon. April 2013. Homer, C. G., J. A. Dewitz, L. Yang, S. Jin, P. Danielson, G. Xian, J. Coulston, N. D. Herold, J. D. Wickham, and K. Megown. 2015. Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States-Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 81(5): 345-354. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php Howe, R. W., W. Evans, and A. T. Wolf. 2002. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeastern Wisconsin. Prepared by University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, for Wisconsin Public Service Corporation and Madison Gas and Electric Company, Madison, Wisconsin. November 21, 2002. 104 pp. ICF International. 2012. Montezuma Wind LLC (Montezuma I) 2011 Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources. Prepared by ICF International, Sacramento, California. May 17, 2012. ICF International. 2013. Montezuma Wind LLC (Montezuma I) 2012 Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources. Prepared by ICF International, Sacramento, California. May 2013. Insignia Environmental. 2009. 2008/2009 Annual Report for the Buena Vista Avian and Bat Monitoring Project. Prepared for Contra Costa County, Martinez, California. Prepared by Insignia Environmental, Palo Alto, California. September 4, 2009. Jacques Whitford Stantec Limited (Jacques Whitford). 2009. Ripley Wind Power Project Postconstruction Monitoring Report. Project No. 1037529.01. Report to Suncor Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta, and Acciona Energy Products Inc., Calgary, Alberta. Prepared for the Ripley Wind Power Project Post-Construction Monitoring Program. Prepared by Jacques Whitford, Markham, Ontario. April 30, 2009. Jain, A. 2005. Bird and Bat Behavior and Mortality at a Northern Iowa Windfarm. Thesis. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slobodnik. 2007. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study – 2006. Final Report. Prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slobodnik. 2009a. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2007. Final report prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. May 6, 2009.

WEST, Inc. 33 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, and M. Lehman. 2009b. Maple Ridge Wind Power Avian and Bat Fatality Study Report - 2008. Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Post- construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc, Horizon Energy, and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. May 14, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, J. Quant, and D. Pursell. 2009c. Annual Report for the Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, J. Histed, and J. Meacham. 2009d. Annual Report for the Noble Clinton Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, L. Slobodnik, A. Fuerst, and C. Hansen. 2009e. Annual Report for the Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC, Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2008. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC. April 13, 2009. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2010a. Annual Report for the Noble Clinton Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 9, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2010b. Annual Report for the Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 14, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, A. Fuerst, and A. Harte. 2010c. Annual Report for the Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2009. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. March 9, 2010. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2011a. Annual Report for the Noble Altona Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and K. Russell. 2011b. Annual Report for the Noble Chateaugay Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, L. Slobodnik, R. Curry, and A. Harte. 2011c. Annual Report for the Noble Wethersfield Windpark, LLC: Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2010. Prepared for Noble Environmental Power, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May, New Jersey. January 22, 2011. 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. January 2008.

WEST, Inc. 34 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Jeffrey, J. D., W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, M. Sonneberg, J. Baker, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2009a. Horizon Wind Energy, Elkhorn Valley Wind Project, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, First Annual Report, January-December 2008. Technical report prepared for Telocaset Wind Power Partners, a subsidiary of Horizon Wind Energy, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. May 4, 2009. Jeffrey, J. D., K. Bay, W. P. Erickson, M. Sonneberg, J. Baker, M. Kesterke, J. R. Boehrs, and A. Palochak. 2009b. Portland General Electric Biglow Canyon Wind Farm Phase I Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring First Annual Report, Sherman County, Oregon. January 2008 - December 2008. Technical report prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST) Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. April 29, 2009. Johnson, G., W. Erickson, and J. White. 2003. Avian and Bat Mortality During the First Year of Operation at the Klondike Phase I Wind Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Technical report prepared for Northwestern Wind Power, Goldendale, Washington, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. March 2003. Johnson, G. D., W. P. Erickson, M. D. Strickland, M. F. Shepherd, and D. A. Shepherd. 2000. Final Report: Avian Monitoring Studies at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota: Results of a 4- Year Study. Final report prepared for Northern States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. September 22, 2000. 212 pp. Johnson, G. D., M. K. Perlik, W. P. Erickson, and M. D. Strickland. 2004. Bat Activity, Composition and Collision Mortality at a Large Wind Plant in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32(4): 1278-1288. Johnson, G. D., M. Ritzert, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2010a. Bird and Bat Fatality Studies, Fowler Ridge I Wind-Energy Facility Benton County, Indiana. Unpublished report prepared for British Petroleum Wind Energy North America Inc. (BPWENA) by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). Johnson, G. D., M. Ritzert, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2010b. Bird and Bat Fatality Studies, Fowler Ridge III Wind-Energy Facility, Benton County, Indiana. April 2 - June 10, 2009. Prepared for BP Wind Energy North America. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. Kerlinger, P. 2002a. An Assessment of the Impacts of Green Mountain Power Corporation’s Wind Power Facility on Breeding and Migrating Birds in Searsburg, Vermont: July 1996-July 1998. NREL/SR- 500-28591. Prepared for Vermont Public Service, Montpelier, Vermont. US Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado. March 2002. 95 pp. Available online: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/28591.pdf Kerlinger, P. 2002b. Avian Fatality Study at the Madison Wind Power Project, Madison, New York. Report to PG&E Generating. Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Jain, C. Wilkerson, B. Fischer, and A. Hasch. 2006. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Study for the High Winds Wind Power Project, Solano County, California: Two Year Report. Prepared for High Winds LLC, FPL Energy. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, MacLean, Virginia. April 2006. Available online: http://www.co.solano.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8915 Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, and J. Guarnaccia. 2007. Migratory Bird and Bat Monitoring Study at the Crescent Ridge Wind Power Project, Bureau County, Illinois: September 2005 - August 2006. Final draft prepared for Orrick Herrington and Sutcliffe, LLP. May 2007.

WEST, Inc. 35 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Hasch, and A. Jain. 2009. Revised Post-Construction Avian Monitoring Study for the Shiloh I Wind Power Project, Solano County, California. Final Report: October 2009. Third Year Report (Revised 2010). Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (IRI). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC., McLean, Virginia. Available online: https://www.solanocounty.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8914 Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, L. Culp, A. Hasch, and A. Jain. 2010. Post-Construction Avian Monitoring Study for the Shiloh II Wind Power Project, Solano County, California. Year One Report. Prepared for enXco Development Inc. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. September 2010. Available online: https://www.solanocounty.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=12118 Kerlinger, P., J. Guarnaccia, L. Slobodnik, and R. Curry. 2011a. A Comparison of Bat Mortality in Farmland and Forested Habitats at the Noble Bliss and Wethersfield Windparks, Wyoming County, New York. Report Prepared for Noble Environmental Power. Report prepared by Curry & Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May Point, New Jersey. November 2011. Kerlinger, P., D. S. Reynolds, J. Guarnaccia, L. Slobodnik, and R. Curry. 2011b. An Examination of the Relationship between Bat Abundance and Fatalities at the Noble Altona Windpark, Clinton County, New York. Report prepared for Noble Environmental Power. Report prepared by Curry & Kerlinger, LLC, Cape May Point, New Jersey, and North East Ecological Services. December 2011. Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, J. Guarnaccia, and D. Riser-Espinoza. 2013a. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Studies at the Shiloh II Wind Project, LLC, Solano County, California. Final Report. Prepared for EDF Renewable Energy (formerly known as enXco). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. December 2012 (Revised June 2013). Kerlinger, P., R. Curry, A. Hasch, J. Guarnaccia, and D. Riser-Espinoza. 2013b. Post-Construction Bird and Bat Studies at the Shiloh III Wind Project, LLC, Solano County, California. Report on Year 1 Results. Prepared for EDF Renewable Energy (formerly known as enXco). Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. August 2013. Kerlinger, P., J. Guarnaccia, R. Curry, and C. J. Vogel. 2014. Bird and Bat Fatality Study, Heritage Garden I Wind Farm, Delta County, Michigan: 2012-2014. Prepared for Heritage Sustainable Energy, LLC. Prepared by Curry and Kerlinger, LLC, McLean, Virginia. November 2014. Kerns, J. and P. Kerlinger. 2004. A Study of Bird and Bat Collision Fatalities at the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, Tucker County, West Virginia: Annual Report for 2003. Prepared for FPL Energy and the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center Technical Review Committee. February 14, 2004. 39 pp. Kronner, K., B. Gritski, and S. Downes. 2008. Big Horn Wind Power Project Wildlife Fatality Monitoring Study: 2006−2007. Final report prepared for PPM Energy and the Big Horn Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee by Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Mid-Columbia Field Office, Goldendale, Washington. June 1, 2008. Martin, C., E. Arnett, and M. Wallace. 2013. Evaluating Bird and Bat Post-Construction Impacts at the Sheffield Wind Facility, Vermont: 2012 Annual Report. Prepared for Bat Conservation International and First Wind. Prepared by Department of Natural Resources Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. March 25, 2013. Miller, A. 2008. Patterns of Avian and Bat Mortality at a Utility-Scaled Wind Farm on the Southern High Plains. Thesis. Texas Tech University.

WEST, Inc. 36 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). 2012. Lakefield Wind Project Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring. MPUC Site Permit Quarterly Report and USFWS Special Purpose – Utility (Avian Take Monitoring) 30-Day Report: April 1 – September 30, 2012. USFWS Permit No: MB70161A-0; MDNR Permit No: 17930; MPUC Permit No: IP-6829/WS-09-1239, Permit Special Condition VII.B. October 15, 2012. Natural Resource Solutions Inc. (NRSI). 2011. Harrow Wind Farm 2010 Post-Construction Monitoring Report. Project No. 0953. Prepared for International Power Canada, Inc., Markham, Ontario. Prepared by NRSI. August 2011. New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2008a. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Periodic Report Covering Work Conducted between 1 August and 30 September 2008. Submitted to New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, New Jersey Clean Energy Program, Newark, New Jersey. Submitted by New Jersey Audubon Society, Center for Research and Education, Cape May Court House, New Jersey. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/Wind/ACUA_Interim%20Report_Ja n-Sep08_all.pdf New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2008b. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Periodic Report Covering Work Conducted between 20 July and 31 December 2007. Submitted to New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, New Jersey Clean Energy Program, Newark, New Jersey. Submitted by New Jersey Audubon Society, Center for Research and Education, Cape May Court House, New Jersey. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/CORE/ACUAReportwithimages123 107LowRes.pdf New Jersey Audubon Society (NJAS). 2009. Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring at the Atlantic City Utilities Authority - Jersey Atlantic Wind Power Facility: Project Status Report IV. Available online: http://www.njcleanenergy.com/files/file/Renewable_Programs/Wind/ACUA_Quarterly%20report_t o-date_Jan-Aug09_1c.pdf Nicholson, C. P., R. D. Tankersley, Jr., J. K. Fiedler, and N. S. Nicholas. 2005. Assessment and Prediction of Bird and Bat Mortality at Wind Energy Facilities in the Southeastern United States. Final Report. Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2010. Stetson Mountain II Wind Project Year 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Mortality Monitoring Study, T8 R4 Nbpp, Maine. Prepared for First Wind, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Falmouth, Maine. December 2, 2010. Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2011. Year 3 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Casualty Monitoring at the Stetson I Wind Farm, T8 R4 Nbpp, Maine. Prepared for First Wind Energy, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Falmouth, Maine. December 2011. North American Datum (NAD). 1983. Nad83 Geodetic Datum. Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC) and Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2007. Avian and Bat Monitoring Report for the Klondike II Wind Power Project. Sherman County, Oregon. Prepared for PPM Energy, Portland, Oregon. Managed and conducted by NWC, Pendleton, Oregon. Analysis conducted by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. July 17, 2007. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2016. State Listed Wildlife Species. Accessed October 2016. Available online at: http://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/species-and-habitats/state-listed-species

WEST, Inc. 37 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2009. On-Shore Bird and Bat Pre- and Post Construction Protocol for Commercial Wind Energy Facilities in Ohio. Last accessed on October 2017. Available online at: https://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/portals/wildlife/pdfs/species%20and%20habitats/windwildlifemonitoring protocol.pdf Osborn, R. G., K. F. Higgins, C. D. Dieter, and R. E. Usgaard. 1996. Bat Collisions with Wind Turbines in Southwestern Minnesota. Bat Research News 37: 105-108. Osborn, R. G., K. F. Higgins, R. E. Usgaard, C. D. Dieter, and R. G. Neiger. 2000. Bird Mortality Associated with Wind Turbines at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota. American Midland Naturalist 143: 41-52. Piorkowski, M. D. and T. J. O’Connell. 2010. Spatial Pattern of Summer Bat Mortality from Collisions with Wind Turbines in Mixed-Grass Prairie. American Midland Naturalist 164: 260-269. Poulton, V. and W. P. Erickson. 2010. Post-Construction Bat and Bird Fatality Study, Judith Gap Wind Farm, Wheatland County, Montana. Final Report: Results from June-October 2009 Study and Comparison with 2006-2007 Study. Prepared for Judith Gap Energy, LLC. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. March 2010. Reynolds, R. T., J. M. Scott, and R. A. Nussbaum. 1980. A Variable Circular-Plot Method for Estimating Bird Numbers. Condor 82(3): 309-313. Sapphos Environmental, Inc. (Sapphos). 2014. Pacific Wind Energy Project: Year I Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring Report. Prepared for Pacific Wind, LLC, San Diego, California. Prepared by Sapphos, Pasadena, California. September 15, 2014. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2008. 2007 Spring, Summer, and Fall Post-Construction Bird and Bat Mortality Study at the Mars Hill Wind Farm, Maine. Prepared for UPC Wind Management, LLC, Cumberland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec (formerly Woodlot Alternatives, Inc.), Topsham, Maine. January 2008. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009a. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Mars Hill Wind Farm, Maine - Year 2, 2008. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. January 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009b. Post-Construction Monitoring at the Munnsville Wind Farm, New York: 2008. Prepared for E.ON Climate and Renewables, Austin, Texas. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. January 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2009c. Stetson I Mountain Wind Project: Year 1 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2009 for the Stetson Mountain Wind Project in Penobscot and Washington Counties, Maine. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC. Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. December 2009. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2010. Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms Year 1 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2009, for the Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms in Cohocton, New York. Prepared for Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC and Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. January 2010. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2011a. Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms Year 2 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2010, for the Cohocton and Dutch Hill Wind Farms in Cohocton, New York. Prepared for Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC, and Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. October 2011.

WEST, Inc. 38 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2011b. Post-Construction Monitoring 2010 Final Annual Report – Year 1, Milford Wind Corridor Phase I, Milford, Utah. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. August 2011. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2012a. 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Report, Kibby Wind Power Project, Franklin County, Maine. Prepared for TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc., North Walpole, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2012. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2012b. Post-Construction Monitoring 2011 - 2012, Milford Wind Corridor Phase I and II, Milford, Utah. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. May 2012. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013a. Palouse Wind Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, 2012-2013. Prepared for Palouse Wind, Whitman County, Washington. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. December 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013b. Record Hill Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for Record Hill Wind LLC, Lyme, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013c. Rollins Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013d. Steel Winds I and II Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012, Lackwanna and Hamburg, New York. Prepared for First Wind Management, LLC, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. April 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2013e. Stetson II Wind Project Post-Construction Monitoring Report, 2012. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. March 2013. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2014. Stetson I Wind Project 2013 Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, Year 5. Stetson I Wind Project, Washington County, Maine. Prepared for First Wind, Portland, Maine. Prepared by Stantec, Topsham, Maine. February 2014. Stantec Consulting, Inc. (Stantec). 2015. Record Hill Wind Project Year 2 Post-Construction Wildlife Monitoring Report, 2014. Prepared for Record Hill Wind LLC and Wagner Forest Management, Ltd., Lyme, New Hampshire. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Topsham, Maine. March 2015. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2008. Melancthon I Wind Plant Post-Construction Bird and Bat Monitoring Report: 2007. File No. 160960220. Prepared for Canadian Hydro Developers, Inc., Guelph, Ontario. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. June 2008. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2010a. Wolfe Island Ecopower Centre Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 1: May - June 2009. File No. 160960494. Prepared for Canadian Hydro Developers, Inc.’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. February 2010. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2010b. Wolfe Island Ecopower Centre Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 2: July - December 2009. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. May 2010.

WEST, Inc. 39 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011a. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Follow-up Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 3: January - June 2010. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. January 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011b. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 4: July - December 2010. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. July 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2011c. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Followup Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 5: January - June 2011. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. December 2011. Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec Ltd.). 2012. Wolfe Island Wind Plant Post-Construction Follow-up Plan. Bird and Bat Resources Monitoring Report No. 6: July-December 2011. File No. 160960494. Prepared for TransAlta Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiary, Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation. Prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., Guelph, Ontario. July 2012. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec Consulting). 2012. Post-Construction Monitoring, Summer 2011 - Spring 2012. Year 1 Annual Report. Kittitas Valley Wind Power Project, Cle Elum, Washington. Prepared for Sagebrush Power Partners, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Stantec Consulting, Salt Lake City, Utah. Tetra Tech. 2013. Spruce Mountain Wind Project Post-Construction Bird and Bat Fatality and Raptor Monitoring: Year 1 Annual Report. Prepared for Patriot Renewables. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Portland, Maine. May 2013. Thompson, J., D. Solick, and K. Bay. 2011. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Dry Lake Phase I Wind Project. Iberdrola Renewables: September 2009 - November 2010. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 10, 2011. Thompson, J. and K. Bay. 2012. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Dry Lake II Wind Project: February 2011 – February 2012. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Portland, Oregon. Prepared by Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. June 6, 2012. Tidhar, D., W. Tidhar, and M. Sonnenberg. 2010. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for Lempster Wind Project, Iberdrola Renewables. Prepared for Lempster Wind, LLC, Lempster Wind Technical Advisory Committee, and Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. September 30, 2010. Tidhar, D., W. L. Tidhar, L. McManus, and Z. Courage. 2011. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Lempster Wind Project, Lempster, New Hampshire. Prepared for Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. and the Lempster Wind Technical Committee. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., Waterbury, Vermont. May 18, 2011. Tidhar, D., L. McManus, Z. Courage, and W. L. Tidhar. 2012a. 2010 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Study and Bat Acoustic Study for the High Sheldon Wind Farm, Wyoming County, New York. Final Report: April 15 - November 15, 2010. Prepared for High Sheldon Wind Farm, Sheldon Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. April 15, 2012.

WEST, Inc. 40 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Tidhar, D., L. McManus, D. Solick, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2012b. 2011 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Study and Bat Acoustic Study for the High Sheldon Wind Farm, Wyoming County, New York. Final Report: April 15 - November 15, 2011. Prepared for High Sheldon Wind Farm, Sheldon Energy LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Waterbury, Vermont. April 25, 2012. Tidhar, D., M. Sonnenberg, and D. P. Young, Jr. 2013a. 2012 Post-Construction Carcass Monitoring Study for the Beech Ridge Wind Farm, Greenbrier County, West Virginia. Final Report: April 1 - October 28, 2012. Prepared for Beech Ridge Wind Farm, Beech Ridge Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), NE/Mid-Atlantic Branch, Waterbury, Vermont. January 18, 2013. Tidhar, D., J. Ritzert, M. Sonnenberg, M. Lout, and K. Bay. 2013b. 2012 Post-Construction Fatality Monitoring Study for the Maple Ridge Wind Farm, Lewis County, New York. Final Report: July 12 - October 15, 2012. Prepared for EDP Renewables North, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), NE/Mid-Atlantic Branch, Waterbury, Vermont. February 12, 2013. Tierney, R. 2007. Buffalo Gap I Wind Farm Avian Mortality Study: February 2006-January 2007. Final Survey Report. Prepared for AES SeaWest, Inc. TRC, Albuquerque, New Mexico. TRC Report No. 110766-C-01. May 2007. Tierney, R. 2009. Buffalo Gap 2 Wind Farm Avian Mortality Study: July 2007 - December 2008. Final Survey Report. Submitted by TRC, Albuquerque, New Mexico. TRC Report No. 151143-B-01. June 2009. TRC Environmental Corporation. 2008. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Fatality Monitoring and Grassland Bird Displacement Surveys at the Judith Gap Wind Energy Project, Wheatland County, Montana. Prepared for Judith Gap Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. TRC Environmental Corporation, Laramie, Wyoming. TRC Project 51883-01 (112416). January 2008. URS Corporation. 2010a. Final Goodnoe Hills Wind Project Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 16, 2010. URS Corporation. 2010b. Final Marengo I Wind Project Year One Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 22, 2010. URS Corporation. 2010c. Final Marengo II Wind Project Year One Avian Mortality Monitoring Report. Prepared for PacifiCorp, Salt Lake City, Utah. Prepared by URS Corporation, Seattle, Washington. March 22, 2010. US Fish and Wildlife Service, (USFWS). 2016. Bald and Golden Eagles: Population Demographics and Estimation of Sustainable Take in the United States, 2016 Update. Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington D.C., USA. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2003. USFWS Migratory Bird Permit Memorandum 2003. http://www.fws.gov/permits/mbpermits/Memorandums/Abatement%20Activities%20Using%20Ra ptors.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011a. Draft Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance. January 2011.

WEST, Inc. 41 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011b. Use of Endangered Species Act Section 10 Permits to Provide Bald and Golden Eagle Act Authorization for Incidental Take of Bald Eagles and Golden Eagles. Memorandum to Regional Directors Regions 1-8; Assistant Director, Migratory Birds; Assistant Director, Endangered Species; Assistant Director, Fisheries and Habitat Conservation; and Chief, Office of Law Enforcement. March 10, 2011. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2012. Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines. March 23, 2012. 82 pp. Available online: http://www.fws.gov/cno/pdf/Energy/2012_Wind_Energy_Guidelines_final.pdf US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance: Module 1 - Land-Based Wind Energy, Version 2. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management. April 2013. Executive Summary and frontmatter + 103 pp. Available online: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/eagleconservationplanguidance.pdf US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Data (NLCD). 2011. National Land Cover Database NLCD, Muti-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (Mrlc). USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (Eros) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Information available online at: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_leg.php US Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD). 2011. National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011). Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC), National Land Cover Database (NLCD). USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Available online: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php; Legend: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_leg.php Ventus Environmental Solutions (Ventus). 2012. Vantage Wind Energy Center Avian and Bat Monitoring Study: March 2011- March 2012. Prepared for Vantage Wind Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Ventus, Portland, Oregon. May 16, 2012. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2006. Diablo Winds Wildlife Monitoring Progress Report, March 2005 - February 2006. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy and Alameda County California. WEST. Cheyenne, Wyoming. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2008. Diablo Winds Wildlife Monitoring Progress Report: March 2005 – February 2007. Prepared by WEST, Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 2008. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST). 2011. Post-Construction Fatality Surveys for the Barton Chapel Wind Project: Iberdrola Renewables. Version: July 2011. Iberdrola Renewables, Portland, Oregon. Whitfield, D. P. and M. Madders. 2005. Flight Height in the Hen Harrier Circus Cyaneus and Its Incorporation in Wind Turbine Collision Risk Modelling. October 2005. Natural Research Information Note 2. Natural Research Ltd., Banchory, United Kingdom. Young, D. P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, R. E. Good, M. D. Strickland, and G. D. Johnson. 2003. Avian and Bat Mortality Associated with the Initial Phase of the Foote Creek Rim Windpower Project, Carbon County, Wyoming, Final Report, November 1998 - June 2002. Prepared for Pacificorp, Inc. Portland, Oregon, SeaWest Windpower Inc. San Diego, California, and Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins District Office, Rawlins, Wyoming. January 10, 2003. Available online: http://west-inc.com/reports/fcr_final_mortality.pdf

WEST, Inc. 42 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Young, D. P., Jr., J. Jeffrey, W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, V. K. Poulton, K. Kronner, R. Gritski, and J. Baker. 2006. Eurus Combine Hills Turbine Ranch. Phase 1 Post Construction Wildlife Monitoring First Annual Report: February 2004 - February 2005. Technical report prepared for Eurus Energy America Corporation, San Diego, California, and the Combine Hills Technical Advisory Committee, Umatilla County, Oregon. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla Washington, and Northwest Wildlife Consultants, Inc. (NWC), Pendleton, Oregon. February 21, 2006. Available online: http://wind.nrel.gov/public/library/young7.pdf Young, D. P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, J. Jeffrey, and V. K. Poulton. 2007. Puget Sound Energy Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Phase 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring First Annual Report, January - December 2006. Technical report for Puget Sound Energy, Dayton, Washington and Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee, Columbia County, Washington. Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. 25 pp. Young, D. P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2009a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: March - June 2009. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 17, 2009. Young, D. P., Jr., J. D. Jeffrey, K. Bay, and W. P. Erickson. 2009b. Puget Sound Energy Hopkins Ridge Wind Project, Phase 1, Columbia County, Washington. Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, Second Annual Report: January - December, 2008. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Dayton, Washington, and the Hopkins Ridge Wind Project Technical Advisory Committee, Columbia County, Washington. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Walla Walla, Washington. May 20, 2009. Young, D. P., Jr., W. P. Erickson, K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2009c. Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Phase 1 Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring, July - October 2008. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 17, 2009. Young, D. P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2010a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: April - July 2010. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 27, 2010. Young, D. P., Jr., K. Bay, S. Nomani, and W. Tidhar. 2010b. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2009. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 12, 2010. Young, D. P., Jr., S. Nomani, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2011a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: April - July 2011. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. August 29, 2011. Young, D. P., Jr., S. Nomani, W. Tidhar, and K. Bay. 2011b. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2010. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 10, 2011.

WEST, Inc. 43 January 8, 2018 Timber Road IV Avian Use Surveys Confidential Business Information

Young, D. P., Jr., S. Nomani, Z. Courage, and K. Bay. 2012a. Nedpower Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, Post-Construction Avian and Bat Monitoring: July - October 2011. Prepared for NedPower Mount Storm, LLC, Houston, Texas. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology (WEST), Inc., Cheyenne, Wyoming. February 27, 2012. Young, D. P., Jr., M. Lout, Z. Courage, S. Nomani, and K. Bay. 2012b. 2011 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland: April - November 2011. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. April 20, 2012. Revised November 25, 2013. Young, D. P., Jr., C. Nations, M. Lout, and K. Bay. 2013. 2012 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland. April - November 2012. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. January 15, 2013. Young, D. P., Jr., M. Lout, L. McManus, and K. Bay. 2014a. 2013 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Beech Ridge Wind Energy Project, Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia. Final Report: April 1 - November 15, 2013. Prepared for Beech Ridge Energy, LLC, Chicago, Illinois. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Burlington, Vermont. January 28, 2014. Young, D. P., Jr., M. Kauffman, M. Lout, and K. Bay. 2014b. 2013 Post-Construction Monitoring Study, Criterion Wind Project, Garrett County, Maryland. April - November 2013. Prepared for Criterion Power Partners, LLC, Oakland, Maryland. Prepared by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST), Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Waterbury, Vermont. February 18, 2014.

WEST, Inc. 44 January 8, 2018

Appendix A. Summary1 of individual and group observations in all seasons by species and bird type for 60-minute fixed-point count large bird use surveys conducted at the proposed Timber Road IV Wind Farm from November 2, 2016, to October 30, 2017. Spring Summer Fall Winter Overall Bird Species Scientific Name # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs # grps # obs Waterbirds 4 4 9 10 6 6 1 1 20 21 great blue heron Ardea herodias 4 4 9 10 6 6 1 1 20 21 Waterfowl 28 106 8 46 10 132 35 2011 81 2295 Canada goose Branta canadensis 9 49 4 34 9 125 28 1831 50 2039 mallard Anas platyrhynchos 15 48 3 9 0 0 4 136 22 193 snow goose Chen caerulescens 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 1 6 unidentified duck NA 2 5 1 3 1 7 2 38 6 53 wood duck Aix sponsa 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 Shorebirds 104 240 67 122 44 309 18 52 233 723 killdeer Charadrius vociferus 104 240 67 122 43 308 18 52 232 722 upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Diurnal Raptors 34 36 38 42 82 93 53 55 207 226 Accipiters 0 0 0 0 4 5 1 1 5 6 Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 3 3 unidentified accipiter Accipiter spp 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 2 3 Buteos 20 22 16 18 24 27 16 17 76 84 red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis 20 22 16 18 24 27 16 17 76 84 Northern Harrier 8 8 9 9 29 29 20 20 66 66 northern harrier Circus cyaneus 8 8 9 9 29 29 20 20 66 66 Eagles 1 1 3 3 9 11 4 4 17 19 bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 1 1 3 3 9 11 4 4 17 19 Falcons 4 4 7 8 16 21 12 13 39 46 American kestrel Falco sparverius 4 4 6 7 14 19 12 13 36 43 peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 2 unidentified falcon Falco spp 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Osprey 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 osprey Pandion haliaetus 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 Other Raptors 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 unidentified hawk NA 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 unidentified raptor NA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Vultures 23 48 68 141 23 137 1 1 115 327 turkey vulture Cathartes aura 23 48 68 141 23 137 1 1 115 327 Doves/Pigeons 26 253 31 90 23 89 29 765 109 1197 mourning dove Zenaida macroura 18 30 30 60 20 49 14 123 82 262 rock pigeon Columba livia 8 223 1 30 3 40 15 642 27 935 Large Corvids 5 5 1 1 6 150 10 23 22 179

Appendix B. North American Fatality Summary Tables

Appendix B. All bird and raptor fatality estimates (birds/megawatt [MW]/year) and habitat types for North American wind energy facilities. Bird Raptor Fatalities Fatalities Project Predominant Habitat Type Citation (birds/MW/ (raptors/MW/ year) year) Alite, CA (2009-2010) 0.55 0.12 Shrub/scrub and grassland Chatfield et al. 2010 Alta Wind I, CA (2011-2012) 7.07 0.27 Woodland, grassland, shrubland Chatfield et al. 2012 Alta Wind I-V, CA (2013-2014) 7.8 0.08 NA Chatfield et al. 2014 Alta Wind II-V, CA (2011-2012) 1.66 0.05 Desert scrub Chatfield et al. 2012 Alta VIII, CA (2012-2013) 0.66 0.02 Grassland and riparian Chatfield and Bay 2014 Barton I & II, IA (2010-2011) 5.5 0 Agriculture Derby et al. 2011b Barton Chapel, TX (2009-2010) 1.15 0.25 Agriculture/forest WEST 2011 Beech Ridge, WV (2012) 1.19 0.01 Forest Tidhar et al. 2013a Beech Ridge, WV (2013) 1.48 0.01 Forest Young et al. 2014a Big Blue, MN (2013) 0.6 0 Agriculture Fagen Engineering 2014 Big Blue, MN (2014) 0.37 0 Agriculture Fagen Engineering 2015 Big Horn, WA (2006-2007) 2.54 0.11 Agriculture/grassland Kronner et al. 2008 Big Smile, OK (2012-2013) 0.09 0 Grassland, agriculture Derby et al. 2013b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 2008) 1.76 0.03 Agriculture/grassland Jeffrey et al. 2009b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 2009) 2.47 0 Agriculture/grassland Enk et al. 2010 Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 2009-2010) 5.53 0.14 Agriculture Enk et al. 2011b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 2010-2011) 2.68 0.03 Grassland/shrub-steppe, agriculture Enk et al. 2012b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase III; 2010-2011) 2.28 0.05 Grassland/shrub-steppe, agriculture Enk et al. 2012a Blue Sky Green Field, WI (2008; 2009) 7.17 0 Agriculture Gruver et al. 2009 Buffalo Gap I, TX (2006) 1.32 0.1 Grassland Tierney 2007 Buffalo Gap II, TX (2007-2008) 0.15 0 Forest Tierney 2009 Buffalo Mountain, TN (2000-2003) 11.02 0 Forest Nicholson et al. 2005 Buffalo Mountain, TN (2005) 1.1 0 Forest Fiedler et al. 2007 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 1996) 4.14 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 1997) 2.51 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 1998) 3.14 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 1999) 1.43 0.47 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 1998) 2.47 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 1999) 3.57 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2000 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; 1999) 5.93 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2004 Buffalo Ridge I, SD (2009-2010) 5.06 0.2 Agriculture/grassland Derby et al. 2010d Buffalo Ridge II, SD (2011-2012) 1.99 0 Agriculture, grassland Derby et al. 2012a Casselman, PA (2008) 1.51 0 Forest Arnett et al. 2009b Casselman, PA (2009) 2.88 0 Forest, pasture, grassland Arnett et al. 2010 Cedar Ridge, WI (2009) 6.55 0.18 Agriculture BHE Environmental 2010

Appendix B. All bird and raptor fatality estimates (birds/megawatt [MW]/year) and habitat types for North American wind energy facilities. Bird Raptor Fatalities Fatalities Project Predominant Habitat Type Citation (birds/MW/ (raptors/MW/ year) year) Cedar Ridge, WI (2010) 3.72 0.13 Agriculture BHE Environmental 2011 Cohocton/Dutch Hill, NY (2009) 1.39 0 Agriculture/forest Stantec 2010 Cohocton/Dutch Hills, NY (2010) 1.32 0.08 Agriculture, forest Stantec 2011a Combine Hills, OR (Phase I; 2004-2005) 2.56 0 Agriculture/grassland Young et al. 2006 Combine Hills, OR (2011) 2.33 0.05 Grassland/shrub-steppe, agriculture Enz et al. 2012 Criterion, MD (2011) 6.4 0.02 Forest, agriculture Kerlinger et al. 2007 Criterion, MD (2012) 2.14 NA Forest, agriculture Young et al. 2012b Criterion, MD (2013) 3.49 NA Forest, agriculture Young et al. 2013 Diablo Winds, CA (2005-2007) 4.29 0.4 NA Young et al. 2014b Dillon, CA (2008-2009) 4.71 0 Desert Derby et al. 2010b Dry Lake I, AZ (2009-2010) 2.02 0 Desert grassland/forested WEST 2006, 2008 Dry Lake II, AZ (2011-2012) 1.57 0 Desert grassland/forested Chatfield et al. 2009 Elkhorn, OR (2008) 0.64 0.06 Shrub/scrub & agriculture Thompson et al. 2011 Elkhorn, OR (2010) 1.95 0.08 Shrub/scrub & agriculture Thompson and Bay 2012 Elm Creek, MN (2009-2010) 1.55 0 Agriculture Jeffrey et al. 2009a Elm Creek II, MN (2011-2012) 3.64 0 Agriculture, grassland Enk et al. 2011a Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 1999) 3.4 0.08 Grassland Derby et al. 2010e Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 2000) 2.42 0.05 Grassland Derby et al. 2012b Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 2001-02) 1.93 0 Grassland Young et al. 2003 Fowler I, IN (2009) 2.83 0 Agriculture Johnson et al. 2010a Goodnoe, WA (2009-2010) 1.4 0.17 Grassland and shrub-steppe URS Corporation 2010a Grand Ridge I, IL (2009-2010) 0.48 0 Agriculture Derby et al. 2010a Harvest Wind, WA (2010-2012) 2.94 0.23 Grassland/shrub-steppe Downes and Gritski 2012a Hay Canyon, OR (2009-2010) 2.21 0 Agriculture Gritski and Kronner 2010a High Sheldon, NY (2010) 1.76 0.06 Agriculture Tidhar et al. 2012a High Sheldon, NY (2011) 1.57 0 Agriculture Tidhar et al. 2012b High Winds, CA (2003-2004) 1.62 0.5 Agriculture/grassland Kerlinger et al. 2006 High Winds, CA (2004-2005) 1.1 0.28 Agriculture/grassland Kerlinger et al. 2006 Hopkins Ridge, WA (2006) 1.23 0.14 Agriculture/grassland Young et al. 2007 Hopkins Ridge, WA (2008) 2.99 0.07 Agriculture/grassland Young et al. 2009b Kewaunee County, WI (1999-2001) 1.95 0 Agriculture Howe et al. 2002 Stantec Consulting Services Kittitas Valley, WA (2011-2012) 1.06 0.09 Sagebrush-steppe, grassland 2012 Klondike, OR (2002-2003) 0.95 0 Agriculture/grassland Johnson et al. 2003 Klondike II, OR (2005-2006) 3.14 0.06 Agriculture/grassland NWC and WEST 2007

Appendix B. All bird and raptor fatality estimates (birds/megawatt [MW]/year) and habitat types for North American wind energy facilities. Bird Raptor Fatalities Fatalities Project Predominant Habitat Type Citation (birds/MW/ (raptors/MW/ year) year) Klondike III (Phase I), OR (2007-2009) 3.02 0.15 Agriculture/grassland Gritski et al. 2010 Grassland/shrub-steppe and Gritski et al. 2011 Klondike IIIa (Phase II), OR (2008-2010) 2.61 0.06 agriculture Leaning Juniper, OR (2006-2008) 6.66 0.16 Agriculture Gritski et al. 2008 Lempster, NH (2009) 3.38 0 Grasslands/forest/rocky embankments Tidhar et al. 2010 Lempster, NH (2010) 2.64 0 Grasslands/forest/rocky embankments Tidhar et al. 2011 Linden Ranch, WA (2010-2011) 6.65 0.27 Grassland/shrub-steppe, agriculture Enz and Bay 2011 Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 2009) 0.84 0 Grassland Arnett et al. 2011 Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 2010) 0.76 0 Grassland Arnett et al. 2011 Maple Ridge, NY (2007) 2.34 NA Agriculture/forested Jain et al. 2009a Maple Ridge, NY (2007-2008) 2.07 0.03 Agriculture/forested Jain et al. 2009d Marengo I, WA (2009-2010) 0.27 0 Agriculture URS Corporation 2010b Marengo II, WA (2009-2010) 0.16 0.05 Agriculture URS Corporation 2010c Mars Hill, ME (2007) 1.67 0 Forest Stantec 2008 Mars Hill, ME (2008) 1.76 0 Forest Stantec 2009a Milford I, UT (2010-2011) 0.56 NA Desert shrub Stantec 2011b Milford I & II, UT (2011-2012) 0.73 0.04 Desert shrub Stantec 2012b Montezuma I, CA (2011) 5.19 1.06 Agriculture and grasslands ICF International 2012 Montezuma I, CA (2012) 8.91 0.79 Agriculture and grasslands ICF International 2013 Montezuma II, CA (2012-2013) 1.08 0.46 Agriculture Harvey & Associates 2013 Moraine II, MN (2009) 5.59 0.37 Agriculture/grassland Derby et al. 2010f Mount Storm, WV (2009) 3.85 0 Forest Young et al. 2009a, 2010b Mount Storm, WV (2010) 2.6 0.1 Forest Young et al. 2010a, 2011b Mount Storm, WV (2011) 4.24 0.03 Forest Young et al. 2011a, 2012a Mountaineer, WV (2003) 2.69 0.07 Forest Kerns and Kerlinger 2004 Munnsville, NY (2008) 1.48 0.59 Agriculture/forest Stantec 2009b Mustang Hills, CA (2012-2013) 1.66 0.08 Grasslands and riparian Chatfield and Bay 2014 Nine Canyon, WA (2002-2003) 2.76 0.03 Agriculture/grassland Erickson et al. 2003 Noble Altona, NY (2010) 1.84 0 Forest Jain et al. 2011b Noble Bliss, NY (2008) 1.3 0.1 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2009e Noble Bliss, NY (2009) 2.28 0.12 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2010a Noble Chateaugay, NY (2010) 1.66 0.08 Agriculture Jain et al. 2011c Noble Clinton, NY (2008) 1.59 0.1 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2009c Noble Clinton, NY (2009) 1.11 0.16 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2010b Noble Ellenburg, NY (2008) 0.83 0.11 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2009b

Appendix B. All bird and raptor fatality estimates (birds/megawatt [MW]/year) and habitat types for North American wind energy facilities. Bird Raptor Fatalities Fatalities Project Predominant Habitat Type Citation (birds/MW/ (raptors/MW/ year) year) Noble Ellenburg, NY (2009) 2.66 0.25 Agriculture/forest Jain et al. 2010c Noble Wethersfield, NY (2010) 1.7 0.13 Agriculture Jain et al. 2011a NPPD Ainsworth, NE (2006) 1.63 0.06 Agriculture/grassland Derby et al. 2007 Palouse Wind, WA (2012-2013) 0.72 NA Agriculture and grasslands Stantec 2013a Pebble Springs, OR (2009-2010) 1.93 0.04 Grassland Gritski and Kronner 2010b Pine Tree, CA (2009-2010, 2011) 17.44 NA Grassland BioResource Consultants 2012 Pinnacle, WV (2012) 3.99 0 Forest Hein et al. 2013a Pinyon Pines I & II, CA (2013-2014) 1.18 NA NA Chatfield and Russo 2014 Pioneer Prairie I, IA (Phase II; 2011-2012) 0.27 0 Agriculture, grassland Chodachek et al. 2012 PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), ND (2010) 1.48 0.05 Agriculture Derby et al. 2011c PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), ND (2011) 1.56 0.05 Agriculture, grassland Derby et al. 2012c PrairieWinds SD1, SD (2011-2012) 1.41 0 Grassland Derby et al. 2012d PrairieWinds SD1, SD (2012-2013) 2.01 0.03 Grassland Derby et al. 2013a PrairieWinds SD1, SD (2013-2014) 1.66 0.17 Grassland Derby et al. 2014 Rail Splitter, IL (2012-2013) 0.84 0 Agriculture Good et al. 2013b Record Hill, ME (2012) 3.7 NA Forest Stantec 2013b Record Hill, ME (2014) 1.84 NA Forest Stantec 2015 Red Hills, OK (2012-2013) 0.08 0.04 Grassland Derby et al. 2013c Ripley, Ont (2008) 3.09 0.1 Agriculture Jacques Whitford 2009 Rollins, ME (2012) 2.9 NA Forest Stantec 2013c Rugby, ND (2010-2011) 3.82 0.06 Agriculture Derby et al. 2011b Shiloh I, CA (2006-2009) 6.96 0.42 Agriculture/grassland Kerlinger et al. 2009 Shiloh II, CA (2009-2010) 1.9 0.11 Agriculture Kerlinger et al. 2010, 2013a Shiloh II, CA (2010-2011) 2.8 0.44 Agriculture Kerlinger et al. 2013a Shiloh III, CA (2012-2013) 3.3 NA NA Kerlinger et al. 2013b Solano III, CA (2012-2013) 1.6 0.95 NA AECOM 2013 Stateline, OR/WA (2001-2002) 3.17 0.09 Agriculture/grassland Erickson et al. 2004 Stateline, OR/WA (2003) 2.68 0.09 Agriculture/grassland Erickson et al. 2004 Stateline, OR/WA (2006) 1.23 0.11 Agriculture/grassland Erickson et al. 2007 Stetson Mountain I, ME (2009) 2.68 0 Forest Stantec 2009c Stetson Mountain I, ME (2011) 1.18 0 Forest Normandeau Associates 2011 Stetson Mountain I, ME (2013) 6.95 0 Forest Stantec 2014 Stetson Mountain II, ME (2010) 1.42 0 Forest Normandeau Associates 2010 Stetson Mountain II, ME (2012) 3.37 0 Forest Stantec 2013e Summerview, Alb (2005-2006) 1.06 0.11 Agriculture Brown and Hamilton 2006b

Appendix C. Summary of Publicly Available Studies at Modern North American Wind Energy Facilities that Report Fatality and Species Data for Birds

Appendix C. Summary of publicly available studies at modern North American wind energy facilities that report fatality and species data for birds. Data from the following sources: Project, Location Reference Project, Location Reference Alite, CA (09-10) Chatfield et al. 2010 Maple Ridge, NY (07-08) Jain et al. 2009b Alta Wind I, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Maple Ridge, NY (12) Tidhar et al. 2013b Alta Wind I-V, CA (13-14) Chatfield et al. 2014 Marengo I, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010b Alta Wind II-V, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Marengo II, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010c Alta VIII, CA (12-13) Chatfield and Bay 2014 Mars Hill, ME (07) Stantec 2008 Barton I & II, IA (10-11) Derby et al. 2011b Mars Hill, ME (08) Stantec 2009a Barton Chapel, TX (09-10) WEST 2011 McBride, Alb (04) Brown and Hamilton 2004 Beech Ridge, WV (12) Tidhar et al. 2013a Melancthon, Ont (Phase I; 07) Stantec Ltd. 2008 Beech Ridge, WV (13) Young et al. 2014a Meyersdale, PA (04) Arnett et al. 2005 Big Blue, MN (13) Fagen Engineering 2014 Milford I, UT (10-11) Stantec 2011b Big Blue, MN (14) Fagen Engineering 2015 Milford I & II, UT (11-12) Stantec 2012b Big Horn, WA (06-07) Kronner et al. 2008 Montezuma I, CA (11) ICF International 2012 Big Smile, OK (12-13) Derby et al. 2013b Montezuma I, CA (12) ICF International 2013 Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 08) Jeffrey et al. 2009b Montezuma II, CA (12-13) Harvey & Associates 2013 Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 09) Enk et al. 2010 Moraine II, MN (09) Derby et al. 2010f Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 09-10) Enk et al. 2011b Mount Storm, WV (Fall 08) Young et al. 2009c Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 10-11) Enk et al. 2012b Mount Storm, WV (09) Young et al. 2009a, 2010b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase III; 10-11) Enk et al. 2012a Mount Storm, WV (10) Young et al. 2010a, 2011b Blue Sky Green Field, WI (08; 09) Gruver et al. 2009 Mount Storm, WV (11) Young et al. 2011a, 2012a Insignia Environmental Buena Vista, CA (08-09) Mountaineer, WV (03) Kerns and Kerlinger 2004 2009 Buffalo Gap I, TX (06) Tierney 2007 Mountaineer, WV (04) Arnett et al. 2005 Buffalo Gap II, TX (07-08) Tierney 2009 Munnsville, NY (08) Stantec 2009b Buffalo Mountain, TN (00-03) Nicholson et al. 2005 Mustang Hills, CA (12-13) Chatfield and Bay 2014 Buffalo Mountain, TN (05) Fiedler et al. 2007 Nine Canyon, WA (02-03) Erickson et al. 2003 Buffalo Ridge, MN (94-95) Osborn et al. 1996, 2000 Nine Canyon II, WA (04) Erickson et al. 2005 Buffalo Ridge, MN (00) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Altona, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011a Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 96) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Altona, NY (11) Kerlinger et al. 2011b Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 97) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Bliss, NY (08) Jain et al.2009c Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 98) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Bliss, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010c Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 99) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Bliss/Wethersfield, NY (11) Kerlinger et al. 2011a Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 98) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Chateaugay, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011b Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 99) Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Clinton, NY (08) Jain et al. 2009d Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 01/Lake Benton I) Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Clinton, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010a Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase II; 02/Lake Benton I) Johnson et al. 2000 Noble Ellenburg, NY (08) Jain et al. 2009e Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; 99) Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Ellenburg, NY (09) Jain et al. 2010b Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; 01/Lake Benton II) Johnson et al. 2004 Noble Wethersfield, NY (10) Jain et al. 2011c Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase III; 02/Lake Benton II) Derby et al. 2010d NPPD Ainsworth, NE (06) Derby et al. 2007 Oklahoma Wind Energy Center, OK Buffalo Ridge I, SD (09-10) Derby et al. 2012a Piorkowski and O’Connell 2010 (04; 05) Buffalo Ridge II, SD (11-12) Arnett et al. 2009b Pacific, CA (12-13) Sapphos 2014 Casselman, PA (08) Arnett et al. 2010 Palouse Wind, WA (12-13) Stantec 2013a Casselman, PA (09) Arnett et al. 2009a Pebble Springs, OR (09-10) Gritski and Kronner 2010b Castle River, Alb. (01) Brown and Hamilton 2006a Pine Tree, CA (09-10) BioResource Consultants 2012 Castle River, Alb. (02) Brown and Hamilton 2006a Pinnacle, WV (12) Hein et al. 2013a Cedar Ridge, WI (09) BHE Environmental 2010 Pinyon Pines I & II, CA (13-14) Hein et al. 2013b Cedar Ridge, WI (10) BHE Environmental 2011 Pioneer Prairie I, IA (Phase II; 11-12) Chatfield and Russo 2014 Cohocton/Dutch Hill, NY (09) Stantec 2010 Pioneer Prairie II, IA (13) Chodachek et al. 2012 Cohocton/Dutch Hills, NY (10) Stantec 2011a Pioneer Trail, IL (12-13) Chodachek et al. 2014 Combine Hills, OR (Phase I; 04-05) Young et al. 2006 Prairie Rose, MN (14) ARCADIS 2013 Combine Hills, OR (11) Enz et al. 2012 PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), ND (10) Chodachek et al. 2015 Fishman Ecological Condon, OR PrairieWinds ND1 (Minot), ND (11) Derby et al. 2011d Services 2003 PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Lake), SD Crescent Ridge, IL (05-06) Kerlinger et al. 2007 Derby et al. 2012d (11-12) PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Lake), SD Criterion, MD (11) Young et al. 2012b Derby et al. 2012c (12-13) PrairieWinds SD1 (Crow Lake), SD Criterion, MD (12) Young et al. 2013 Derby et al. 2013a (13-14) Criterion, MD (13) Young et al. 2014b Rail Splitter, IL (12-13) Derby et al. 2014 Crystal Lake II, IA (09) Derby et al. 2010b Record Hill, ME (12) Good et al. 2013b Diablo Winds, CA (05-07) WEST 2006, 2008 Record Hill, ME (14) Stantec 2013b Dillon, CA (08-09) Chatfield et al. 2009 Red Canyon, TX (06-07) Stantec 2015 Dry Lake I, AZ (09-10) Thompson et al. 2011 Red Hills, OK (12-13) Miller 2008 Dry Lake II, AZ (11-12) Thompson and Bay 2012 Ripley, Ont (08) Derby et al. 2013c Elkhorn, OR (08) Jeffrey et a. 2009a Ripley, Ont (08-09) Jacques Whitford 2009 Elkhorn, OR (10) Enk et al. 2011a Rollins, ME (12) Golder Associates 2010 Elm Creek, MN (09-10) Derby et al. 2010e Rugby, ND (10-11) Stantec 2013c Elm Creek II, MN (11-12) Derby et al. 2012b Searsburg, VT (97) Atwell 2012 Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 99) James 2008 Sheffield, VT (12) Derby et al. 2011c Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 00) Young et al. 2003 Shiloh I, CA (06-09) Anderson et al. 2005 Foote Creek Rim, WY (Phase I; 01-02) Young et al. 2003 Shiloh II, CA (09-10) Kerlinger 2002a Forward Energy Center, WI (08-10) Young et al. 2003 Shiloh II, CA (10-11) Martin et al. 2013 Fowler I, IN (09) Grodsky and Drake 2011 Shiloh III, CA (12-13) Martin et al. 2013

Appendix C. Summary of publicly available studies at modern North American wind energy facilities that report fatality and species data for birds. Data from the following sources: Project, Location Reference Project, Location Reference Fowler III, IN (09) Johnson et al. 2010b SMUD Solano, CA (04-05) Erickson and Sharp 2005 Fowler I, II, III, IN (10) Good et al. 2011 Solano III, CA (12-13) AECOM 2013 Fowler I, II, III, IN (11) Good et al. 2012 Spruce Mountain, ME (12) Tetra Tech 2013 Fowler I, II, III, IN (12) Good et al. 2013a Stateline, OR/WA (01-02) Erickson et al. 2004 Goodnoe, WA (09-10) URS Corporation 2010a Stateline, OR/WA (03) Erickson et al. 2004 Grand Ridge I, IL (09-10) Derby et al. 2010a Stateline, OR/WA (06) Erickson et al. 2007 Natural Resource Solutions Harrow, Ont (10) Steel Winds I, NY Grehan 2008 2011 Harvest Wind, WA (10-12) Downes and Gritski 2012a Steel Winds I & II, NY (12) Stantec 2013d Hay Canyon, OR (09-10) Gritski and Kronner 2010a Stetson Mountain I, ME (09) Stantec 2009c Heritage Garden I, MI (12-14) Kerlinger et al. 2014 Stetson Mountain I, ME (11) Normandeau Associates 2011 High Sheldon, NY (10) Tidhar et al. 2012a Stetson Mountain I, ME (13) Stantec 2014 High Sheldon, NY (11) Tidhar et al. 2012b Stetson Mountain II, ME (10) Normandeau Associates 2010 High Winds, CA (03-04) Kerlinger et al. 2006 Stetson Mountain II, ME (12) Stantec 2013e High Winds, CA (04-05) Kerlinger et al. 2006 Summerview, Alb (05-06) Brown and Hamilton 2006b Hopkins Ridge, WA (06) Young et al. 2007 Summerview, Alb (06; 07) Baerwald 2008 Hopkins Ridge, WA (08) Young et al. 2009b Top Crop I & II, IL (12-13) Anderson et al. 2004 Jersey Atlantic, NJ (08) NJAS 2008a, 2008b, 2009 Top of Iowa, IA (03) Good et al. 2013c Judith Gap, MT (06-07) TRC 2008 Top of Iowa, IA (04) Jain 2005 Judith Gap, MT (09) Poulton and Erickson 2010 Tuolumne (Windy Point I), WA (09-10) Jain 2005 Kewaunee County, WI (99-01) Howe et al. 2002 Vansycle, OR (99) Enz and Bay 2010 Kibby, ME (11) Stantec 2012a Vantage, WA (10-11) Erickson et al. 2000 Ventus Environmental Kittitas Valley, WA (11-12) Stantec Consulting 2012 Vasco, CA (12-13) Solutions 2012 Kittitas Valley, WA (12-13) Johnson et al. 2003 Wessington Springs, SD (09) Brown et al. 2013 Klondike, OR (02-03) NWC and WEST 2007 Wessington Springs, SD (10) Derby et al. 2010c Klondike II, OR (05-06) Gritski et al. 2010 White Creek, WA (07-11) Derby et al. 2011a Klondike III (Phase I), OR (07-09) Gritski et al. 2011 Wild Horse, WA (07) Downes and Gritski 2012b Klondike IIIa (Phase II), OR (08-10) MPUC 2012 Windy Flats, WA (10-11) Erickson et al. 2008 Leaning Juniper, OR (06-08) Gritski et al. 2008 Winnebago, IA (09-10) Enz et al. 2011 Lempster, NH (09) Tidhar et al. 2010 Wolfe Island, Ont (May-June 09) Derby et al. 2010g Lempster, NH (10) Tidhar et al. 2011 Wolfe Island, Ont (July-December 09) Stantec Ltd. 2010a Linden Ranch, WA (10-11) Enz and Bay 2011 Wolfe Island, Ont (January-June 10) Stantec Ltd. 2010b Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 09) Arnett et al. 2011 Wolfe Island, Ont (July-December 10) Stantec Ltd. 2011a Locust Ridge, PA (Phase II; 10) Arnett et al. 2011 Wolfe Island, Ont (January-June 11) Stantec Ltd. 2011b Madison, NY (01-02) Kerlinger 2002b Wolfe Island, Ont (July-December 11) Stantec Ltd. 2011c Maple Ridge, NY (06) Jain et al. 2007 Wolfe Island, Ont (January-June 12) Stantec Ltd. 2012 Maple Ridge, NY (07) Jain et al. 2009a