DOCSLIB.ORG

Solano 4 Wind Project EIR 8 References Executive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Solano 4 Wind Project EIR 8 References Executive Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 8 References Executive Summary No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 1, “Introduction” No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 2, “Project Description” California Energy Commission. 2018 (August). Operational Wind Projects, Solano Wind Resource Area, 2018. Map scale 1:24,000. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/wind/WindResourceArea_Solano.pdf. Accessed March 27, 2019. CEC. See California Energy Commission. Solano County. 1987 (May). Solano County Wind Turbine Siting Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Department of Environmental Management, Fairfield, CA. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019 (January). U.S. Wind Turbine Database. Available: https://eerscmap.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/#14.02/38.16164/-121.79729. Accessed February 9, 2019. USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey. Chapter 3, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures” Section 3.1, “Aesthetics” Black & Veatch. 2019 (January 3). Solano Wind Energy Project, Wind Project Shadow Flicker Assessment. California Department of Transportation 2019. Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. Accessed March 18, 2019. Federal Aviation Administration. 2018 (August 17). Obstruction Marking and Lighting, including Changes 1 and 2. Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L. Chapter 13, “Marking and Lighting Wind Turbines.” Federal Highway Administration. 2015 (January). Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. FHWA-HEP-15-029. Washington, DC. Page 8-1 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 National Research Council. 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NRC. See National Research Council. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2007 (September). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the SMUD Solano Wind Project Phase 3. Sacramento, CA. SMUD. See Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Solano County. 2008 (November). Solano County General Plan. Fairfield, CA. Adopted by the Solano County Board of Supervisors on August 5, 2008, and by the Solano County voters on November 4, 2008. Resources Element, Figure RS-5, “Scenic Roadways.” ———. 2018. Solano County Code, Chapter 28, “Zoning Regulations,” Article 3, “Land Use Regulations,” Section 28.80, “Commercial Wind Energy Facilities.” As amended through December 11, 2018. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019 (January). U.S. Wind Turbine Database. Available: https://eerscmap.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/#14.02/38.16164/-121.79729. Accessed February 9, 2019. USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey. Western Railway Museum. 2019. Home Page. http://www.wrm.org. Accessed March 22, 2019. Section 3.2, “Air Quality” American Lung Association. 2018. State of the Air 2018. Chicago, IL. Available: https://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/state-of-the-air/sota-2018- full.pdf. Accessed March 6, 2019. ARB. See California Air Resources Board. BAAQMD. See Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017 (May). California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. ———. 2018. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Available: http://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/research-and-data/air-quality- standards-and-attainment-status#five. Last updated April 24, 2018. Accessed March 6, 2019. Page 8-2 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 California Air Resources Board. 2013. The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality—2013 Edition. Air Quality Planning and Science Division, Sacramento, CA. ———. 2016a (May 4). Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available: https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. Accessed February 14, 2019. ———. 2016b. 2016 SIP Emission Projection Data: 2012 Estimated Annual Average Emissions, Solano County. Available: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/maps/2017statemap/cntymap.htm. Accessed March 7, 2019. ———. 2019. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. Available: https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam. Accessed March 6, 2019. EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. OEHHA. See Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015 (February). Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Air, Community, and Environmental Research Branch, Sacramento, CA. Solano County. 2008. Solano County General Plan. Fairfield, CA. Adopted by the Solano County Board of Supervisors on August 5, 2008, and by the Solano County voters on November 4, 2008. Air Quality Element, in Chapter 5, “Public Health and Safety.” Union of Concerned Scientists. 2019. Environmental Impacts of Natural Gas. Available: https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/environmental- impacts-of-natural-gas#.Wk0oT2hSw2w. Accessed March 7, 2019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2016a. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Table. Available: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs- table. Last updated December 20, 2016. Accessed March 4, 2019. ———. 2016b. Basic Information about NO2: Effects of NO2. Available: https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2#Effects. Last updated September 8, 2016. Accessed March 6, 2019. ———. 2018a. Ground-level Ozone Pollution: Health Effects of Ozone Pollution. Available: https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution. Last updated October 10, 2018. Accessed March 6, 2019. ———. 2018b. Ground-level Ozone Pollution. Available: https://www.epa.gov/ozone- pollution. Last updated November 7, 2018. Accessed March 6, 2019. Page 8-3 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 ———. 2018c. Particulate Matter (PM) Pollution: Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM). Available: https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and- environmental-effects-particulate-matter-pm. Last updated June 20, 2018. Accessed March 6, 2019. ———. 2019. Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book). Available: https://www.epa.gov/green-book. Last updated March 1, 2019. Accessed March 7, 2019. Van Gosen, B. S., and J. P. Clinkenbeard. 2011. Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in California. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1188. Western Regional Climate Center. 2019. Climate Summaries: California Period of Monthly Climate Summary. Available: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu. Accessed March 7, 2019. WRCC. See Western Regional Climate Center. Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District. 2007. Handbook for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Adopted July 11, 2007. Davis, CA. ———. 2019. Attainment Status. Available: https://www.ysaqmd.org/plans- data/attainment/. Accessed March 7, 2019. YSAQMD. See Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District. Zhu, Y., W. C. Hinds, S. Kim, and C. Sioutas. 2002. Concentration and Size Distribution of Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Highway. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 52(9):1032–1042. Section 3.3, “Biological Resources” Acta Environmental, Inc. 2011 (August). Report on Biological Surveys, 2008/2009: Montezuma Wetlands Project, Solano County, California. Unpublished report to Montezuma Wetlands LLC. AECOM. 2016 (March). Annual Monitoring Report, July 2014–June 2015 and Final Report 2012–2015, Solano Wind Project–Phase 3. Sacramento, CA. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District Environmental Management, Sacramento, CA. ———. 2018a (August 23). Burrowing Owl Habitat Assessment for the Solano 4 Wind Project. Technical memorandum submitted to Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Page 8-4 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 ———. 2018b (September). Sacramento Municipal Utility District Solano Wind 4, California Tiger Salamander Habitat Assessment. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2018c (October 11). California Red-legged Frog Habitat Assessment for the Solano 4 Wind Project. Technical memorandum submitted to Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2018d (October 15). Giant Garter Snake Habitat Assessment for the Solano 4 Project. Technical memorandum submitted to Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2019a (January). Sacramento Municipal Utility District Solano Wind 4 Project Botanical Survey Report. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2019b (February). Preliminary Delineation of Waters of the United States, Including Wetlands, for the SMUD Solano 4 Wind Project. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Althouse and Meade. See Althouse and Meade Biological and Environmental Services. Althouse and Meade Biological and Environmental Services. 2017 (September). Invasive Species Monitoring Report for Solano Wind Farm. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Althouse and Meade Biological and Environmental Services. 2018 (March). Land Management Plan for Solano Wind Farm, Rio Vista, Solano County. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. APLIC. See Avian Power Line Interaction Committee. Area West Environmental, Inc. 2017a (May). Eagle Survey Report. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2017b (July). Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2017c (July 18). Protocol-Level Special-status Plant Surveys Conducted for the Solano 4 Wind Project. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2017d (August). Habitat Assessment and Vegetation Mapping Summary Report. Prepared for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. ———. 2017e
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Summary of Delta Dredged Material Placement Sites
    Summary of Delta Dredged Material Placement Sites Capacity Overall Map Dredge Material Placement Active Types of Material Years in Remaining Capacity ID Site (Yes/No) Owner/Operator Accepted Service (CY) (CY) Notes 1 S1 2 S4 3 S7 4 S9 5 S11 Port of Sacramento S12 (Department of 6 1,710,000 3, 5 South Island Prospect Island Interior Bureau of Land Management?) 7 S13 S14 8 USACE N/A 3 Grand Island Placement Site S16 9 USACE 3,000,000 3 Rio Vista Placement Site DWR, Mega S19 10 Sands, Port of 20,000,000 3 Decker Island Placement Site Sacramento S20 Port of Sacramento 11 1,000,000 3, 5 Augusta Pit Placement Site (DWR?) S31 12 Port of Sacramento Placement Port of Sacramento Site Reclamation S32 13 Districts 999 and (six segments) 900 S35 DOW Chemical 14 Montezuma Hills Placement 890,000 3 Company Site 15 SX Sacramento Muni 1 Capacity Overall Map Dredge Material Placement Active Types of Material Years in Remaining Capacity ID Site (Yes/No) Owner/Operator Accepted Service (CY) (CY) Notes Utility District Sherman Lake (Sherman 16 USACE 3,000,000 3 Island?) 17 Montezuma Wetlands Project Montezuma LLC Montezuma Wetlands 18 Montezuma LLC Rehandling Site Expanded Scour Pond Dredge material 19 Placement Site (also called Yes DWR according to WDR #R5- 250,000 1, 2, 3,4 Sherman Island?) 2004-0061 Port of Stockton McCormack Pit Placement maintenance material 20 Site (also called Sherman Yes DWR only 250,000 3,4 Island?) WDR R5-2003-0145 Proposed Iron House Levy repair and 21 Jersey Island Placement Site Restoration 3 Sanitation District maintenance
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh Iii Wind Plant Project Habitat Conservation Plan
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE SHILOH III WIND PLANT PROJECT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN P REPARED BY: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2800 Cottage Way, W-2650 Sacramento, CA 95825 Contact: Mike Thomas, Chief Habitat Conservation Planning Branch W ITH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Brad Schafer 916.737.3000 February 2011 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh III Wind Plant Project Habitat Conservation Plan. February. (ICF 00263.09). Sacramento, CA. With technical assistance from ICF International, Sacramento, CA. Contents Chapter 1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.2 Species Covered by the HCP ...................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3 Proposed Action Addressed in this EA ....................................................................................... 1‐2 1.4 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action .......................................................................... 1‐2 Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives .................................................................................. 2‐1 2.1 Alternative 1: Proposed Action .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources Inventory Report and Addendum
    APPENDIX E1 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT This page intentionally left blank CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED MONTEZUMA II WIND PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P REPARED FOR: NextEra Energy Montezuma II Wind, LLC 700 Universe Boulevard, MS FEW/JB Juno Beach, FL 33408 Contact: Cliff Graham 561.304.5372 P REPARED BY: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Andrea Nardin 916.737.3000 August 2010 ICF International. 2010. Cultural Resources Inventory Report for the Proposed Montezuma II Wind Project, Solano County, California. August. (ICF 00336.10). Sacramento, CA. Prepared for NextEra Energy Montezuma II Wind, LLC, Juno Beach, FL. Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 1 Area of Impact ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Regulatory Setting .................................................................................................................................. 3 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................ 4 Cultural Setting ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Existing Conditions
    Buchanan Field Airport Master Planning Program Field A. INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Buchanan A > Inventory of Existing Conditions INTRODUCTION. Buchanan Field Airport (CCR) is the major general aviation reliever airport serving Contra Costa County and multiple communities located in the northeastern portion of the greater San Francisco Bay Area (see Figure A1). The Airport has been a catalyst for business growth in the region and has served as an anchor for the local employment base, as well as meeting the aviation transportation needs. Situated in an unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County, directly adjacent to the thriving urban heartbeat of the City of Concord, Buchanan Field Airport is a vital component of the transportation infrastructure serving the region for tourism and business. Buchanan Field Airport is well equipped to serve regional demand related to general aviation and business aviation needs. The Airport has a reputation as being an excellent aviation facility that offers a safe and efficient operational environment. The Bay Area continues to experience significant increases in business activity, commercial and residential growth, and economic development. Because of this, Buchanan Field Airport is also being presented with increasing operational and facility demands. Many of the areas surrounding the Airport, with many high quality homes and environmental amenities, have experienced significant residential development, resulting in homeowner concerns about the effect that the Airport may have on their lifestyle. Some of these homes and facilities are located within a two to three mile radius of the Airport. Thus, the Airport may influence the social, economic, and physical environments of the area in which it operates.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan
    Statement of Qualifications for Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan Prepared for City of Rio Vista Prepared by Statement of Qualifications for RioRio VVistaista AAirportp Pavement Management Plan, DrainageiA AsseAssessment,ssment,ment,nt, and Electrical Plan July 22, 2010 765 The City Drive Suite 400 Mr. John Andoh Orange, California Transit & Airport Coordinator 92868 City of Rio Vista TEL 714 939 1030 FAX 714 938 9488 One Main Street Rio Vista, CA 94571 Re: Statement of Interest and Qualifications for Professional Airport Engineering Design and Planning Services for the City of Rio Vista and the Rio Vista Municipal Airport Dear Mr. Andoh: The City of Rio Vista is looking for the most qualified airport consultant to work with the City to improve the Rio Vista Municipal Airport. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is that firm. We believe that Kimley-Horn is the right choice for the City based on the following: History of Stability and Strong California Presence. Kimley-Horn is an employee owned, national firm. Since its inception in 1967, our firm has never been sold or acquired, or merged with other entities. Furthermore, we are ranked in the top 20 national aviation firms by ENR, have been ranked No.1 firm to work for by CE News several times, and are in the top 100 companies to work for by Fortune. Kimley-Horn is stable. We are consistent and we’re not going anywhere. We are confident that the people and the company you see in California today will be the people and company you see for the life of your projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Suisun City General Plan
    B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES B ACKGROUND R EPORT Biological Resources In This Background Report Page Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................... 3 Habitat Types ......................................................................................................................... 3 Sensitive Biological Resources ................................................................................................ 9 Sensitive Habitats ................................................................................................................. 10 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................... 40 Federal Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Laws ...................................................................... 41 State Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Laws ......................................................................... 43 Regional and Local Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Ordinances .......................................... 44 General Plan Issues and Opportunities ..................................................................................... 46 References ............................................................................................................................... 47 P AGE BIO‐ 1 C ITY OF
    [Show full text]
  • Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report Montezuma Wind Plant Project (U-06-06) January 2010
    Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report Montezuma Wind Plant Project (U-06-06) January 2010 Department of Resource Management 675 Texas Street, Suite 5500 Fairfield, CA 94533 Planning Services Division Michael Yankovich Phone: (707) 784-6765 / Fax: (707) 784-4805 Planning Program Manager January 14, 2010 Dear Interested Agency: Subject: Notice of Montezuma Wind Project Final Environmental Impact Report Amendment The County of Solano Department of Resource Management published the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Montezuma Wind Project in February of 2007. An amendment to the FEIR has been prepared, dated January 2010, and is attached. The amendment describes and analyzes the potential impacts resulting from minor changes to the project description, environment and setting, and/or new information being received, generally described as follows: Modifications to wind turbine layout option #1 (Siemens). Elimination of PG&E reconductoring project from EIR (project near completion). Slight increased size (0.07 acre) of one of two substation options, and increased main transformer size from 40 MVA to 60 MVA. Increased project area from 1,458 to 1,466 acres. New and/or updated reports: blade throw, shadow flicker, low frequency/infrasound noise, and avian mortality. Update and resolution of Travis AFB radar issue related to the Project. Update to Air Quality section of EIR regarding greenhouse gases and global warming. Update to Biological Resources section of EIR regarding California Tiger Salamander and regulations for Bald and Golden Eagles. Other updates regarding County adoption of 2008 General Plan, plans underway for County adoption of updated development standards for wind turbine generators, and recently completed and planned wind energy projects in the vicinity of Montezuma Wind.
    [Show full text]
  • Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1
    SAN FRANCISCO BAY RESTORATION AUTHORITY Staff Recommendation April 11, 2018 MONTEZUMA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT, PHASE 1 Project No. RA-001 Project Manager: Laura Cholodenko RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorization to disburse up to $1,610,000 to Montezuma Wetlands LLC to complete the Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1, which includes tidal and seasonal wetland restoration on 630 acres of diked baylands and enhancement of adjacent uplands in Suisun Marsh, Solano County. LOCATION: Montezuma Slough, Solano County; Measure AA Region: North Bay MEASURE AA PROGRAM CATEGORY: Safe, Clean Water and Pollution Prevention Program; Vital Fish, Bird and Wildlife Habitat Program. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Project Location Exhibit 2: Project Design Exhibit 3: CEQA Documentation Exhibit 4: Project Letters RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends that the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority adopt the following resolution pursuant to The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Act, Gov. Code § 66700- 66706: “The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority hereby authorizes the disbursement of an amount not to exceed one million six hundred ten thousand dollars ($1,610,000) to Montezuma Wetlands LLC for implementation of the Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1, which includes tidal and seasonal wetland restoration on 630 acres of diked baylands and enhancement of adjacent uplands in Suisun Marsh, Solano County. Prior to commencement of the project, the grantee shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Officer of the Authority the following: a. A detailed work program, schedule, and budget. Page 1 of 10 MONTEZUMA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT, PHASE 1 b. Names and qualifications of any contractors to be employed in carrying out the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Maps of the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta, California
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP MF-1401 UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC MAPS OF THE SACRAMENTO - SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA By Brian F. Atwater INTRODUCTION The Sac ramen to - San Joaquin Delta, the arm of Helley, and W. R. Lettis improved the manuscript with the San Francisco Bay estuary that reaches into the critical reviews, and Faith Dunham, J. R. Le Compte, Central 'valley of California, differs from typical J. B. Pinkerton, N. J. Tamamian, J. A. Thomas, and coastal-plain deltas in three important respects. Natalie Weiskal helped prepare the maps and text for First, rather than meeting the ocean individually and publication. directly, all major waterways of this delta discharge via a single constricted outlet into a chain of estuarine bays and straits. Second, in the most SKETCH OF DEPOSITIONAL HISTORY common vertical sequence of deposits, peat and mud deposited in tidal marshes and swamps (tidal wetlands) The Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta overlies 5-10 directly overlie alluvium or eolian sand, a sequence km of sedimentary deposits. Most of this material, recording a landward spread of tidal environment~ including sources and reservoirs of the Delta's rather than the seaward migration of fluvial natural gas, accumulated in marine environments about environments that is typical of coastal-plain deltas 175 million to 25 million years ago (Burroughs, (Cosby, 1941, p. 43; Thompson, 1957, p. 12; Shlemon 1967). Younger deposits are generally described as and Begg, 1975, p. 259; Atwater and Belknap, 1980). nonmarine (Burroughs, 1967), but some must have formed Finally, intensive human use has led to a peculiar set in shallow seas and estuaries (see maps by C.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership Directory (1999-2000)
    19 Directory Errata Sheet Section 4. Notice of all regular meetings, including an agenda which lists all items of business on which action will be taken, will be posted to the Chapter’s Web Page not less than two weeks prior to the date on which the meeting is Some corrections/revisions were not included in the scheduled to be held. Upon written request to the Executive Director, members recently mailed directories. may also have a copy of the agenda mailed to them at the time of posting. For convenience, meeting agendas will be published in the Chapter’s newsletter Please cut the pages and punch the holes as shown for preceding the meeting. Included with the notice and agenda shall be a brief inclusion in your directory binder. The revisions are as description and/or explanation of those items of business on which action is proposed, in order to alert the general membership. Such advance notice and follows, agenda shall not be required for the second and any succeeding meeting(s) which may occur or be called during an annual meeting. Such advance notice, Remove and replace pages 19-20, if any, which is reasonably possible shall be given for special meetings called by the President to deal with urgent business of an emergency nature. Remove and replace pages 21-22, Emergency matters that impact directly on the operation of the Chapter that arise after publication of the agenda for a scheduled meeting of the Board may be acted upon by the Board during the meeting without prior notification to the Remove and replace pages 25-26, general membership.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Wind Energy Facilities on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
    The Wildlife Society Impacts of Wind Energy Facilities on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Technical Review 07–2 September 2007 LThe Wildlife Society, Impacts of Wind Energy Facilities on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Technical Review 07-2 September 2007 The Wildlife Society Technical Review Committee on Wind Energy Facilities and Wildlife Edward B. Arnett, Ph.D. (Chair) Albert M. Manville, Ph.D. Bat Conservation International U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P. O. Box 162603 Division of Migratory Bird Management Austin, TX 78716-2603 4401 N. Fairfax Drive – MBSP-4107 Arlington, VA 22203 Douglas B. Inkley, Ph.D. National Wildlife Federation Russ Mason, Ph.D. 11100 Wildlife Center Drive Nevada Department of Wildlife Reston, VA 20190-5362 1100 Valley Rd. Reno, NV 89512 Douglas H. Johnson, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Michael Morrison, Ph.D. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Department of Wildlife and Fisheries University of Minnesota Sciences 1980 Folwell Ave. Texas A&M University St. Paul, MN 55108 College Station, TX 77843-2258 Ronald P. Larkin, Ph.D. M. Dale Strickland, Ph.D. Illinois Natural History Survey Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. 607 E. Peabody Drive 2003 Central Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 Cheyenne, WY 82001 Stephanie Manes Robert Thresher, Ph.D. North American Grouse Partnership National Renewable Energy Laboratory 222 S. Houston #A 1617 Cole Blvd. Tulsa, OK 74127 Golden, CO 80401 The Wildlife Society 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 200 Bethesda, MD 20814 COVER: Wind turbines at the Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lowville, New York (center): Ed Arnett, Bat Conservation International; Silver-haired bat (left): Merlin D. Tuttle, Bat Conservation International; Bluetit in spring (upper right); Greater prairie chicken (lower right): U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Richness and Endemism in the Native Flora of California
    RESEARCH ARTICLE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY Species richness and endemism in the native f ora of California 1 Bruce G. Baldwin 2 , Andrew H. Thornhill , William A. Freyman , David D. Ackerly , Matthew M. Kling , Naia Morueta-Holme , and Brent D. Mishler PREMISE OF THE STUDY: California’s vascular f ora is the most diverse and threatened in temperate North America. Previous studies of spatial patterns of Californian plant diversity have been limited by traditional metrics, non-uniform geographic units, and distributional data derived from f oristic descrip- tions for only a subset of species. METHODS: We revisited patterns of sampling intensity, species richness, and relative endemism in California based on equal-area spatial units, the full vascular f ora, and specimen-based distributional data. We estimated richness, weighted endemism (inverse range-weighting of species), and corrected weighted endemism (weighted endemism corrected for richness), and performed a randomization test for signif cantly high endemism. KEY RESULTS: Possible biases in herbarium data do not obscure patterns of high richness and endemism at the spatial resolution studied. High species richness was sometimes associated with signif cantly high endemism (e.g., Klamath Ranges) but often not. In Stebbins and Major’s (1965) main endemism hotspot, Southwestern California, species richness is high across much of the Peninsular and Transverse ranges but signif cantly high endemism is mostly localized to the Santa Rosa and San Bernardino mountains. In contrast, species richness is low in the Channel Islands, where endemism is signif cantly high, as also found for much of the Death Valley region. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of taxonomic richness, even with greater weighting of range-restricted taxa, are insuf cient for identifying areas of signif cantly high endemism that warrant conservation attention.
    [Show full text]