Doc.EUROBATS.MoP7.13.Annex Draft Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – revision 2014 Notes: - Comments may be sent to Luisa Rodrigues ([email protected]; [email protected]) - Additional data on studies (annex 1) and mortality (annex 2) may still be incorporated. - Sentences/words highlighted in yellow are still missing or need to will be revised after 7MoP. - Suren will check if all references are referred in the text, and uniform the references - Suren will highlight in the text all terms that are included in the Glossary - Authors: Luísa Rodrigues (Portugal), Lothar Bach (Germany), Marie-Jo Dubourg-Savage (SFEPM, France), Branko Karapandža (Serbia), Dina Kovač (Croatia), Thierry Kervyn (Belgium), Jasja Dekker (BatLife Europe, The Netherlands), Andrzej Kepel (Poland), Petra Bach (Germany), Jan Collins (BCT, United Kingdom), Christine Harbusch (NABU, Germany), Kirsty Park (Stirling University, United Kingdom), Branko Micevski (FYR Macedonia), Jeroen Minderman (Stirling University, United Kingdom) Foreword Comment [LR1]: At the end we need to 1 Introduction discuss the level of detail of the index 2 General aspects of the planning process 2.1 Site selection phase 2.2 Construction phase 2.3 Operation phase 2.4 Decommissioning phase 3 Carrying out impact assessments Goals of the impact assessment in relation to bats (EXTRA BOX - Collision risk level for European bat species) 3.1 Pre-survey assessment Collation and review of existing information 3.2 Survey 3.2.1 Survey design 3.2.2 Survey methods 3.2.2.1 Land-based wind turbines 3.2.2.2 Offshore wind turbines 3.2.2.3 Micro- and small wind turbines a) Siting b) Surveys 3.2.3 Survey effort 3.2.4 Type of survey 3.2.4.1 Inland survey a) Investigation of important roost sites b) Bat detector surveys on the ground c) Activity surveys at height d) Equipment requirements e) Timing of survey Manual bat detector surveys from the ground Automated bat detector survey at each planned siting of wind turbines Continuous automated bat detector monitoring Within broadleaved or coniferous woodlands - 1 - 3.2.4.2 Offshore survey a) Surveys from land b) Surveys at sea c) Timing of surveys 3.2.5 Survey report and evaluation 3.3 Repowering / Extension 4 Monitoring the impacts 4.1 Monitoring of activity at nacelle height 4.2 Monitoring of mortality 4.2.1 Searching for bat fatalities a) Search plot size b) Number of sampled wind turbines c) Time interval between samples d) Monitoring schedule e) Search methods 4.2.2 Estimation of fatalities a) Carcass removal trials b) Searcher efficiency trials c) Mortality estimators d) Cumulative effects 5 Avoidance, mitigation and compensation 5.1. Fatalities 5.1.1. Avoidance 5.1.1.1. Planning of site layout 5.1.1.2. Prevention of roost sites destruction while bats are present within them 5.1.1.3. Elimination of attraction factors 5.1.2. Mitigation 5.1.2.1. Blade feathering and increase of cut-in wind speeds (EXTRA BOX – Case study 1: Belgium) (EXTRA BOX – Case study 2: Germany) 5.1.2.2. Deterrents 5.1.3. Compensation 5.2. Loss/Deterioration of Habitats 5.2.1. Avoidance 5.2.2. Mitigation 5.2.3. Compensation 5.3. Disturbance 5.3.1. Avoidance 5.3.2. Mitigation 6 Research priorities 6.1 Why do bats collide with turbines? 6.2 What are the best methods to assess bat problems with wind turbines during impact assessments and post construction monitoring (methodology development)? 6.3 How effective are the mitigation measures that are used today? 6.4 How large is the effect of populations, especially the cumulative effect of wind farms? 6.5 In which habitats/landscapes wind turbines should not be allowed due to high collision rate? 6.6 What is the behaviour of bats migrating over large water bodies, especially seas? In what numbers do they exhibit this behaviour? 6.7 Small Wind Turbines (SWT) 7 Content of national guidelines 7.1 Developing national guidelines 7.2 Compliance of national guidelines with EUROBATS Guidelines 7.3 The content of national guidelines 7.4 Adapting guidelines to local conditions 7.5 Ensuring implementation of guidelines - 2 - 8 Conclusions and further work 9 References / further reading 10 Glossary Acknowledgments Annex 1 - Studies done in Europe Annex 2 – Bat mortality Annex 3 - Maximum foraging distances of species and height of flight Annex 4 – Detectability coefficients to compare activity indices - 3 - Foreword Following Resolution 4.7, approved at the 4th Session of the Meeting of Parties of EUROBATS (Sofia, Bulgaria, 22–24 September 2003), the Advisory Committee of the Agreement was requested to assess the evidence regarding the impacts of wind turbines on bat populations. Also, if appropriate, to develop voluntary guidelines for assessing potential impacts on bats and for the construction of wind turbines, taking into account the ecological requirements of bat populations. In response to this request, an Intersessional Working Group (IWG) was established during the 9th Meeting of the Advisory Committee (Vilnius, Lithuania, 17-19 May 2004). Some members of this IWG volunteered to prepare guidelines for assessing potential impacts of wind turbines on bats, which were adopted at the 5th Session of the Meeting of Parties (Ljubljana, Slovenia, 4–6 September 2006) as an Annex to Resolution 5.6. Those guidelines were published in EUROBATS Publication Series (Rodrigues et al. 2008). According to Resolution 6.12 of the 6th Session of the Meeting of Parties (Prague, Czech Republic, 20–22 September 2010), these guidelines (and any subsequently updated versions) should be the basis for national guidance to be developed and implemented, with consideration of the local environment. The guidelines have subsequently been updated and the revised version (this document) was adopted at the 7th Session of the Meeting of Parties (Brussels, Belgium, 15-17 September 2014) as an Annex to Resolution 7.++. 1 Introduction Presently, there are 52 bat species occurring in the EUROBATS area and listed under the Agreement. Bats are legally protected in all European countries. Those occurring in the EU countries are protected by the Habitats Directive; all species are listed in Annex IV of this directive (member States are required to take the requisite measures to establish a system of strict protection for them in their natural range) and some of them additionally in Annex II (species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation). In addition, most species are redlisted in one or more countries in Europe and on the IUCN Red List. Europe continues to be faced with the need to tackle climate change and environmental pollution and to find sustainable methods to meet demands for power production. The commitment to low-emission energy generation leads to an increased promotion of alternative methods, e.g., wind power, following Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. Furthermore, there is a growing public and political awareness to reduce or stop nuclear power production. Wind turbines have been described as a problem for birds for many years (Winkelman 1989, Phillips 1994, Reichenbach 2002). More recently, many studies have established that wind turbines can have negative impacts on bats (e.g., Arnett et al. 2008, Rydell et al. 2010a). Bat mortality at wind turbines occurs due to collision and/or barotrauma (Arnett et al. 2008, Baerwald et al. 2008, Grodsky et al. 2011). There are various reasons for bat presence, and resulting fatalities, around wind turbines. Clearly, the location of the turbines is an important variable (e.g. Dürr & Bach 2004). There are several European examples where an appropriate impact assessment has resulted in a wind turbine project being abandoned due to inappropriate siting with respect to bats. Annex 1 summarises studies done in Europe. At low wind speeds, insect flight and bat activity occur at higher altitude, increasing the potential presence of bats near rotating blades. Security lights at the bottom of tower, the colour of wind turbines and acoustic effects are also suspected to attract flying insects and bats into the risk zone (Horn et al. 2008, Rydell et al. 2010b, Long et al. 2011). It has been suggested that lights for civil aviation above the nacelle may also attract bats, but Bennet & Hale (2014) rejected this hypothesis. Furthermore, the outer extremities of the blades may reach speeds as high as 250-300 km/h, making them totally undetectable for echolocating bats (Long et al. 2009, 2010a). In addition to the - 4 - risk of direct collision, the wake effect drastically modifies the air pressure in the vicinity of the rotating blades, enlarging the risk zone and causing fatal barotraumas to flying bats (Baerwald et al. 2008). Altogether 27 European bat species have been found as casualties beneath turbines (Annex 2). Adequate avoidance and mitigation measures taking these risks into account should be included in the environmental impact assessment and in the permit delivered by authorities before the operating phase (see chapter on mitigation). A first version of the guidelines was published in 2008, having the primary purpose of raising awareness amongst developers and planners of the need to consider bats and their roosts, migration routes and feeding areas when they are assessing applications for wind turbines. Guidelines should also be of interest to local and national consenting authorities who are required to draw up strategic sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, it was a base for national guidelines that were subsequently published in several countries. A large amount of research has been carried out into the impacts of wind turbines on bats and the increased knowledge justifies the update of this document.