Title |
Effects of wind-energy facilities on breeding grassland bird distributions
|
---|---|
Published in |
Conservation Biology, July 2015
|
DOI | 10.1111/cobi.12569 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jill A. Shaffer, Deborah A. Buhl |
Abstract |
The contribution of renewable energy to meet worldwide demand continues to grow. Wind energy is one of the fastest growing renewable sectors, but new wind facilities are often placed in prime wildlife habitat. Long-term studies that incorporate a rigorous statistical design to evaluate the effects of wind facilities on wildlife are rare. We conducted a before-after-control-impact (BACI) assessment to determine if wind facilities placed in native mixed-grass prairies displaced breeding grassland birds. During 2003-2012, we monitored changes in bird density in 3 study areas in North Dakota and South Dakota (U.S.A.). We examined whether displacement or attraction occurred 1 year after construction (immediate effect) and the average displacement or attraction 2-5 years after construction (delayed effect). We tested for these effects overall and within distance bands of 100, 200, 300, and >300 m from turbines. We observed displacement for 7 of 9 species. One species was unaffected by wind facilities and one species exhibited attraction. Displacement and attraction generally occurred within 100 m and often extended up to 300 m. In a few instances, displacement extended beyond 300 m. Displacement and attraction occurred 1 year after construction and persisted at least 5 years. Our research provides a framework for applying a BACI design to displacement studies and highlights the erroneous conclusions that can be made without the benefit of adopting such a design. More broadly, species-specific behaviors can be used to inform management decisions about turbine placement and the potential impact to individual species. Additionally, the avoidance distance metrics we estimated can facilitate future development of models evaluating impacts of wind facilities under differing land-use scenarios. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 9 | 18% |
Ireland | 4 | 8% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 8% |
Australia | 3 | 6% |
Canada | 1 | 2% |
Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
France | 1 | 2% |
South Africa | 1 | 2% |
Italy | 1 | 2% |
Other | 2 | 4% |
Unknown | 24 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 34 | 67% |
Scientists | 13 | 25% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Portugal | 1 | <1% |
Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
Australia | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 165 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 47 | 27% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 16% |
Student > Master | 24 | 14% |
Other | 20 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
Other | 17 | 10% |
Unknown | 20 | 12% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 74 | 43% |
Environmental Science | 53 | 31% |
Engineering | 3 | 2% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 1% |
Unspecified | 2 | 1% |
Other | 8 | 5% |
Unknown | 29 | 17% |