Post on 02-Apr-2018
353617 EVT EMP 004 A
-
2 March 2016
Krnovo Wind Farm
Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
Krnovo Wind Farm
Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
March 2016
Akuo Energy
140, Av. des Champs Elysées, 75008, Paris
Mott MacDonald, 22 Station Road, Cambridge CB1 2JD, United Kingdom
T +44 (0)1223 463500 F +44 (0)1223 461007 W www.mottmac.com
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description
A 2 March 2016 Tristan Folland
Iain Bray
Nik Stone
First Issue
Issue and revision record
Information class: Standard
This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.
We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.
This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
Chapter Title Page
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction ________________________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 Project description __________________________________________________________________ 1 1.3 Scope of this report _________________________________________________________________ 1
2 Survey Methodology 2
2.1 Vantage Point Surveys _______________________________________________________________ 2
3 Results 5
3.1 Target Species _____________________________________________________________________ 5 3.2 Vantage Point Surveys _______________________________________________________________ 5
4 Annual Collision Risk Assessment 9
5 Discussion 11
5.1 Winter bird surveys _________________________________________________________________ 11 5.2 Collision Risk Assessment ___________________________________________________________ 11
6 References 12
Appendices 13
Appendix A. Flight Lines _______________________________________________________________________ 14
Contents
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
1
1.1 Introduction
Mott MacDonald was commissioned by Akuo Energy to undertake ornithological monitoring in relation to
the Krnovo wind farm, Montenegro (‘the Project’) in April 2015.
1.2 Project description
The Project is located within the central area of Montenegro on the border of three municipalities; Nikšić,
Šavnik and Plužine. It comprises the installation of 26, 2/3MW wind turbine generators (WTG) as well as
the construction of a new substation at Krnovo connected by a 20km double circuit 110kV transmission
line. In addition to this infrastructure, the Project will reconstruct 3.8km of existing paved roads and create
13km of new roads (mostly upgrading of existing gravel roads).
1.3 Scope of this report
The aim of this report is to provide an overview of the ornithological monitoring results from the vantage
point surveys conducted in November and December 2015; and January and February 2016. It specifically
targets the occurrence and use of the wind farm area of species which have the potential to collide with the
operational WTGs.
1 Introduction
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
2
2.1 Vantage Point Surveys
The VP survey methodology below is in accordance with national guidance Prakljačić et al. (2011) and
international good practice (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2014). The survey was performed by two surveyors
experienced in the identification of species within Montenegro. Winter surveys were undertaken on the
following dates including:
13-15 November 2015;
11-13 December 2015;
3-6 January 2016; and
5-7 February 2016.
In order to ensure that bird activity was monitored across the whole wind farm area a total of five vantage
point survey locations were used covering the Project site (VP1 to VP5) and two vantage points (VP6 and
VP7) covering a control area. At least 20 hours of survey were carried out at each vantage point. Survey
duration lasted between two and three hours.
2 Survey Methodology
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
3
Figure 2.1: Vantage Point locations
The surveys were carried out during suitable weather conditions (i.e. not during periods of high winds and
heavy rain). The start/finish times were between dawn and dusk; varied to account for any diurnal
differences in species flight activities.
During the VP surveys, details of all target species were recorded when observed within the 2km study
area of the VP location. This included all species of conservation value at risk of collision with the
operational WTGs such as raptors and waterbirds. Species of conservation concern include all those
species listed as near-threatened or threatened on the European Red List of Birds (BirdLife International,
2015). Information was recorded onto a proforma and included: species, sex (where possible), number and
duration of flight height in 15 second intervals. Five different height categories (<50m, 50m-100m, 100m-
150m, 150m-200m, >200m) were used. In addition, the location and flight direction of target species were
recorded onto a field map of the study area (one map per vantage point per survey).
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
4
In addition to target species, information on secondary species was also recorded. This included species
at less risk of collision with the operational WTGs such as herons and/or raptors and waterbirds not
considered to be of conservation value.
For these secondary species, the number of individuals, flight direction and general flight height were
recorded during the VP surveys. Recording of secondary species was subsidiary to recording of target
species.
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
5
3.1 Target Species
One target and six secondary target species were recorded during the vantage point surveys. These are
summarised in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Target and secondary target species
Species European Red List Target Secondary Target Resident/Migratory
Accipiter gentilis Least Concern Resident
Accipiter nisus Least Concern Resident
Aquila chrysaetos Least Concern Resident
Buteo buteo Least Concern Resident
Buteo lagopus Least Concern Migratory
Circus cyaneus Near Threatened Migratory
Falco tinnunculus Least Concern Resident
3.2 Vantage Point Surveys
The environmental conditions encountered on site were typical of winter. Of the seven species recorded
(Table 3.2), all were raptors; one species (Circus cyaneus) is considered to be near-threatened in Europe.
There was no significant difference in the abundance of birds between the project site (VP1-5) and the
control site (VP6-7) (t=0.83, df=22, p= 0.414).
Within the project area the most observations were made from VP4 and the fewest at VP3. The difference
in the number of observations between VP4 and 3 was however only seven observations. Vantage point
data were subjected to Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using the FactoMiner plugin in R-3.1.2 for
Windows (R Development Core Team, 2014). For clarity, data relating to common resident species (Buteo
buteo and Falco tinnunculus) and control VP6 and VP7 were excluded from the analysis. Birds only
occurred as singletons and therefore there was a linear (1:1) relationship between observation frequency
(total number of observations) and abundance (total number of birds recorded). For this reason vantage
points can be divided into two groups (Figure 3.1) based on the number of observations made at each
vantage point. The difference in the number of observations of Aquila chrysaetos and Circus cyaneus
separated the two groups of turbines, one group in the north (VP4, VP5) and one group in the south (VP1,
VP2 and VP3). The majority of Aquila chrysaetos observations were from VP4 and VP5 and the majority of
the observations of Circus cyaneus were from VP1, VP2 and VP3
Table 3.2: Species observation frequency and cumulative abundance per VP
Species VP 1 VP 2 VP 3 VP 4 VP 5 VP 6 VP 7
Accipiter gentilis 0,0 0,0 0,0 1,1 0,0 0,0 1,1
Accipiter nisus 0,0 0,0 0,0 1,1 0,0 1,1 2,2
Aquila chrysaetos 0,0 0,0 0,0 3,3 1,1 0,0 0,0
Buteo buteo 10,10 12,12 7,7 10,10 12,12 6,6 3,3
3 Results
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
6
Species VP 1 VP 2 VP 3 VP 4 VP 5 VP 6 VP 7
Buteo lagopus 0,0 0,0 1,1 1,1 0,0 0,0 0,0
Circus cyaneus 2,2 2,2 1,1 1,1 0,0 0,0 0,0
Falco tinnunculus 1,1 2,2 1,1 0,0 0,0 1,1 0,0
* Target species in bold type.
Figure 3.1: PCA of vantage point observation frequency and abundance
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
7
Flight paths recorded for primary and secondary target species are presented in Appendix A of this report.
Dominant flight directions observed during the vantage point surveys highlight predominance for a general
north-south movement of birds across the northern turbine alignment (Figure 3.2). Movements of birds in a
general east-west direction were predominant across the southern turbine alignment (Figure 3.3).
Figure 3.2: Flight Direction (northern turbine alignment)
VP1 VP4
VP5
00.5
11.5
22.5
3N
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSES
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
0
1
2
3
4N
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSES
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
0
0.5
1
1.5
2N
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSES
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
8
Figure 3.3: Flight Direction (southern turbine alignment)
VP2 VP 3
01234567
NNNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSES
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
0
1
2
3
4N
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSES
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
9
The data collected from the vantage point surveys (April 2015-February 2016) were put into a Collision
Risk Model (CRM) (Band et al, 2007) to estimate the annual collision risk for the northern turbine array
(Table 4.1) and southern turbine array (Table 4.2). The CRM was based on a 32 turbine layout in order to
provide a ‘worst-case scenario’ estimate. Only those species recorded flying through the collision risk
window (50-150m) are considered to be at risk of colliding with a wind turbine. The minimum and maximum
heights of the turbine blades are considered to be 33.5 and 136.5m respectively. The following species
were not recorded within the collision risk window:
Accipiter gentilis;
Accipiter nisus;
Buteo rufinus;
Circus cyaneus;
Circus macrourus; and
Grus grus.
The 0.99 (99%) avoidance rate is recommended by SNH (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2010) for most
species except for example Falco tinnunculus where a 0.95 (95%) avoidance rate is recommended.
The CRM shows a higher collision risk in the northern turbine array compared to the southern turbine
array. This may be as a result of birds using the increasing elevation north of the northern turbine array to
gain altitude having been hunting or passing low over the plateau between the turbine arrays.
For all species the collision risk appears to be low with, for example, one collision estimated every 5.8
years for Buteo buteo (=1/(0.09+0.08) and one every five years for Falco tinnunculus (=1/(0.18+.02) across
both the northern and southern arrays combined. For migratory species the estimated annual mortality is
considered to be very small with, for example, one collision every 333 years for Circus aeruginosus across
both the northern and southern arrays combined.
Table 4.1: Estimated Collision Risk (northern turbine array)
Species Avoiding action
None 0.9 0.95 0.99
Buteo buteo 8.65 0.87 0.43 0.09
Falco tinnunculus 3.63 0.36 0.18 0.04
Corvus cornax 2.05 0.21 0.10 0.02
Aquila chrysaetos 0.46 0.05 0.02 0.005
Circus aeruginosus 0.25 0.02 0.01 0.002
Falco vespertinus 0.18 0.02 0.01 0.002
Circus pygargus 0.16 0.02 0.01 0.002
Buteo lagopus 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.001
Pernis apivorus 0.05 0.005 0.002 0.0005
Circaetus gallicus 0.02 0.002 0.001 0.0002
4 Annual Collision Risk Assessment
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
10
Table 4.2: Estimated Collision Risk (southern turbine array)
Species Avoiding action
None 0.9 0.95 0.99
Buteo buteo 0.41 0.39 0.08 0.08
Falco tinnunculus 0.11 0.11 0.02 0.02
Circus aeruginosus 0.004 0.004 0.001 0.001
Circus pygargus 0.01 0.01 0.001 0.001
Buteo lagopus 0.003 0.003 0.001 0.001
Falco subbuteo 0.002 0.002 0.0005 0.0005
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
11
5.1 Winter bird surveys
Weather conditions were not typical for winter in Montenegro, being mild with little snow cover. The mild
conditions may have led to an increase in bird activity compared to typical winter conditions with deep
snow cover on the ground. The vantage point survey results are therefore likely to be an over estimate of
bird activity for the area during winter. There was no significant difference in bird abundance between the
site and the control site.
Circus cyaneus was recorded at low frequency and in small numbers and was the only primary target
species. Secondary target species were also recorded at low frequency and in small numbers and there is
no evidence to indicate that there is a significant risk of collision with respect to winter birds.
In relative terms, the species richness in the northern extent of the Project area was greater when
compared to the southern extent of the Project area.
5.2 Collision Risk Assessment
It is currently considered that, taking into account monthly data collection between April 2015 and February
2016 (Mott MacDonald, 2015a; 2015b), the impact of collision is not significant and that mitigation will not
be required. Post construction monitoring should be undertaken in accordance with Scottish Natural
Heritage guidance (2009) in Years 1, 2, 3 and 5, 10 and 15 of operation. This will allow confirmation of the
predicted impact against any realised impact..
Operational monitoring should include systematic carcass searches in accordance with Scottish Natural
Heritage guidance (2009) and Atienza et al (2009) and should account for search, observer and scavenger
bias.
A post construction environmental management plan should be prepared and include a fully detailed
methodology for carcass searches and breeding raptor surveys; the numbers of several breeding raptors
being of bwere of national significance in terms of making up at least 1% of the national population
estimate (Mott MacDonald, 2015).
5 Discussion
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
12
Atienza, J.C., Martín Fierro, I., Infante, O., Valls, J. & Domínguez, J., 2011.Guidelines for assessing the
Impact of Wind Farms on Birds and Bats (Version 4). SEO/BirdLife, Madrid.
Band, W., Madders, M., & Whitfield, D.P. 2007. Developing field and analytical methods to assess avian
collision risk at wind farms. In: de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E.& Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms: Risk
Assessment and Mitigation, pp. 259-275. Quercus, Madrid.
Mott MacDonald, 2015a. Krnovo Wind Farm. Bird Survey Report (April-June 2015). Mott MacDonald,
Cambridge.
Mott MacDonald, 2015b. Krnovo Wind Farm. Bird Survey Report (July-October 2015). Mott MacDonald,
Cambridge.
Prakljačić, B., Saveljić, D., Vujović, A., Jovićević, M., 2011. W indmills and birds: recommendations for
making environmental impact assessment.
R Development Core Team, 2014. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Scottish Natural Heritage, 2009. Guidance note. Guidance on Methods for Monitoring Bird Populations at
Onshore Wind Farms. January, 2009. [pdf] Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C205417.pdf>
[Accessed on 1 March 2016].
Scottish Natural Heritage, 2010. SNH Avoidance Rate Information & Guidance Note. September, 2010.
[pdf] Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/B721137.pdf> [Accessed on 1 March 2016].
Scottish Natural Heritage, 2014. Guidance. Recommended bird survey methods to inform impact
assessment of onshore wind farms. May 2014. [pdf] Available at:
<http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C278917.pdf> [Accessed on 1 March 2016].
6 References
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
13
Appendices
Appendix A. Flight Lines _______________________________________________________________________ 14
Krnovo Wind Farm Bird Survey Report (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617/EVT/EMP/004/A 2 March 2016 -
14
Appendix A. Flight Lines
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
#*#*
#*
#*
#*VP1
VP2
VP3
VP4VP5
Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri(Thailand), MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
[
Sources: Esri, HERE,DeLorme, USGS, Intermap,increment P Corp., NRCAN,Esri Japan, METI, Esri China(Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand),
A
APR
A For issue
Krnovo Wind Farm
[
App'd
Flight lines (November 2015 - February 2016)
353617Krnovo Winter Birds.mxd
IBTF
Environment Division22 Station Road, CambridgeCB1 2JD, United KingdomT +44 (0)1223 463 500F +44 (0)1223 461 007W www.mottmac.com
Rev
Status
Drawing No.
Drawing Title
Ch'k'dDescription DrawnDateRev
Project Title
MM Project No.
GIS File
01/03/2016
Scale1:25000 @ A3
Legend
NS
Location Map
This document should not be relied on or used in circumstances other than those for which it was originally prepared and for which Mott MacDonald Ltd. was commissioned. Mott MacDonald Ltd. accepts no responsibility for this document to any other than the person by whom it was commissioned. MMD-353617-Env-GIS-00-XX-W001
ClientAkuo Energy140, Av. des Champs Elysées75008, Paris
Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2015
SPECIESAccipiter gentilisAccipiter nisusAquila chrysaetosButeo lagopusCircus cyaneusFalco tinnunculusButeo buteo
#* Vantage point!( Turbine base (indicative)