Migrating Whooping Cranes avoid wind-energy infrastructure when selecting stopover habitat.

Electricity generation from renewable-energy sources has increased dramatically worldwide in recent decades. Risks associated with wind-energy infrastructure are not well understood for endangered Whooping Cranes (Grus americana) or other vulnerable Crane populations. From 2010 to 2016, we monitored 57 Whooping Cranes with remote-telemetry devices in the United States Great Plains to determine potential changes in migration distribution (i.e., avoidance) caused by presence of wind-energy infrastructure. During our study, the number of wind towers tripled in the Whooping Crane migration corridor and quadrupled in the corridor's center. Median distance of Whooping Crane locations from nearest wind tower was 52.1 km, and 99% of locations were >4.3 km from wind towers. A habitat selection analysis revealed that Whooping Cranes used areas ≤5.0 km (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8-5.4) from towers less than expected (i.e., zone of influence) and that Whooping Cranes were 20 times (95% CI 14-64) more likely to use areas outside compared to adjacent to towers. Eighty percent of Whooping Crane locations and 20% of wind towers were located in areas with the highest relative probability of Whooping Crane use based on our model, which comprised 20% of the study area. Whooping Cranes selected for these places, whereas developers constructed wind infrastructure at random relative to desirable Whooping Crane habitat. As of early 2020, 4.6% of the study area and 5.0% of the highest-selected Whooping Crane habitat were within the collective zone of influence. The affected area equates to habitat loss ascribed to wind-energy infrastructure; losses from other disturbances have not been quantified. Continued growth of the Whooping Crane population during this period of wind infrastructure construction suggests no immediate population-level consequences. Chronic or lag effects of habitat loss are unknown but possible for long-lived species. Preferentially constructing future wind infrastructure outside of the migration corridor or inside of the corridor at sites with low probability of Whooping Crane use would allow for continued wind-energy development in the Great Plains with minimal additional risk to highly selected habitat that supports recovery of this endangered species.

Quantifying and addressing the prevalence and bias of study designs in the environmental and social sciences.

Building trust in science and evidence-based decision-making depends heavily on the credibility of studies and their findings. Researchers employ many different study designs that vary in their risk of bias to evaluate the true effect of interventions or impacts. Here, we empirically quantify, on a large scale, the prevalence of different study designs and the magnitude of bias in their estimates. Randomised designs and controlled observational designs with pre-intervention sampling were used by just 23% of intervention studies in biodiversity conservation, and 36% of intervention studies in social science. We demonstrate, through pairwise within-study comparisons across 49 environmental datasets, that these types of designs usually give less biased estimates than simpler observational designs. We propose a model-based approach to combine study estimates that may suffer from different levels of study design bias, discuss the implications for evidence synthesis, and how to facilitate the use of more credible study designs.

Estimating offsets for avian displacement effects of anthropogenic impacts.

Biodiversity offsetting, or compensatory mitigation, is increasingly being used in temperate grassland ecosystems to compensate for unavoidable environmental damage from anthropogenic developments such as transportation infrastructure, urbanization, and energy development. Pursuit of energy independence in the United States will expand domestic energy production. Concurrent with this increased growth is increased disruption to wildlife habitats, including avian displacement from suitable breeding habitat. Recent studies at energy-extraction and energy-generation facilities have provided evidence for behavioral avoidance and thus reduced use of habitat by breeding waterfowl and grassland birds in the vicinity of energy infrastructure. To quantify and compensate for this loss in value of avian breeding habitat, it is necessary to determine a biologically based currency so that the sufficiency of offsets in terms of biological equivalent value can be obtained. We describe a method for quantifying the amount of habitat needed to provide equivalent biological value for avifauna displaced by energy and transportation infrastructure, based on the ability to define five metrics: impact distance, impact area, pre-impact density, percent displacement, and offset density. We calculate percent displacement values for breeding waterfowl and grassland birds and demonstrate the applicability of our avian-impact offset method using examples for wind and oil infrastructure. We also apply our method to an example in which the biological value of the offset habitat is similar to the impacted habitat, based on similarity in habitat type (e.g., native prairie), geographical location, land use, and landscape composition, as well as to an example in which the biological value of the offset habitat is dissimilar to the impacted habitat. We provide a worksheet that informs potential users how to apply our method to their specific developments and a framework for developing decision-support tools aimed at achieving landscape-level conservation goals.

Modeling effects of crop production, energy development and conservation-grassland loss on avian habitat.

Birds are essential components of most ecosystems and provide many services valued by society. However, many populations have undergone striking declines as their habitats have been lost or degraded by human activities. Terrestrial grasslands are vital habitat for birds in the North American Prairie Pothole Region (PPR), but grassland conversion and fragmentation from agriculture and energy-production activities have destroyed or degraded millions of hectares. Conservation grasslands can provide alternate habitat. In the United States, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is the largest program maintaining conservation grasslands on agricultural lands, but conservation grasslands in the PPR have declined by over 1 million ha since the program's zenith in 2007. We used an ecosystem-services model (InVEST) parameterized for the PPR to quantify grassland-bird habitat remaining in 2014 and to assess the degradation status of the remaining grassland-bird habitat as influenced by crop and energy (i.e., oil, natural gas, and wind) production. We compared our resultant habitat-quality ratings to grassland-bird abundance data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey to confirm that ratings were related to grassland-bird abundance. Of the grassland-bird habitat remaining in 2014, about 19% was degraded by crop production that occurred within 0.1 km of grassland habitats, whereas energy production degraded an additional 16%. We further quantified the changes in availability of grassland-bird habitat under various land-cover scenarios representing incremental losses (10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%) of CRP grasslands from 2014 levels. Our model identified 1 million ha (9%) of remaining grassland-bird habitat in the PPR that would be lost or degraded if all CRP conservation grasslands were returned to crop production. Grassland regions world-wide face similar challenges in maintaining avian habitat in the face of increasing commodity and energy production to sate the food and energy needs of a growing world population. Identifying ways to model the impacts of the tradeoff between food and energy production and wildlife production is an important step in creating solutions.

Effects of wind-energy facilities on breeding grassland bird distributions.

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.