Baker Consultants Ltd

Updated guidance on bird surveys for proposed wind farm sites in England has been long awaited, currently ecologists are using methods set out by Scottish Natural Heritage which often do not suit English conditions. This new guidance however presents us with a new set of problems without providing much in the way of a route map for ecologists, developers or planners. At the highest level I do not believe that it is unfair to say that the document is not so much guidance but more a “wish list” for research into the ecological impacts of wind turbines. Natural England quite rightly points out that there is a lack of published data and a need for more research but this should not have been presented in a Technical Information Note (TIN 069)

At the detailed level the guidance that is given is ambiguous using imprecise language and terms that are open to interpretation. For example the document talks of “very small” developments, “significant numbers” of birds,” several kilometres” from the site, “relatively high” concentrations but does not define any of these terms. The guidance calls for an extra year of data to be collected ‘for species of high conservation priority’ but does not define what those species are. A list of key species is present in an appendix but it is not clear if this is intended to be an exclusive list, nor does it take into account the status of a species on a site, whether it is a core area for that species or simply an occasional bird passing through but broadly ‘off course’.

The guidance also calls for a greater levels if survey information than previously required including surveying 500m – 2km outside the development site, survey at night using radar or other technologies and finding control areas close to the development site against which data can be compared. Not only are these proposals likely to be highly impractical but also they are not proportionate to the extent that they could incur such a significant cost that would challenge the viability of most wind farm developments.

The greatest danger with this guidance note is that guidance is more often than not interpreted as rules when it comes to dealing with planners, advocates at a public inquiry or even Natural England officers. It is our experience that there is wide variability in interpretation between Natural England offices with an inconsistent application of guidance. There is an urgent need for clarification of these guidelines and a need for the industry to set up a dialogue with Natural England at the earliest opportunity to try and provide the certainty that is required in order to prevent long delays to wind energy developments.