Here is a letter to the Editor The Cape Codder concerning a planned Wind Turbine at Mass Audubon Society’s Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary
BIRD & BAT KILLER!
You’d think it obvious to not build a bird and bat killing wind turbine(WT) at a Wildlife Sanctuary. Massachusetts Audubon Society(MAS) is planning a 150ft tall 11kw WT at Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary(WBWS). Wind Turbines kill! Pre-Construction estimated for wind turbines are regularly wrong. The State of Massachusetts has not published post construction bird and bat kills from WTs…unlike many states. Why?
In Pennsylvania WTs on average kills 25 bats per year. US Geologic Survey says, “Dead bats are turning up beneath wind turbines all over the world.“ The American Wind Energy Association lobbying group, which MAS quotes, claim 1-2 bird kills per turbine per year. Similar sited WTs albeit larger in NJ & DE kill about 80 birds/bats per year…Osprey, Herons, songbirds and in NJ an endangered Peregrine Falcon…only 25 breeding pair in that state. Hundreds of Golden Eagles killed in California by WTs. In Maryland at Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge an 11kw WT not unlike the planned WBWS turbine killed at least one Bald Eagle after lots of studies saying it wouldn’t. It then broke in a wind storm. They didn’t repair it…left it to rot. Not uncommon for WTs.
MAS wishes to sacrifice a Sanctuary which donors wanted as a SANCTUARY. WBWS is in Audubon Important Birding Area(IBA) because it’s ideal for hosting birds! Even the pro wind energy U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service states that Wildlife Sanctuaries shouldn’t be developed for wind energy. All electricity at WBWS is already currently green. A local WT will not reduce CO2 output.
Wellfleet avoided WTs in the CCNS. MAS mission states “To Protect the Nature of Massachusetts for People and Wildlife”….no mention of being a renewable power generation leader. So how about it Mass Audubon…PROTECT!
August 12, 2013
Dear Mr. Prescott & Mass Audubon,
Mass Audubon that campaigned for Cape Wind, despite the lead federal regulator US Fish and Wildlife Service protest that there is a, "lack of relevant baseline data", has now proposed a wind turbine for the Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary. This is an indefensible plan given the fact that wind turbines are known to be prolific killers of birds and bats, and because this is a sanctuary for them.
As you are no doubt aware, Dr. Taber Allison, former Vice President of Mass Audubon, was U.S. Department of Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's appointed Advisor on the U.S. Wind Turbine Siting Guidelines Advisory Committee. Thus Mass Audubon clearly recognizes the inherent risks to wildlife posed by wind turbines, and the places most unsuitable for them, (while my ten years of independent research indicates there is no suitable place for them).
The Department of the Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued guidelines for siting wind towers in 2003 and in 2005:
"--Avoid placing turbines in documented locations of any species of wildlife, fish, or plant protected under the ESA.
-- Avoid locating turbines in known local bird-migration pathways or in areas where birds are highly concentrated, unless mortality risk is low (e.g., birds rarely enter the rotor-swept area). Examples of high-concentration areas for birds are wetlands, state or federal refuges, private duck clubs, staging areas, rookeries, roosts, riparian areas along streams, and landfills
-- Avoid known daily-movement flyways (e.g., between roosting and feeding areas) and areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, low cloud ceilings, and low visibility."
Please refrain from using Mass Audubon’s arguments in favor of this wind turbine on the premises of our needs to address climate change, and to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Wind energy requires concrete processing, the processing of steel, and fiberglass blades that can’t be recycled. Cape Wind, as example, is anticipated to increase vessel traffic. Please consider the harmful emissions produced during the full life cycle of wind energy, including the processing of steel, concrete, construction, operation, and maintenance of just one offshore wind project. The EPA has much to say about concrete and steel processing, not to mention emissions from vessels, top harmful emissions offenders by the EPA.
Wind energy is also a redundant energy source that requires fossil fuel energy sources as back-up when the wind doesn’t blow, or when wind speed is excessive. The reality is that with wind we pay for conventional fuel sources, and then triple current cost for redundant wind energy.
You are likely aware that National Grid has purchased a percentage of Cape Wind’s energy should this project secure bankable wind turbines, find financing and a loan guarantee, commence construction before year's end, and prevail in five federal lawsuits. The British company has a new plan to remedy the unpredictability of the wind that negates any environmental benefits.
August 3, 2012
'We could soon be paying billions for this wind back-up The National Grid's latest plan is taking off into the weirdest scheme yet, thanks to our politicians’ obsession with wind turbines'
"...National Grid has come up with, only made possible by the latest computer technology and “cloud software”, is to hook up thousands of diesel generators, remotely controlled by the grid, to provide almost instantly available back-up for when the wind drops..."
Jim Gordon of Cape Wind obviously recognized the need to burn fossil fuel to back-up his unreliable offshore wind energy project that lacks financing.
‘The Real Jim Gordon, Environmental Hypocrite!’
“You may have heard that the same man, Jim Gordon of Energy Management, Inc., who is proposing good, clean, renewable energy in the form of wind turbines for the Cape is also proposing a DIESEL burning power plant for Chelsea…” (next to an elementary school)
I invite you to follow me on Twitter @ https://twitter.com/Barbarajdurkin
As I read and post international news related to wind energy. During the past six months, I’ve notice a dramatic shift in the tone of articles regarding wind. Criticism of this scheme is trending in major news publications. The subsidies are drying up as wind energy mandates are being repealed around the world. There is a big downside for Mass Audubon if this turbine goes in as people are really catching on to the corruption and impacts behind this industry. Mass Audubon leaders would be wise to recognize that there is no benefit to be gained by the sacrifice of birds at the altar of wind, before the masses do, and before birds are sacrificed to a useless wind turbine at the Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Center, and fingers begin to point.
Mass Audubon's "support" for Cape Wind, and testimony, puts you in conflict with strict liability criminal statutes. It's very troubling to me that your continued actions indicate an utter disregard for listed, and endangered species, and relevant protections and international treaties.
Reference File No. NAE-2004-338-1, EOEA No. 12643:
"By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year."
“Europe is ahead of us.”
'Europe Pulls The Plug On Its Green Future' The Australian 8/10/13
Massachusetts Audubon should withdraw this ill-conceived proposal prior to the September 19, 2013 Public Hearing by the Wellfleet Zoning Board of Appeals. As this wildlife sanctuary exists for the protection of wildlife as most expect Massachusetts Audubon does.
David Cameron has hinted he would like to cut green subsidies that force up energy bills, after questioning the "sanity" of onshore wind farms.
BERLIN—Spiraling costs in Germany for developing renewable energy sources could damage the country's economic competitiveness and need to be scaled back, Chancellor Angela Merkel said Wednesday—without elaborating much on how.
Posted: Jun 10, 2013 5:19 PM EDTUpdated: Jun 10, 2013 6:49 PM EDT
by ABC6 Chief Political Reporter Mark Curtis
Applause broke out the Fairhaven Town Hall, after the Board of Health voted to shut down the Fairhaven wind turbines from 7 at night until 7 every morning, effective immediately.
The Health Department received over 400 complaints.
"What people are experiencing is chronic sleeplessness, being woken up in the middle of the night. They are experiencing headaches. What's really, really hard for some of the families is that some of the children are affected" said Louise Barteau, a wind turbine opponent.
The decision brought tears to some who've fought the turbine battle for years.
Dawn Devlin, a wind turbine opponent said, "It's enough for now, so that for the people who are affected, can get some sleep and get healthy again."
ABC6 Chief Political Reporter Mark Curtis said, "For now the shutdown of the wind turbines is a temporary solution, from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. But if the developer does not find a permanent solution to the noise problems, they could be shut down for good."
The developers of Fairhaven Wind - which operates the turbines – attended the meeting, but declined our request for an interview.
In a surprise move the Board of Selectmen voted that Fairhaven Wind had breached its lease because of noise violations, and it has 30 days to fix them.
Dr. Barbara Acksen, from the Fairhaven Board of Health said, "We had been told that if the DEP found that the turbines were in non-compliance, that they would direct the Select Board to shut them down, and I was very surprised that they didn't."
Testing showed that the wind turbines were too loud, especially at night.
Dear Mr Prescott and Mass. Audubon Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary,
We have yet to receive a reply from the numerous emails providing you with real world impact of Wind Turbines, micro, small, medium and large as they all operate in the same fashion. High speed blades in open nature killing more flying animals than researchers guess at. We have seen where you attempt to explain a 40 ft blade as micro, suggesting that somehow that will prevent bat and bird deaths. Or that somehow having no peer reviewed studies about small/medium wind turbine deaths means they won’t kill. Or worse, some say other things kill more so wind turbine aren’t as bad, which is like saying I murder just one so the mass murderer makes me ok. You talk about sound and we provide numerous death counts. Researching the history of WBWS, it was interesting to learn that area was specially selected to research birds even before the WBWS as it had an almost unique spectrum of birds and habitat. I saw where Cape Cod is seeing the return of Bald Eagles. So the poignant official report below will let you realize that as a leader of the Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary you would rather not have to explain why dead animals keep appearing or why someone or something is injured by mechanical debris of a large machine a hundred feet in the air at your public facility for nature. Please stop the wind turbine now to prevent this big mistake. I hope you can admit we aren’t making up the facts we are sending you and they very much apply to what you are doing. There is no magical solution to installing spinning blade at Wildlife Refuge that will prevent numerous deaths, like the one the report below shows. That Wildlife Refuge had to admit reality and has removed the “micro” wind turbine. Save the Sanctuary a lot of money from well-meaning donors and ill-will by not attempting to build this large machine and put it towards land acquisition, bird studies, something good, or CO2 lowering efficiency technologies at your building. Do you think the Maryland Refuge situation is so different from yours?
You have been told the turbine is small, low, only 10kw and those don’t kill. The following should disabuse you of these UNTURTHS. People are given medicine because it is proven safe….has your manufacturer proven this medicine is safe? Because we see lots of patients dying! We are not suggesting that you can’t make meaningful reductions in your energy usage to lower your carbon emission….we are just telling you that Wind Turbines harm wildlife and in larger numbers than your advisers, consultants, friends, colleagues, associates, manufactures, lobbyists will admit. Please don’t be so enamored with wind energy to allow it in your Wildlife Sanctuary. Remember killing Eagles is a Federal Crime that one day may be prosecuted and now you can’t say you haven’t been warned that killing an Eagle is possible.
Eagle’s Cause of Death Confirmed at Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge in Maryland
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has confirmed that a dead bald eagle found below a small 10-kilowatt
wind turbine on Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge in Rock Hall, Md., was killed by blunt force trauma.
Refuge staff found the adult male eagle and sent it to the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease
Study in Athens, Ga., to establish the specific cause of death. The Service received the necropsy report
from the Georgia facility the afternoon of June 19, 2012.
As smart renewable energy is important to the Service, the refuge installed a single, 60-foot-tall wind
turbine in 2002 to provide an alternative source of energy for its facilities. In addition, the refuge has
installed a 5-kilowatt solar array that provides power to an administrative building. A contractor hired by
the Service conducted a 3.5-year study after the turbine’s installation, which indicated a mortality rate
averaging less than three native birds a year and no effects to eagles.
In Maryland, the bald eagle population has increased from 44 nesting pairs in 1977 to now more than 500
pairs. A very dense population of bald eagles lives in the refuge area, with about eight nesting territories
this year. An American success story, the eagle’s remarkable recovery led to its removal from the federal
list of threatened and endangered species in 2007.
However, bald eagles remain protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The Service
continues to encourage wind project developers to coordinate early to help minimize risks to birds and is
finalizing guidance for eagle conservation plans to address potential impacts. The Service has treated the
incident at Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge as it would any similar incident at a non-federal wind
Due to hurricane damage and the lack of power being generated by the turbine, the refuge has removed
the turbine and blades, leaving only the tower. The refuge is re-evaluating the long term viability of this
wind energy project to consider additional factors, such as newer technology, vertical wind turbines, tower
height and location.
Media: Meagan Racey, 413-253-8558, Meagan_racey@fws.gov
Wind projects and eagles: Sarah Nystrom, 413-253-8592, firstname.lastname@example.org
Refuge and alternative energy project: Suzanne Baird, 410-228-2692 ext 101, Suzanne_baird@fws.gov
KEEP IT A SANCTUARY
Save Our Sea Shore
The leadership of Wellfleet Bay Wildlife "Sanctuary" seem to wish to convert the mission of the Sanctuary from wildlife and habitat protection area to Electrical Generation facility area...renewable...but never the less a production facility. It is appalling that a WILDLIFE SANCTUARY has had their mission perverted in to a space hogging, wildlife killing, technology center!!!
The leadership has lost their way. There are so few wildlife sanctuaries and the appeal of these vanity projects is apparently too much for these "care takers". They love the money and attention gleaned with these industrial, nature killing machines! They go to the lobbyists funded conferences telling about all the good that will come from placing these machines in a natural environment. There are the state/federal funded research better known as guessing, as to the harm that will be wreaked. Invariably the "guessers" are regularly wrong, though they get paid to make sure most projects are "viable" and thereby self perpetuating(money in their pockets). Check this research out http://saveourseashore.org/?p=2709 "
Although we predicted abundance would remain relatively constant, raptor abundance was lower post-construction compared to pre-construction levels.""
THIS HAS TO BE STOPPED!
Remember electricity can be generated anywhere and transported. Money can be spend on harmless projects that dramatically lowering usage of electricity...but the vanity of these projects just aren't as appealing as 100-200 ft industrial machine in the middle of a WILDLIFE SANCTUARY!
Instead of spending money to acquire more land to in the wonderful true mission of ab Audubon Sanctuary's which is to protect a piece of nature they now spend money on newer buildings, newer larger more harmful power generation machinery! Why exactly does an Audubon center need air conditioning....most people that live nearby don't have it? Why not convert more facilities to open environment and remove the video screen for that simple thing people are really looking for....THE SANCTUARY OF NATURE!
The current industrial wind project being attempted at the Wellfleet Bay "WILDLIFE SANCTUARY"....please note they call it a micro turbine...is only 150ft tall with 40ft blades that will kill birds and bats!
Their first attempt at an even larger wind turbines project in 2008 met with failure as reasonable heads prevailed and shot that project down.
Here is some information about the solar production facility at the Audubon Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary as more doesn't even seem to be enough.
"Now we’d like to complete the installation of a new 41 kilowatt photovoltaic solar array that, combined with our existing solar array...". Please take note in the following pictures that they take land from the nature to build their production facility. Also called BULLDOZING!!! Note that solar panels raise the temperature of the local environment as welll a fine thing for a "Sanctuary".
Note in the picture above more greenery could have supported butterflies, bees, birds, insects....but alas the Wildlife Sanctuary chooses glass, aluminum, silicon, and higher temperatures, They have chosen an Energy Production Mission over Wildlife and Nature mission.
Please go back an investigate the original mission of the Sanctuary, what does the charter say? It might be time for better leadership!
KEEP IT A SANCTUARY!
Call this the bat effect: A bat killed by a wind turbine in Somerset can lead to higher tomato prices at the Wichita farmers market.
Bats are something of a one-species stimulus program for farmers, every year gobbling up millions of bugs that could ruin a harvest. But the same biology that allows the winged creatures to sweep the night sky for fine dining also has made them susceptible to one of Pennsylvania's fastest-growing energy tools.
The 420 wind turbines now in use across Pennsylvania killed more than 10,000 bats last year -- mostly in the late summer months, according to the state Game Commission. That's an average of 25 bats per turbine per year, and the Nature Conservancy predicts as many as 2,900 turbines will be set up across the state by 2030.
This is a bad time to be a bat.
It may seem like a good thing to those who fear the flying mammals, but the wind farm mortality rate is an acute example of how harnessing natural energy can lead to disruptions in the circle of life -- and the cycle of business. This chain of events mixes biology and economics: Bat populations go down, bug populations go up and farmers are left with the bill for more pesticide and crops (which accounts for those pricey tomatoes in Kansas).
Wind industry executives are shelling out millions of dollars on possible solutions that don't ruin their bottom line, even as wind farms in the area are collaborating with the state Game Commission to work carcass-combing into daily operations.
"If you look at a map and see where the mountains are, everything funnels through Somerset," said Tracey Librandi Mumma, the wildlife biologist who led the March commission report on bird and bat mortality. "If I'm out driving ... I wonder, 'How many are being killed at that one?' "
Bats are nature's pesticide, consuming as many as 500 insects in one hour, or nearly 3,000 insects in one night, said Miguel Saviroff, the agricultural financial manager at the Penn State Cooperative Extension in Somerset County.
"A colony of just 100 little brown bats may consume a quarter of a million mosquitoes and other small insects in a night," he said. "That benefits neighbors and reduces the insect problem with crops."
If one turbine kills 25 bats in a year, that means one turbine accounted for about 17 million uneaten bugs in 2010.
Bats save farmers a lot of money: About $74 per acre, according to an April report in Science magazine that calculated the economic value of bats on a county-by-county basis.
In Allegheny County, bats save farmers an estimated $642,986 in a year. That's nothing compared with more agricultural counties in the region such as Somerset ($6.7 million saved), Washington ($5.5 million) or Westmoreland ($6.1 million).
Lancaster County? You owe bats $22 million.
In all of Pennsylvania, bats saved farmers $277.9 million in estimated avoided costs.
Initially, the "Economic Importance of Bats in Agriculture" article was meant to attract attention to the white-nose fungus virus that is wiping out entire colonies of bats across the country.
"We were getting a lot of questions about why we should care about white-nose syndrome," said author Justin Boyles, a post-doctoral fellow in bat research at the University of Tennessee. "Really, it's the economic impact that makes people listen."
The white-nose syndrome is compounding the wind turbine problems, having killed more than a million bats in the northeastern United States since 2006. It surfaced in Pennsylvania in 2008 and has killed thousands of in-state bats.
Meanwhile, the same creatures that save Pennsylvania farmers millions of dollars each year are also costing energy companies some big bucks as they try to stave off a mass execution beneath the blades.
Technology is being developed on sound generators that would deter the creatures from getting too close with a high-pitched noise only heard by bats. Some studies suggest that a slowdown in blade speed would reduce mortality.
But new technology is expensive and a blade slowdown would reduce the number of megawatts produced.
"All these options cost money," said Ms. Librandi Mumma, and it can be a tough sell to the private industry handing over the information that helps in the research. "You don't want to penalize the hand that's giving you the data."
Companies that have signed a Game Commission cooperation agreement must foot the bill for the commission's pre-construction reconnaissance and post-construction monitoring. The cost of the process varies, but the research can last several months and involve extensive habitat monitoring.
Under the agreement, each site conducts two years of mortality monitoring, sending a lucky employee out every day from April to November to comb the six meters around each turbine for carcasses. The employees are tested to see "how good they are at finding dead things," said Ms. Librandi Mumma.
"We got a dead snake once, because it was on the road and they were just collecting everything dead," she said. "It wasn't because the wind turbine killed it. The guy was just being thorough."
Some retrievers aren't so good.
"The average person finds 30 percent of the carcasses that are under a turbine," said Ms. Librandi Mumma, so the commission has come up with an algorithm that accounts for the missing bodies.
Agents will leave a carcass on the ground and note how long it takes to disappear -- this provides some insight on how many carcasses are unaccounted for because of living animals that have a taste for decomposing flesh.
Some wind companies with Pennsylvania operations have already seen seven-figure expenses on account of the bat problem.
NextEra Energy Resources, which operates the Somerset wind farms visible from the Pennsylvania Turnpike, has five active sites in Pennsylvania but did not participate in the Game Commission study.
The company monitors its mortality rates in house and funds outside research to reduce bird and bat deaths at its sites, said Skelly Holmbeck, environmental business manager at the Juno Beach, Fla.-based firm.
The funding program involving nine different research facilities is "in the millions overall," she said.
Migratory research that precedes any construction can employ bird watchers, nets or tape recorders designed to read the local ecosystem.
PPL Renewable Energy LLC of Allentown had planned on installing four turbines at its Lancaster County wind farm, but went with only two after sensitive avian populations were found nearby.
"There were design aspects that we elected not to use," said spokeswoman Mimi Mylin. "Some construction sites use lattice towers, but those can become roosting sites" for birds.
It's not just bats that are dying around wind turbines. An estimated 1,680 birds were killed by turbines last year, according to the state Game Commission report.
The disparity in mortality stems from biology. Birds typically crash into the blade and die from blunt force trauma, while bats suffer from a condition called barotrauma. It's the bat equivalent of the "bends" that scuba divers can suffer if they surface too quickly.
The rapid drop in air pressure around the blades causes the bats' lungs to burst, and they collapse with no ostensible lacerations or scars on the body.
"They just look like they're sleeping," said Ms. Librandi Mumma.
Bats must fly very close to the blades for their lungs to burst, and some researchers say the lights around the turbines might attract insects, which in turn attract bats.
Barotrauma in bats was only discovered in 2008, when a Canadian biologist thought to dissect one of the unblemished carcasses turning up at wind farms across North America.
"It was an 'a-ha' moment," said Ms. Librandi Mumma.
The turbine problem has yielded some other, unexpected contributions to bat research.
One carcass hunter in central Pennsylvania found a Seminole bat felled by barotrauma under the blades. Seminole bats live in the southeastern United States and rarely show up in Pennsylvania.
"It's like a double-edged sword," said Ms. Librandi Mumma. "You're excited because it's a new bat, but it's a dead one."
The Seminole specimen was kept on dry ice in a small styrofoam container by a commission employee and handed over to Suzanne McLaren, the collection manager at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History's research center in East Liberty. They met in the Ligonier Diamond town square -- home to a postcard-perfect gazebo and lots of sunlight -- for the transfer.
The bat, which may have traveled here from as far as Florida, found its final resting place in a freezer in East Liberty.
A letter to:
Dear Audubon Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary,
I would like to draw your attention to some research concerning raptors and wind turbines and why you should not choose a wind turbine for the Audubon Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary. We are sure some of you think this is a broken record….but we wish to convince you with HARD FACT that wind turbines have a dramatic impact on wildlife and that the wind turbine lobby has been successful so far in soft pedaling the dramatic impact.
"Overall raptor abundance was on average 47% lower post-construction"
"Although we predicted abundance would remain relatively constant, raptor abundance was lower post-construction compared to pre-construction levels."
This from A pre- and post-construction study conducted to determine the impact of a windfarm on the abundance and behaviour of raptors in Wisconsin, USA.
Garvin, J. C., Jennelle, C. S., Drake, D. and Grodsky, S. M. (2011), Response of raptors to a windfarm. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48: 199–209. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01912.x
Once again the prediction that wind turbines won’t have an effect on animals and once again animals are impacted. A Wind Turbine is an extremely poor choice to have at the Audubon Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary. Please, we ask you to send us any data you have on Wind Turbines not impacting animals…beyond anecdotal …I visited a turbine and it didn't look that bad…or someone I know has one and he says is isn’t bad or we didn’t look for any dead animals so we didn’t find any. The evidence of 50% avoidance is horrific for an Audubon Wildlife Sanctuary.
KEEP IT A WILDLIFE SANCTUARY!
FAIRHAVEN — Fairhaven's two industrial-sized wind turbines are in violation of Massachusetts noise regulations, according to preliminary results of a sound study conducted by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
The announcement at a meeting Tuesday night prompted opponents to demand the turbines be shut down.
DEP Deputy Commissioner Martin Suuberg told the Board of Health that noise from the turbines exceeded state regulations in five of the 24 periods during which the DEP conducted testing.
DEP started its sound study in August to determine whether the turbines were more than 10 decibels louder than ambient noise at homes of residents who had complained about the turbine noise.
Five different locations were tested overall but the five periods of noncompliance came from only single locations on Little Bay Road, Peirces' Point Road and Teal Circle.
Winds were blowing from the northwest and northeast, at varying speeds, when the turbines were found to be exceeding noise regulations by differences of .7 to 1.5 decibels, according to DEP data presented Tuesday night.
The DEP still needs to collect more noise samples at varying wind speeds before the test is complete, but Suuberg said the state agency would work with the town and developers to "mitigate the problem."
Developer Gordon Dean said he disputed some of the methodology used in the DEP's study but agreed to work with the town and DEP to "see what might be done in a cost-effective manner."
He said he hoped a solution could be found before winter, when many of the violations were found.
That response was not good enough for the more than 30 members of the turbine opposition group Windwise who were in attendance and cheered and booed various speakers throughout the meeting.
At one point, many in the audience began shouting for Board of Health Chairman Peter DeTerra to make a motion to shut down the wind turbines until Fairhaven Wind presented the board with a mitigation plan.
"Until you find a way to fix this, it's only fair to shut them down," Grant Menard said.
Lisa Plante agreed, saying "the burden of proof is on the developers to prove they can be in compliance."
Planning Board Chairman Wayne Hayward warned the Board of Health against taking any action "without the advice of counsel," saying "don't allow yourself to be pressured by the 35 people here."
His comments were met with boos and yells from Windwise members.
DeTerra said he would wait to make a decision until the Board of Health could meet with selectmen and town counsel.