The Register-Herald, Beckley, West Virginia

Local News

July 11, 2009

Endangered bats behind effort to halt work on wind farm

By John Raby

CHARLESTON — Environmental and animal rights groups want to stop further construction on a West Virginia wind farm until a judge can determine whether the project is harmful to the endangered Indiana bat.

The Animal Welfare Institute and Mountain Communities for Responsible Energy filed a motion for a preliminary injunction Friday in U.S. District Court in Maryland against developer Beech Ridge Energy LLC of Rockville, Md.

No hearing was immediately set before U.S. District Judge Roger Titus.

The groups filed a lawsuit last month seeking to force the company to obtain a required federal permit before it continued working on the project in Greenbrier County.

Shortly thereafter, Beech Ridge Energy told the plaintiffs it would begin placing wind turbines on the project starting in August, said attorney Bill Eubanks, who is representing the groups.

“Because the defendants moved forward rapidly with construction after the filing of the complaint, plaintiffs were left with no recourse but to file the motion,” Eubanks said. “If you allow the construction to go forward and get the wind turbines up and operational, it’s a done deal. There’s no way to go back.”

Beech Ridge owner Invenergy LLC of Chicago had hoped to have 67 turbines operating by year’s end. Invenergy Vice President Dave Grober declined comment on the motion Friday.

The plaintiffs say Beech Ridge’s development will place 390-foot-tall wind turbines within miles of known Indiana bat habitat. A permit is required from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act if an otherwise lawful activity results in the incidental death or harm to an endangered species, Eubanks has said.

The latest motion was accompanied by affidavits from three biologists. Thomas Kunz, a biology professor at Boston University, said Beech Ridge Energy’s projection of 6,746 bat deaths annually from the wind project was “likely an underestimate.”

The state Supreme Court upheld the project last year and the state Public Service Commission earlier this year said it would not reconsider a previous decision to approve the siting and construction.

Text Only
Local News