GLENN PERRIGO, Ph.D. Personal Office : 108B Biology Building, MSC 158, Texas A&M University, Kingsville, TX 78363. Telephone (361) 593-4170 FAX: 361-593-3800 E-MAIL: glenn-perrigo@tamuk.edu Residence: 1256 E. County Road 2302, Riviera, TX 78379 Telephone (361) 297- 5533 Education Ph.D. in Zoology, 1986, Institute of Reproductive Biology, Univ. of Texas at Austin B.S. in Biology, 1980, State University of New York at Brockport Academic and Research Positions Held 2006-present Professor and Chair, Department of Biological and Health Sciences, Texas

A&M University-Kingsville 2003-2006 Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Biology, Texas A&M University-Kingsville 2000-2006 Associate Professor, Department of Biology, Texas A&M University- Kingsville 1996-2000: Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Texas A&M University- Kingsville. 1995-1996: Visiting Assistant Professor, Biology Department, Westminster College 1989-1996: Research Assistant Professor of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia (non-tenure track) 1986-89: Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Missouri-Columbia 1985-86: Assistant Instructor in Zoology, University of Texas at Austin 1984-85: Graduate Fellow in Zoology, University of Texas at Austin 1982-83: Teaching Assistant in Zoology, University of Texas at Austin 1980-84: Graduate Research Assistant in Zoology, University of Texas at Austin 1980: Laboratory Technician in Endocrinology, S.U.N.Y. Brockport 1980: Adult Education Teacher, Ornithology, Greece Central School District, NY 1978-80: Undergrad. Teaching Assistant (Organic & Biochemistry), S.U.N.Y.

Brockport.

COURSES TAUGHT

Texas A&M University-Kingsville (1996-2008) • Human Anatomy & Physiology I (19 semesters) • Human Anatomy & Physiology II (16 semesters) • Introductory Zoology (9 semesters) • Animal Physiology lecture and laboratory (7 semesters) • Vertebrate Zoology lecture and laboratory (1 semester) • Amazon Biology (1 semester) • Undergraduate Seminar (1 semester) • Behavioral Ecology — Undergraduate and Graduate level (3 semesters)

• Advanced Biological Concepts — Graduate level (1 semester) • Ornithology lecture and laboratory — Undergraduate and Graduate level (6 semesters) • Hormones and Behavior — Graduate level (1 semester) • Research Projects in Biology (20 semesters) Westminster College (1995-96) • General Biology Laboratory (2 semesters) University of Missouri-Columbia (1990-96) • General Biology: Physiology & Organismal Biology (5 semesters) • General Biology: Ecology, Evolution & Behavior (2 semesters) • General Biology: Cellular & Molecular Biology (1 semester) • General Biology for non-majors (2 semesters) • General Zoology Lecture (1 semester) • Neotropical Biology: Journey to the Amazon (5 semesters) • Vertebrate Physiology Lecture & Laboratory (4 semesters) University of Texas at Austin (1982-86) • Vertebrate Physiology Laboratory (3 semesters) • General Zoology Laboratory (1 semester) • General Botany Laboratory (1 semester) • Mammalian/Human Anatomy Laboratory (2 semesters) Greece Central School District (1980) • Ornithology and Field Identification (Adult Education), Greece Central School District, N.Y. (1 semester)

PUBLICATIONS Perrigo, G. (2004). Birds of the Baffin Bay area of Kleberg County. Texas Birds, 5(1): 34-39. Perrigo, G. (2004). Epilogue to an epidemic: What really happened with West Nile Virus? Texas Birds, 5(1): 17-19. Small, M., C. Pruett, D. Hewitt, E. Hellgren, G. Perrigo and G. Waggerman (1998). Brain and plasma cholinesterase activity in white-winged doves (Zenaida asiatica) exposed to methyl-parathion. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 34: 698-702 Perrigo, G. (1996). Mammalian reproductive strategies. In: W. Nierenberg, Ed., Encyclopedia of Environmental Biology: Volume II, pp. 443-455. Academic Press, San Diego. Perrigo, G., and D. Booher (1995). Slaty Vireos (Vireo brevipennis) in Central Veracruz and a note on Golden-cheeked Warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) in Chiapas. The Euphonia., 3: 13-17. Perrigo, G., L. Belvin, P. Quindry, T. Kadir, J. Becker, C. van Look and J. Niewoehner (1993). Genetic mediation of infanticidal and parental behavior in male and female domestic and wild stock house mice. Behavior Genetics., 23: 525-531.

Perrigo, G., L. Belvin, and F.S. vom Saal (1993). Social inhibition of infanticide in male house mice. Ethology Ecology & Evolution, 5: 181-185. Perrigo, G., and L. Belvin (1992). Time and sex in the male mouse: Temporal regulation of infanticide and parental behavior. Chronobiology International, 9 (6): 421-433. Perrigo, G., L. Belvin, and F.S. vom Saal (1991). Individual variation in the neural timing of infanticide and parental behavior in male house mice. Physiology and Behavior, 50: 287-296. Perrigo, G. (1990). Food, sex, time and effort in a small mammal: Energy allocation strategies for survival and reproduction. Behaviour, 114 (1-4): 191-205. Perrigo, G., L. Belvin, and F.S. vom Saal (1990). Humane behavioral assays in the laboratory: An alternative test for assessing how rodents behave toward young. Humane Innovations and Alternatives in Animal Experimentation, 4: 208-210. Perrigo, G., R. Brundage, R.H. Barth, C. Benesh, N. Damude, C. Fogg, and J. Gower (1990). Spring migration corridor of Golden-cheeked Warblers in Tamaulipas, Mexico. American Birds, 44: 28. Perrigo, G., W.C. Bryant, and F.S. vom Saal (1990). A unique neural timing system prevents male mice from harming their own offspring. Animal Behaviour, 39: 535-539. Perrigo, G., W.C. Bryant, L. Belvin, and F.S. vom Saal (1989). The use of live pups in a humane, injury-free test for infanticidal behaviour in male mice. Animal Behaviour, 38: 897-899. Perrigo, G., W.C. Bryant, and F.S. vom Saal (1989). Fetal, hormonal and experiential factors influencing the mating-induced regulation of infanticide in male house mice. Physiology and Behavior, 46: 121-128. Maruniak, J., J. Taylor, and G. Perrigo (1988). Effects of water deprivation on urine marking and aggression in male house mice. Physiology and Behavior, 42: 47-51. Perrigo, G. (1987). Breeding and feeding strategies in deer mice and house mice when females are challenged to work for their food. Animal Behaviour, 35:1298-1316. Bronson, F.H. and G. Perrigo (1987). Seasonal regulation of reproduction in muroid rodents. American Zoologist, 27: 929-940. Perrigo, G. and F.H. Bronson (1985). Sex differences in the energy allocation strategies of house mice. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 17: 297-302. Perrigo, G. and F.H. Bronson (1985). Behavioral and physiological responses of female house mice to foraging variation. Physiology and Behavior, 34: 437-440. Perrigo, G. and F.H. Bronson (1983). Foraging effort, food intake, fat deposition, and puberty in female mice. Biology of Reproduction, 29: 455-463.

Perrigo, G. and F.H. Bronson (1982). Signaling and priming communication: Independent roles in the reproductive isolation of spatially-separated populations of rodents. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 10: 181-184. Perrigo, G. (1973). Yellow rail (Coturnicops noveboracencis) at Brigantine Refuge. Cassinia, 53: 48-49. Nonrefereed Articles Perrigo, G. (1996). Reproductive biology of house mice. In: P. Raven and G. Johnson, Understanding Biology, (2nd Edition). Wm. C. Brown/Times-Mirror Publishing, St. Louis. Perrigo, G. (1972). The midnight singers. Rochester Academy of Sciences Bulletin, 26 (7). Perrigo, G. (1975-1980) Monthly field editorial. Little Gull, 1 - 5 (1-12; Aug. 1975 - Aug. 1980) Refereed Book Chapters Perrigo, G., and F.S. vom Saal (1994). Behavioral cycles and the neural timing of infanticide and parenting in male mice. In: S. Parmigiani and F.S. vom Saal, Eds., Infanticide and Parental Care, pp. 365-396. Harwood Academic Publishers, London. Perrigo, G. and F.S. vom Saal (1989). Mating-induced regulation of infanticide in male mice: Fetal programming of a unique stimulus-response. In: R. Blanchard, P. Brain, D. Blanchard, and S. Parmigiani, Eds., Ethoexperimental Approaches to the Study of Behavior, pp. 320-336. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Nonrefereed Book Chapters Perrigo, G. and F.H. Bronson (1983). Communication disparities between genetically-divergent populations of deer mice. In: R. Silverstein and D. Muller-Schwarze, Eds., Chemical Signals in Vertebrates: III, pp. 195-209. Plenum Publishing, New York. Books Perrigo, G., Editor (2002). Wildlife in Focus, Coastal Bend Land Trust, Grunwald Printing, Corpus Christi, Texas. 173 pp. Technical Reports Sinclair, J., G. Perrigo and M. Land (2005). Avian Risk Assessment for the Peñascal Wind Farm Project. Submitted to American Shoreline and Heartland Energy.

G. Perrigo (2005). Analysis of systematic avian point-count data in the Kenedy Trust wind resource area from September 2004 through August 2005. Submitted to American Shoreline and Heartland Energy. Ph.D. thesis Perrigo, G. (1986). Energy Allocation Strategies of House Mice. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin. Photography Exhibitions Perrigo, G. (2000)"Images from the Peruvian Amazon: A Biologists Perspective on the People,

Plants, and Animals of a Vast Tropical River and its Forest", October 14th through November 11th, 2000, Conner Museum, Kingsville, Texas.

Perrigo, G. (2001)"Naturally Wild South Texas: the Nature Photography of Hugh Lieck and

Glenn Perrigo", October 15th through November 20th, 2001, Conner Museum, Kingsville, Texas.

Editorship Editor of Texas Birds (2003-2004), published by the Texas Ornithological Society Consulting Zoology Editor: Gunn, W. and K. Downs, managing editors (2004) Wildlife in Focus II, Coastal Bend Land Trust, Grunwald Printing, Corpus Christi, Texas. 165 pp. Conference Organizer “Balancing Wind Power and Wildlife on the Texas Coast”. Sponsored by TAMUK Biology Department and Public Citizen. Venue: Texas A&M University-Kingsville (January 2005)

SYMPOSIA, LECTURES AND PRESENTATIONS Invited International Symposia: • 22nd International Ethological Conference: Mating and Reproductive Strategies; invitation via USIEC Young Ethologist Award. "Infanticide in House Mice" Kyoto, Japan (August 1991) • 20th International Conference on Chronobiology: Symposium on the Comparative Aspects of Circadian Rhythms and Behavioral Ecophysiology of Mammals and Birds. "Time and sex in the male mouse: Temporal regulation of infanticide and parental behavior" Tel Aviv, Israel (June 1991) • NATO Conference on the Protection and Abuse of Young in Animals and Man: Ettore

Majorana Centre for Scientific Culture. "Behavioral cycles and the neural timing of infanticide and parenting in male mice". Erice, Italy (June 1990) • Psychology Department Colloquium speaker: Dalhousie University. "Food, Sex, and Biological Rhythms". Halifax, Canada (January 1990) • 21st International Ethological Conference: Behavioral Ecology Symposium. "Food, Sex and Time in a Small Mammal" Utrecht, The Netherlands (August 1989) • Costs of Reproduction Satellite Conference: Biological Centre, University of Groningen. "Breeding and Feeding Strategies in Deer Mice and House Mice". Groningen, The Netherlands (August 1989) Invited National Symposia: • American Society of Zoologists: Symposium on Behavior as a Factor in the Population Dynamics of Rodents. "Seasonal regulation of reproduction in muroid rodents". Baltimore (December 1985) Invited Regional Symposia: • Texas Renewable Energy Industry Association 2005 annual conference: Texas Coastal and Offshore Wind Forum. University of Houston (November 2005). • Balancing windpower and wildlife on the Texas Coast: Texas A&M University-Kingsville. "Research strategies for avian risk assessment at the proposed Peñascal Windfarm". (January 2005). Invited University Lectures and Seminars: • "People, Plants and Animals of the Amazon", Texas A&M University-Kingsville. (April 1997) • Department of Zoology: Weber State University, "Food, Sex and Time in a small Mammal". (February 1996) • Department of Biology: Georgia Southern University. "Food, Sex and Time in a small Mammal". (April 1995) • Department of Zoology: University of Oklahoma "Food, Sex and Biological Rhythms in a small Mammal". (March 1995) • Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology: University of Missouri-Columbia. "A unique neural timing mechanism in male house mice" (November 1993). • Department of Biology: University of Alabama at Birmingham, "Behavioral cycles and the neural timing of infanticide and parenting in male mice". (August 1992)

• Division of Biological Sciences: University of Kansas, "Intrauterine Position Effects and Sex Differences in House Mice". (April 1991) • Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior: Princeton University. "The Physiology of Infanticide". (April 1990) • Department of Veterinary Medicine: University of Missouri-Columbia, "Sex differences in Energy Allocation Strategies". (April 1990) Recent Abstracts and Presentations • "Coastal offshore wind environmental impacts and other siting issues". Presentation at Texas

Renewable Energy Industry Association 2005 annual conference. Houston (November 2005)..

• "New Genus of Damselfly in United States". Jim Sinclair (TAMUK), Tom Langschied (King

Ranch), Glenn Perrigo (TAMUK), and Alice Hempel ((TAMUK), presentation at Texas Academy of Science Meetings (2005).

• "Foraging and ovulation in house mice: Do small females have a reproductive advantage when food is scarce?" Glenn Perrigo and Michael Boechler, presentation to Texas Academy of Science Meetings (2001).

RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES Funded Submissions • $163,000: Glenn Perrigo, Principal Investigator, National Science Foundation,

"Development, Hormones and Energy Allocation", Sept. 1, 1988 to Aug. 31, 1992 (BNS 8813375).

• $15,500: Glenn Perrigo, Principal Investigator, University of Missouri Research Incentive Fund, 1992-1996 • $298: Provost's Fund (January 1997) • $275: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (January 1997) • $199: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (December 1997) • $200: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (March 1998) • $275: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (January 1999) • $298: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (December 1999) • $280: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (April 2000) • $325: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (December 2000) • $12,500: Alice Hempel and Glenn Perrigo, Co-principal Investigators, Texas A&M

University Health Science Center (CBHEC), "Plants and Diabetes" (Sept. 1, 2000 to August 31, 2000)

• $370: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (April 2001) • $1,650: Glenn Perrigo, Principal Investigator, Texas Excellence Fund “Circadian rhythms, growth, reproduction and aging in house mice susceptible to type II (non-insulin dependent) diabetes (December 2001)

• $4,040: Glenn Perrigo, Principal Investigator, Texas Excellence Fund “Distribution and Status of Eastern and Western Meadowlarks in South Texas” (October 2002). • $500: A&S Dean's Sharing Fund (December 2003) • $36,000: Glenn Perrigo, PI and Jim Sinclair, Co-PI, American Shoreline Company, “Avian

risk analysis of fall migration at proposed Peñascal Windfarm” (October 2004). • $125,000: Glenn Perrigo and Jim Sinclair, PIs, and Margaret Land, Co-PIs, Heartland

Energy, “Avian risk analysis of spring migration and summer breeding season at proposed Peñascal Windfarm” (June 2005).

• $123,291: Alan Fedynich, PI, G. Perrigo and G. Waggerman, Co-PIs, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, “Assessing the impact of the invasive Eurasian Collared-Doves on the breeding ecology of White-winged Doves and other native Columbids” (August 2005).

Juried Photographic Competitions • Winner, Best in Category, Upland Gamebirds & Waterfowl, for "Black-bellied Whistling-Ducks: Vigilant Pair", Texas Audubon Society's 1st Annual Native Wildlife Photography Contest. Judged by professional photographers and TPWD biologists (April 1999). • 2001 Coastal Bend Wildlife Photography Contest: 1st Place, Butterfly Class, and Other

Arachnids Class; 2nd Place, Rodent Class, Arachnid Class, and Macro Class; 3rd place, Other Arachnids Class; Honorable Mention in 4 classes; 2nd Place, Mammal Division, Honorable Mention, Insect Division. Judged by professional photographers (July 2001).

• 2003 Coastal Bend Wildlife Photography Contest: 3rd Place, Special Photography Class;

Honorable Mention in 5 classes: Dragonflies and Damselflies; Bees, Ants and Kin; Patterns in Nature; Water; Amphibians and Landscape. Judged by professional photographers (July 2003).

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Professional Affiliations - American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) - Animal Behavior Society - Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal - American Birding Association - American Society of Zoologists (1984-1993) - Neotropical Bird Club - Texas Ornithological Society - Teaxas Renewable Energy Industry Association - Texas Academy of Science - American Ornithologists Union Consulting and Reviewing

• Grant reviewer for National Science Foundation study areas in Behavioral Neuroendocrinology, Physiological Processes, Animal Learning and Behavior, Systematic and Population Biology, Physiology and Behavior, Animal Behavior program for International Ethological Congress travel grants • Manuscript reviewer for the following journals: Animal Behaviour, Biology of Reproduction, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, Science, Physiology and Behavior, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, Chronobiology International, Journal of Comparative Physiology, Australian Journal of Science, Journal of Comparative Psychology, Ethology Ecology and Evolution, Wildlife Research, Animal Learning and Behavior, Texas Birds • Textbook and chapter reviewer, mainly in areas of physiology, pathophysiology, endocrinology, and reproduction for Harper Collins Publishers, W.C. Brown Publishers, McGraw-Hill Publishers • Birding Ecotour leader for Kenedy Foundation • Professional bird and wildlife tour Guide to Peruvian Amazon and for International

Journeys, Inc. (1991-1996) • Advisory Trustee, Coastal Bend Land Trust and Coastal Bend Wildlife Photography Contest • Ornithologist for Texas Environmental Studies and Analysis, a private consulting firm.

SERVICE

University Service and Committees Administrative - Chair, Department of Biology (2003-2006) and Department of Biological and Health Sciences (2006 to present): Duties include budgeting, scheduling, faculty assessment, public relations, advocacy, policy-making, personnel matters, hiring, space and fund allocation, dispute-mediation, triage, etc. Department level - Biology - Life Science Club advisor (2002 – present) - Biology Liaison, Coastal Bend Schools-to-Careers Partnership for Groundhog Day Shadow Program (2000) - coordination and point-of contact for matching secondary school students with appropriate faculty mentors - Library Representative (1996-2002) - responsible for coordinating library acquisitions for department. - Curriculum Committee Member (1997-present) - review of biology curriculum, changes in curriculum, assessment of student outcomes in ExCET, MCAT, GRE and other post-graduate exams - Annual Biology Scholarship Award Committee (1997) - Faculty Biography Sheet preparation (1997) - summary of faculty research and interests for handout to students College level - Arts & Sciences - Faculty awards for teaching Committee (2005) - President’s Excellence Awards Committee for Junior Researcher and Senior Teaching (2004) - Chair, Syllabus Reform Committee (2004) - Screening Committee for Director of Tutoring Center (2004)

- Space allocation Committee (2003 – present) - Texas Research Excellence Fund Review Committee (2001, 2002) - Arts & Sciences Tenure Committee (2002) - Statistics Search Team (2000) - outside member, Math Department search committee for new statistician faculty - Sociology Accreditation Committee (1999-2000) - Biology Department representative for Social Work program accreditation process - Chair, 1998 Olan Kruse Science Faculty Award Selection Committee (1998, 2000, 2003) - Arts and Sciences Scholarship selection Committee (1997) - Chair, 2001 Arts and Sciences Research Award Committee University level - Chair, Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC, 1998-present) - Federally

mandated committee responsible for overseeing all TAMUK research protocols involving animals. Chair is responsible for interfacing with USDA inspectors and researchers; issuing protocol approval numbers for Sponsored Research; preparation of required semi-annual reports to designated institutional officials (Office of the President and Provost); arrangement of semi-annual committee and veterinary inspection of animal research facilities; arrangement of semi-annual review of TAMUK animal care program; preparation of annual animal use and assurance statements filed with USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Office and NIH's Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare; convene ad hoc committee meetings; tracking of controlled substances used for analgesia and anesthesia; attendance at USDA and NIH sponsored meetings. Workload: 1-16 hours per week, depending on proposal submissions and inspection schedules.

- Chair, Admissions and Standards Committee. 2004-2005. - Sacs Compliance Audit Committee for standard II.8 - Institutional Efectiveness and Planning, SACS Accreditation Committee - Faculty Senator (2003-2004) - TAMUK representative on Scientific Review Committee for Intel International Science and

Engineering Fair - review of science fair protocols to ensure students meet criteria for ethical standards of animal or human experimentation.

- Texas Gear UP Program Faculty Fellow (2001-2003) Community Service

- Science Fair Judge: Kingsville ISD, usually 3rd and 4th Grade, and Coastal Bend Science and

Engineering Fair - Speaker, guest lecturer and slide shows presenter for: TAMUK chapter of the Wildlife Society,

Kingsville AARP, Conner Museum Brown Bag Lecture Series, Kingsville Bird and Wildlife Club, Kingsville Garden Club, Kingsville Wildlife & Nature Festival, åCorpus Christi Kiwanis Club, Riviera Elementary School (Annual Rainforest show for 5th graders), "The Living Room" cable TV show, Kingsville Housing Authority, Kingsville Boys and Girls Clubs, Garden Clubs, and Women’s Clubs

- Co-compiler of annual Kingsville Christmas Bird Count, Sponsored by National Audubon Society.

- Bird and Butterfly tour leader, and speaker, for annual Kingsville Birding and Nature Festival.

Academic Awards, Nominations and Fellowships - Graduate Fellowship in Zoology, 1985, University of Texas - Food for the 21st Century Postdoctoral Fellowship, 1986-88, University of Missouri - U.S. Ethological Conference Committee: Young Ethologist Award to speak at 22nd International Ethological Conference in Kyoto, Japan (1991) - Inclusion in 6th and 9th edition of Who’s Who of America’s Teachers - Student Choice awards: Nominated for best overall instructor - Nominated for Olan Kruse Research award, A&S Teaching Awards, and University Teaching Award Other Areas of Special Interest & Professional Expertise - Biological rhythms - Chemical communication - Debunking pseudoscience - The identification, distribution and behavioral ecology of North American and Neotropical birds, with extensive travel and field experience in the US, México, Ecuador, Perú and Costa Rica - Master Bird Bander permit (US Fish & Wildlife Service, #21216) - Nature and Outdoor Photography - Neotropical slide shows and lectures for schools, organizations, civic groups, etc. - USF&WS annual Breeding Bird Survey, Loyola Beach route - Elderhostel Birding Instructor for TAMUK. - Natural History and Zoology consultant for South Texas region

IN THE LIMITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

COASTAL HABITAT ALLIANCE, 8

PLAINTIFF, Â

V. Â 5 Civil Action No. A-07-CA-985LY Â

JERRY PATTERSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL 3 CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE $ TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE: 6 CHAIRMAN BARRY SMITHERMAN AND JULIE CARUTHERS PARSLEY AND 5 PAUL HUDSON. EACH IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS

Â

COMMISSIONERS OF THE TEXAS 9 PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION; TEXAS Â GULF WIND LLC, WHOLLY OWNED BY BABCOCK & BROWN RENEWABLE 4 HOLDINGS, INC.; AND PPM ENERGY, INC., 9

DEFENDANTS. Â

AFFIDAVIT OF DR. GLENN PERRIGO

STATE OF TEXAS 5 Â

COUNTY OF KLEBERG

On this day, Dr. Glenn Perrigo appeared before me, the undersigned notary public. After I administered an oath to him, upon his oath, he said:

1. My name is Dr. Glenn Perrigo. I am competent to make this affidavit. The facts stated in this affidavit are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct.

2. I am a Professor and the Chair of The Department of Biological and Health Sciences at Texas A&M University-Kingsville. 1 earned a BS in Biology from the State University of New York at Brockport and a Ph.D. in Zoology from the University of Texas at Austin. I did post-doctoral fellowship studies at the University of Missouri. My teaching specialties are Ornithology, Behavioral Ecology, Vertebrate Zoology, Hormones and Behavior, and Animal and Human Physiology. My research expertise includes vertebrate reproduction and behavior, sex differences, biological

Attachment 2

rhythms, and avian ecology and distribution. I have been an invited speaker at various universities and conferences, including the International Ethological Congress and the International Society for Chronobiology.

3. I have a strong professional and personal interest in avian field research. I have led many birding and ecotour trips, including over a dozen to the Amazon Rain Forest. Costa Rica. and Mexico. I have led several Peruvian Amazon trips as part of a neotropical biology course I have taught at the University of Missouri and Texas A&M University-Kmgsville.

4. I have significant experience in the field of avian biology. I have been a regional field editor for the periodical American Birds and the Editor of the periodical Texas Birds. I edited the book Wildlife in Focus. My past and current graduate students study the winter distribution of Eastern and Western Meadowlarks, the ecology of invasive Eurasian Collared-Doves, and habitat requirements of the Tropical Parula warbler. I also have published papers on the migration and wintering grounds in Mexico of Texas's endangered Golden-cheeked Warbler, which breeds only in the Texas Hill Country.

5. I have studied the local birdlife and migration in Kleherg County and Kenedy County, Texas, for over a decade and, as a result, I am intimately familiar with the bird species and populations in [his area. Since 1996, I have lived on Baffin Bay as a resident of Riviera, Texas. I have been an Elderhostel Birding Instructor for Texas A&M University-Kingsville and an official guide for private birding tours of the Kenedy Foundation property. I supervise the Department of Biological and Health Science's 140-acre ficld research station, which is located on Baffin Bay. I am able to quickly identify in the ficld, by sight or sound, nearly all of the more than 350 bird species found regularly in Kenedy County.

6. In the fall of2004. PPM Energy Inc. (PPM), through American Shoreline, awarded a research contract to Mr. Jim Sinclair, Dr. Margaret Land, and myself, all associated with Texas A&M University-Kingsville, as well as Dr. Robert Benson of Texas A&M University-Corpus Chriti, to conduct a study of the property PPM had leased from the Kenedy Trust (Trust) and the potential risks to bird populations of a wind energy facility on the leasehold. After the first year of study, we continued our work for PPM through I'exas Environmental Studies & Analysis, LLC, and Mr. Joel Simon and Mr. Brush Freeman were added to the study team.

7. The other scientists with whom I worked on the study have substantial expertise and experience in this area. Mr. Sinclair has an MS in Biology from Texas A&M University, is a certified master naturalist with expertise in radar, a former Lecturer in the Department of Biological and Health Sciences at Texas A&M University-Kingsville, and a professional bird tour guide in the local area. Dr. Land is a bio-statistician with previous

experience on avian field projects. Dr. Benson is past president of the Texas Ornithological Society with expertise in acoustic and radar imaging, both of which are used extensively to study bird migration and distribution. Mr. Simon is a field ornithologist, with particular expertise on raptors and hawk migration, and past Director of the Hazel Bazemore Hawk Watch. Finally, Mr. Freeman is the co-author of the book entitled Handbook of Texas Birds, which is sponsored by the Texas Ornithology Society and is a required text for the students in my Ornithology classes. In my opinion, Mr. Freeman is one of the foremost experts on the distribution, identification, and natural history of the birds of Texas.

8. The study was conducted over a period of 33 months, from September 2004 through mid-June 2007. The study team employed a variety of proven and emerging research methods, including descriptive observations, comprehensive and systematic visual observations called point counts, analysis of radar data, infrared cameras, and acoustic detection devices. The fundamental purpose of all of these techniques and tools was to assess the probability of a given bird striking a turbine blade and ultimately provide recommendations on the safest areas to site wind turbines on the leasehold.

9. Over the course of the study, data were collected during a wide variety of conditions potentially affecting bird presence and behavior. Data were collected under virtually all weather conditions and climatic conditions, except for a direct hit by hurricane or snow. The study team actually did, however, collect data on July 20,2005, while experiencing the outer wind and rain bands of Emily, a Category 3 Hurricane that made landfall south of Brownsville. Texas. During the study, the area experienced two extremely wet years separated by a year of severe drought.

10. The study team's fieldwork during the first few months consisted of several parallel activities designed to refine the scope and n~ethodology of the data-gathering effort. One of these steps was to assess in the field the bird species present, their densities, and any obvious avian-related concerns about the construction of wind turbines on the leasehold. Another step was to establish point count survey routes for the purposes of systematic visual observations in the field.

11. The study team first characterized the specific habitat elements associated with significant avian activity in the area and identified the daily flight paths of birds traveling to and fiom traditional roosting and feeding areas within the leasehold and the Laguna Madre. We used this information to make recommendations about areas in the leasehold that were ecologically less suitable for wind energy development, including the elimination of one area that had the best wind resource on the leasehold.

12. By way of example, large numbers of Redhead ducks, prized by hunters, winter in the Lagma Madre. The study team determined that thousands of these ducks flew daily from the Laguna Madre to a compact chain of inland lakes on the leasehold to purge salt from their bodies by drinking fresh water. We also determined, however, that these birds traveled a narrow flight path of less than half a mile wide, and they did so during all three winters of the study. Thus, the team recommended that no turbines be located in this area, and that a significant buffer zone be established on either side of the flight path.

13. In part, based on our team's recommendations, the remaining part of the first year of study concentrated on what is now referred to as the Project Development Site (PDS). This allowed us to focus on systematic data collection as well as identify specific questions requiring focused attention. The PDS is relatively flat, with a layer of deep, sandy soil covered by large expanses of grazed short grass prairie. It contains a number of active dunes as well as relic dunes now stabilized by vegetative cover. The PDS is almost treeless.

14. The primary method we used to develop our conclusions was from systematic point count data. Point counts have been used for many years as an efficient means of gathering large amounts of representative data sampled over large areas often containing multiple habitats. Our surveys generally followed the method established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and used over several decades for its continent-wide Breeding Bird Survey database, an effort in which 1 participate annually.

15. Here, the point count technique also allowed the study team to determine whether a species was below, within, or above the zone of a rotating turbine blade. We were able to extrapolate this data to determine collision potential with a wind turbine over many square miles of representative habitat. Point counts have been used at other proposed wind project sites around the country in this fashion and have proven to be an accurate predictor of avian strike risk.

16. By the end of 2004, the study team had established a 30-point survey route (5-minutes per point) through a 100-square-mile area of potential turbine sites on the leasehold. This route covered a fall range of available habitats, including oak forest, open prairie, ephemeral marshes and ponds, and permanent water wells. Conducted during all times of day, including during peak afternoon winds when flying birds would most likely risk collision with turbine blades, I surveyed this route 3-5 times per month for the next two years. This procedure alone yielded over 17,000 data points, counting 87,000 birds of 175 different species.

17. Among the key areas of inquiry for the PDS during this remaining period of the first year of study were the following: (1) the seasonal pattern of raptor migration, for which the Gulf Coast is known, in the PDS: (2) the patterns of migration of neotropical bird species through the PDS during spring and fall migration, and what type of weather influences those patterns; (3) the density and distribution of both. resident and seasonal species in the PDS, including prairie birds; (4) the presence of any threatened or endangered species in the PDS and their status; and (5) the density of nesting raptors in the PDS.

18. The study team conducted a pilot study utilizing an infrared camera. which employs thermal imaging, in the spring of 2005. Thermal imaging is a nascent and expensive technology. Because birds maintain body temperatures of over 100 degrees F, use of this technology allowed the team to identify and record the thermal signatures produced by individual migrants flying overhead during the nighttime. The pilot study also revealed that migrant traffic in the spring over the oak forests west of the PDS was 2 to 3.5 times heavier than over the PDS itself.

19. The second year of study focused more intensely on addressing the questions that arose from the initial work, especially as applied to the PDS. Three more off-road point counts were established in the PDS during the second year, each with ten, 20-minute stops, and each usually conducted weekly. The use of infrared cameras was expanded to determine the angle of departure flown by resting neotropical migrants as they departed in the evening from the oak "mottes" on the northern and southern periphery of the PDS.

20. After the first two years of study, two additional investigations were conducted at the request of David Newstead, who is president of the Coastal Bend Audubon Society, which is a member of the Coastal Habitat Alliance, and who was a member of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) established by PPM. First, during the winter of 2006-2007. the team conducted a wintering prairie bird study using a protocol specified by Mr. Newstead. Second, in [he spring of 2007, the study team conducted a Breeding Bird Survey using the point count methodology established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Setvicc. The data from these studies can be compared to data collected after die turbines are in operation to assess any adverse effects that need to be addressed. No other studies or analyses were requested by the TAC.

21. The overall results of the multi-year study suggest that avian strike risk is lower in the PDS than most other operational wind energy projects in the country. Among the major conclusions of the study were the following: (1) no bird species listed by the federal government as endangered or threatened were observed in the PDS, except for 4 individual detections of the Aplomado Falcon; (2) with the exception of Redheads and other waterfowl purging daily in the scrics of small lakes, no significant flight corridors were noted for waterfowl or waterhiids; (3) migrating raptors are at very low risk because they do not cross Baffin Bay and thus tend to avoid the PDS altogether; (4) the risk to other species during daylight hours is lower than at other wind power projects in the country; (5) there is a minimal risk to neotropical migrants during abnormal weather events, both during daylight and at night; and (6) a minimum safe distance for the turbines from the daytime location of migrants could be determined based on the angle of their departure from the forest in the evening.

22. I have read the report by EDM International Inc. entitled Bird and Bat Collision Assessment, Proposed Kenedy County Wind Projects, Kenedy County, Texas dated December 19,2007 ("EDM Report"). I disagree with its conclusions and believe that our study was scientifically sound and its conclusions are correct. I also have read the document entitled PPM Energy's Response to EDM's Report on the Proposed Pdascal Prefect dated January 14.2008, and I agree with its contents.

23. The EDM Report contains a number of factual errors and makes many unsupported assumptions, but its primary shortcomings are more basic. First, it fails to adequately distinguish between PPM's leasehold within the Kenedy Trust property and property within the Kenedy Foundation bring used by Babcock & Brown for its own wind energy project. Second. the EDM Report fails to account for data collected after our first year of study, much of which was preliminary and exploratory in nature. Third, and most fundamentally, the EDM Report presents absolutely no on-site data whatsoever to support any of its conclusions.

24. By contrast, our study team was on the ground and addressed the actual area in which the PPM project will he located. The study lasted 33 months, not 12. Finally, our study's conclusions are supported by 33 months of data generated by thousands of observer hours, tens of thousands of miles driven, and probably well over 100,000 points of data. For instance, I personally spent over 1,000 hours and drove over 13,000 miles off-road or on caliche during more than 180 different days in the field during the study period.

25. I am neither a proponent nor opponent of the PPM project. As a scientist, however, I stand by our study team's data, observations, and conclusions as being factual, objective and scientifically sound.

SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by Dr. Glenn Perrigo on March 2008.

1

DRAFT SUMMARY OF UNREPORTED SYSTEMATIC POINT COUNT DATA FROM THE PROPOSED PEÑASCAL WIND FARM

FROM DECEMBER 2005 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2007 (24 Months)

Overview The large spinning blades on modern wind turbines represent a potential threat to

birds flying in the area of wind farms. While no serious bird kills have been reported in modern wind farms in the US, assessment of the potential for bird collisions should be done before new facilities are built, especially in areas that represent unique natural resources or with potentially high bird traffic. One of the standard methods used to assess such risk is known as a ‘point count’ in which a stationary observer counts how many birds, within a set period of time, fly through an area in which spinning turbine blades would be located. On modern wind turbines, the “rotor sweep zone” is typically an area between 100 and 400 feet above the ground.

In September of 2004 Perrigo initiated a 50-stop point count on the Kenedy Trust

that traversed oak forest, mesquite brushland, open prairie, mottes, recovering burn areas, freshwater and saline ponds and lakes, and the shores of the Laguna Madre. It soon became clear that, given that the vast area of the Kenedy Trust, this represented an inefficient use of personnel. Round trip from Texas A&M University-Kingsville to the Kenedy Trust study area and back is a minimum of 100 miles, much of it over rough ranch roads with a 35 mph speed limit. Some of the roads became nearly impassable after rain (2004 was an extraordinarily wet year). Furthermore, our wildlife assessments in the first several months immediately eliminated the northern areas of the Trust property and suggested that we focus on the southern half of the property as an area for the safest turbine siting.

By the end of November 2004, a more practical point count route was established

consisting of 29 points, the majority of which were in the potential turbine siting area. Consistency of access was also an issue, so establishing a point count route that was passable regardless of weather conditions during all seasons while adequately sampling typical habitat was a prime factor. The route shown in Figure 1 was the best solution using existing roads and two-tracks. The observer stopped every half-mile and recorded his sightings for 5 minutes. While this time period has been frequently used in other avian studies, at the start of the second year the client asked that we switch to 20 minutes per location, and to have the points one mile apart. The reason for this was to make our data comparable with other wind farm locations.

Since we had already completed nine months of observation, Perrigo continued to

collect 5-min point count data from June of 2005 through November of 2006. The purpose of this extra effort was multifold: 1) To collect two years worth of data for Perrigo’s own research and graduate program; 2) to establish a benchmark of information that could easily be used for post-construction comparisons, if required; and 3) by collecting data above and beyond that necessary for the client, we would have back-up

2

information to support our conclusions regarding safe-citing issues. This is a summary of the unreported data.

FIGURE 1. The blue squares represent point count stops on the Kenedy Trust. Stops 1-12 are in the Control Area (no turbines would be sited here), whereas stops 13-29 are in the Wind Resource Area (turbine siting area). The dotted line divides the two areas. See text for explanation of habitat differences. Methodology

All observation stops on the 29-point count route were 0.5 miles apart. At each stop, the observer recorded all the birds heard and seen within 5-minutes and then proceeded to the next stop. The following were site-specific modifications.

1) On a typical point count survey, an observer is not concerned with altitude of flying birds, only the number and species of birds recorded per stop. On this survey, however, the observer (always Perrigo) recorded all detected birds as well as their altitude. All birds were classified as to whether they were observed flying within the ‘rotor sweep area’ (RSA) or they were not. For classification purposes, the rotor sweep area was considered as between 80 and 400 feet above the ground. 2) While most point counts, especially those focused on nesting species are usually conducted in the early morning, it must be emphasized that the purpose of this methodology was to observe bird density and traffic in the turbine-siting area throughout

3

normal daylight hours and under typical conditions, including a bias toward worse case conditions during afternoon hours when wind speeds and turbine operation would be at a peak. Half of the 95 total counts completed between December of 2004 and November of 2006 were done in the afternoon, whereas the remainder of the counts were started in the morning. 3) The observation zone defined here was a virtual box 0.5 mile wide by 1 mile long (= 0.5 sq. miles). The best way to physically describe this is to assume the observer is standing at the stopping point facing toward the next point down the road. Birds were recorded out to 0.25 miles in front of and behind the observer and out to 0.5 miles to the observer’s respective left and right side. The observer is not static and thus scans repeatedly over the area. This entire point count thus represents a spatial configuration of 29 contiguous boxes that are 0.5 miles in width by 1.0 mile in length. This dimension was chosen for best extrapolation of data over many square miles of Trust habitat. Two point count stops thus represent a 1 square mile observation area. Point-count effort

The data summarized here represents 95 surveys conducted from December of 2004 through November of 2006. Dr. Perrigo conducted all surveys, thus reducing the bias of between-observer error. His effort consisted of 1378 miles of travel and 2755 five-minute stops (230 hours). 90,085 individuals of 219 species were recorded during 24-months of data collection. Routes were usually run at regular intervals of 7-10 days with an average of 4 counts per month.

As already noted in Figure 1, the point count was geographically divided into two parts: 1) an inland area where no turbines would be sited vs. 2) the wind resource area where proposed turbines would be sited. Thus, point count stops 1-12, the ‘Control Area’, were located in a non turbine siting zone which consisted of contiguous Live Oak forests and mottes, mesquite pastures, dunes, two large freshwater lakes, and transition oak scrub. Point count stops 13-29 were in the proposed turbine siting area (N=17) and consisted of grazed short-grass prairie. Several of these stops were sited near ephemeral marshes or windmill-filled water tanks.

Results

Figure 2 shows the diversity of bird species detected at each of the 29 point-count stops during the 24-months of data collection. Two hundred and nineteen (219) species were recorded altogether: One hundred ninety-five (195) species were recorded in the Control Area, whereas only 139 species were recorded in the proposed turbine siting area.

4

FIGURE 2. The total number of bird species detected at each point count stop over 24 months (95 visits to each stop). The area of greatest species diversity occurs at stops 7 and 8, which are adjacent to two large freshwater ponds. The lowest diversity occurs around stops 26, 27, and 28, which are typical of a homogeneous, treeless coastal prairie. The multiple ‘spikes’ in diversity in the turbine siting area (stops 16, 19, 22, 25, and 29) are points near windmill tanks and ephemeral marshes.

From a seasonal perspective, Figure 3 illustrates month-by-month changes in the

number of bird species recorded in the Control Area (no turbine siting, stops 1-12) versus the turbine siting area (stops 13-29). The pattern shown here is a familiar one to those who routinely bird the coastal plains of Kleberg and Kenedy County throughout the year. The exodus of northward-bound waterfowl in mid- to late-winter is often pronounced, while the maximum number of species peaks in spring as early Spring migrants begin drifting through around the first or second week of March, culminating in peak diversity in mid- to late April and early May, mainly because of the volume of neotropical species such as flycatchers, warblers, and thrushes. Species numbers are typically lowest in the summer and gradually increase during the Fall migration. Yearly fluctuations are also highly dependent on local rainfall and the availability of temporary ponds and marshes. 2004 through mid-2005 was the wettest period in a decade whereas drought conditions persisted through mid-2006.

In any case, the oak forests, brushy pastures, and fresh water ponds of stops 1-12

often exhibited twice the number of species per month as the homogeneous short-grass prairie of the turbine siting area.

5

FIGURE 3. Two years of month-by-month changes in the number of bird species recorded in the Control Area (no turbine siting, green solid line) versus the turbine siting area (stops 13-29, red solid line).

As for the abundance of individual birds, Figure 4 represent the cumulative total of all individuals recorded at each of the 29 stops during 24 months of data collection. The large number of individuals at stops #7 and #8 represent hundreds of waterfowl and American Coots that wintered in two adjacent freshwater ponds. It should be emphasized that both freshwater ponds were full in the winter of 2004-2005 (a wet period), but were completely dried up in the winter of 2005-2006 (drought conditions), and began refilling with water again in the spring of 2006. In summary, of the 90,085 individuals recorded over 24 months, 66% were recorded in the Control area, whereas 34%, or 30,615 individuals, were recorded in the turbine-siting area. Although not shown graphically, and adjusted on a per stop basis, the Control Area averaged 52 individuals/stop, whereas the turbine siting area averaged 19 individuals/stop.

Notice that these results parallel the diversity data in Figure 2; specifically, the

small, but noticeable, ‘spikes’ in total numbers in the turbine siting area (stops 16, 19, 22, 25, and 29) are points near water tanks and ephemeral ponds, each of which typically harbored small groups of wintering ducks and shorebirds.

6

FIGURE 4. Cumulative total of all individuals recorded at each of the 29 stops during nine months of data collection. 90,085 individuals were counted (59,470 seen in the Control area versus 30,615 in the turbine-siting area). See text for additional explanation of data. Risk Exposure Indices

Because a flying bird can be struck by a spinning turbine blade, a major aim of this study was to predict the probability of collision. This prediction can be estimated in strikes per turbine per year for each species (Risk Exposure Index). Table 1 shows the summarized data from which risk exposure indices were calculated. Of the 139 species recorded in the turbine siting area (stops 13 - 29), 72 of those species had at least one individual detected in the rotor sweep area during the 24 months of study (52% of all species).

For comparison purposes, the percentage of all individuals of a species that were

observed in the rotor zone is also included in Table 1 (‘Percent in rotor sweep area’ column). In fact, of the 4447 individuals recorded within the rotor sweep area, 61% were represented by just five species: American White Pelican, Turkey Vulture, Common Nighthawk, Brown-headed Cowbird, and Long-billed Curlew. None are endangered.

7

TABLE 1. Summary of 24-month point count data used to calculate risk exposure indices. The ‘sum in rotor sweep area’ represents the total number of birds recorded during 1615 five-minute stops in the turbine siting area (stops 13-29).

Common Name Binomial

Total observed

in turbine-

siting area

Sum in

rotor sweep area

Percent in

rotor sweep area

Pelican, American White Pelecanus erythrorhynchos 1355 1175 87% Vulture, Turkey Cathartes aura 1259 484 38% Nighthawk, Common Chordeiles minor 411 384 93% Cowbird, Brown-headed Molothrus ater 2596 378 15% Curlew, Long-billed Numenius americanus 2065 284 14% Crane, Sandhill Grus canadensis 311 148 47% Dickcissel Spiza americana 132 126 95% Pintail, Northern Anas acuta 817 102 12% Shoveler, Northern Anas clypeata 635 83 13% Gull, Franklin's Larus pipixcan 124 81 65% Blackbird, Red-winged Agelaius phoeniceus 241 76 32% Gull, Laughing Larus atricilla 321 70 22% Swallow, Barn Hirundo rustica 1760 68 4% Teal, Green-winged Anas crecca 926 68 7% Hawk, Swainson's Buteo swainsoni 78 59 76% Pipit, Sprague's Anthus spragueii 500 50 10% Goose, Greater White-fronted Anser albifrons 62 47 76% Vulture, Black Coragyps atratus 114 46 40% Swallow, Cave Petrochelidon fulva 274 43 16% Pipit, American Water Anthus rubescens 920 42 5% Teal, Blue-winged Anas discors 362 40 11% Dove, Mourning Zenaida macroura 2557 37 1% Duck, Mottled Anas fulvigula 173 37 21% Ibis, White-faced Plegadis chihi 144 36 25% Wigeon, American Anas americana 429 35 8% Hawk, White-tailed Buteo albicaudatus 95 34 35% Hawk, Red-tailed Buteo jamaicensis 58 27 47% Swallow, Cliff Petrochelidon pyrrhonota 193 26 14% Caracara, Crested Caracara cheriway 304 26 9% Swallow, Northern Rough-winged Stelgidopteryx serripennis 376 25 7% Ibis, White Eudocimus albus 266 25 9% Gadwall Anas strepera 93 20 22% Yellowlegs, Lesser Tringa flavipes 391 19 5% Tern, Gull-billed Sterna nilotica 219 19 9% Killdeer Charadrius vociferus 449 18 4% Sandpiper, Stilt Calidris himantopus 233 17 7% Goose, Snow Chen caerulescens 270 16 6% Harrier, Northern Circus cyaneus 148 15 10%

8

Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus 78 14 18% Dowitcher, Long-billed Limnodromus scolopaceus 633 14 2% Golden-Plover, American Pluvialis dominica 191 12 6% Egret, Cattle Bubulcus ibis 44 11 26% Sandpiper, Upland Bartramia longicauda 238 11 5% Avocet, American Recurvirostra americana 70 11 16% Falcon, Peregrine Falco peregrinus 17 11 65% Tern, Black Chlidonias niger 161 9 6% Kestrel, American Falco sparverius 117 6 6% Yellowlegs, Greater Tringa melanoleuca 178 6 3% Hawk, Ferruginous Buteo regalis 30 6 20% Merlin Falco columbarius 24 5 21% Osprey Pandion haliaetus 4 4 100% Heron, Great Blue Ardea herodias 27 4 15% Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus 41 4 10% Swallow, Tree Tachycineta bicolor 190 4 2% Swallow, Bank Riparia riparia 28 3 11% Sandpiper, Least Calidris minutilla 334 3 1% Kite, White-tailed Elanus leucurus 5 2 40% Snipe, Wilson's Gallinago delicata 9 2 22% Sandpiper, Solitary Tringa solitaria 16 2 13% Martin, Purple Progne subis 9 2 22% Egret, Reddish Egretta rufescens 11 2 18% Flycatcher, Scissor-tailed Tyrannus forficatus 75 1 1% Cormorant, Double-crested Phalacrocorax auritus 1 1 100% Turnstone, Ruddy Arenaria interpres 1 1 100% Heron, Tricolored Egretta tricolor 4 1 25% Hawk, Cooper's Accipiter cooperii 2 1 50% Tern, Forster's Sterna forsteri 7 1 14% Owl, Burrowing Athene cunicularia 11 1 9% Stilt, Black-necked Himantopus mexicanus 24 1 4% Sandpiper, Western Calidris mauri 277 1 0% Dowitcher, Short-billed Limnodromus griseus 48 1 1% Egret, Great Ardea alba 7 1 8% Meadowlark, Eastern Sturnella magna 2516 0 0% Sparrow, Savannah Passerculus sandwichensis 1293 0 0% Bobwhite, Northern Colinus virginianus 516 0 0% Sparrow, Cassin's Aimophila cassinii 289 0 0% Grackle, Great-tailed Quiscalus mexicanus 197 0 0% Meadowlark, Western Sturnella neglecta 160 0 0% Dunlin Calidris alpina 128 0 0% Phalarope, Wilson's Phalaropus tricolor 92 0 0% Lark, Horned Eremophila alpestris 85 0 0% Coot, American Fulica americana 77 0 0% Shrike, Loggerhead Lanius ludovicianus 76 0 0% Plover, Wilson's Charadrius wilsonia 74 0 0% Sparrow, Grasshopper Ammodramus savannarum 69 0 0% Plover, Black-bellied Pluvialis squatarola 53 0 0% Scaup, Lesser Aythya affinis 38 0 0%

9

Sandpiper, Semipalmated Calidris pusilla 38 0 0% Goldfinch, Lesser Carduelis psaltria 37 0 0% Cowbird, Bronzed Molothrus aeneus 29 0 0% Longspur, Chestnut-collared Calcarius ornatus 23 0 0% Blackbird, Brewer's Euphagus cyanocephalus 17 0 0% Egret, Snowy Egretta thula 15 0 0% Sandpiper, Spotted Actitis macularius 15 0 0% Grosbeak, Blue Passerina caerulea 15 0 0% Duck, Ruddy Oxyura jamaicensis 14 0 0% Sandpiper, White-rumped Calidris fuscicollis 14 0 0% Sandpiper, Baird's Calidris bairdii 13 0 0% Sandpiper, Pectoral Calidris melanotos 11 0 0% Wren, Sedge Cistothorus platensis 11 0 0% Turkey, Wild Meleagris gallopavo 10 0 0% Tern, Least Sterna antillarum 10 0 0% Canvasback Aythya valisineria 9 0 0% Sparrow, Lark Chondestes grammacus 9 0 0% Sparrow, Vesper Pooecetes gramineus 7 0 0% Redhead Aythya americana 6 0 0% Plover, Snowy Charadrius alexandrinus 6 0 0% Mockingbird, Northern Mimus polyglottos 6 0 0% Bufflehead Bucephala albeola 5 0 0% Heron, Little Blue Egretta caerulea 4 0 0% Swift, Chimney Chaetura pelagica 4 0 0% Hummingbird, Ruby-throated Archilochus colubris 4 0 0% Bunting, Lark Calamospiza melanocorys 4 0 0% Goose, Ross's Chen rossii 3 0 0% Warbler, Yellow-rumped Dendroica coronata 3 0 0% Sparrow, Chipping Spizella passerina 3 0 0% Merganser, Hooded Lophodytes cucullatus 2 0 0% Night-Heron, Black-crowned Nycticorax nycticorax 2 0 0% Night-Heron, Yellow-crowned Nyctanassa violacea 2 0 0% Hawk, Sharp-shinned Accipiter striatus 2 0 0% Falcon, Aplomado Falco femoralis 2 0 0% Phalarope, Red-necked Phalaropus lobatus 2 0 0% Ground-Dove, Common Columbina passerina 2 0 0% Roadrunner, Greater Geococcyx californianus 2 0 0% Starling, European Sturnus vulgaris 2 0 0% Yellowthroat, Common Geothlypis trichas 2 0 0% Sparrow, Botteri's Aimophila botterii 2 0 0% Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera 1 0 0% Grebe, Pied-billed Podilymbus podiceps 1 0 0% Spoonbill, Roseate Platalea ajaja 1 0 0% Kite, Mississippi Ictinia mississippiensis 1 0 0% Owl, Short-eared Asio flammeus 1 0 0% Sanderling Calidris alba 1 0 0%

10

Gull, Ring-billed Larus delawarensis 1 0 0% Owl, Great Horned Bubo virginianus 1 0 0% Kingbird, Couch's Tyrannus couchii 1 0 0% Thrasher, Sage Oreoscoptes montanus 1 0 0% Waterthrush, Northern Seiurus noveboracensis 1 0 0% Goldfinch, American Carduelis tristis 1 0 0% Derivation of Risk Exposure Indices

Table 2 provides the risk exposure indices for each of the 72 species observed in the rotor sweep area. No attempt was made to separate results by season so the numbers shown here estimate yearly risk extrapolated from 24-months of consolidated data. Derivation of the Risk Exposure Index is as follows: 1) The manufacturer’s turbine dimensions indicate a 90-meter diameter sweep area, which equals 295 feet. Assuming the rotor sweep area (blade smear) occupies a solid area, the spinning turbine blades occupy a solid circle of 68,350 feet2. 2) Using an imaginary plane bisecting an area 1 mile wide, and assuming 3 turbines per mile (standard configuration), this yields a blade-occupied area of 205,050 feet2/mile out of a total of 1,557,600 feet2/mile within the rotor sweep area altitude. Thus, for any object passing perpendicular through this imaginary geometric plane, the probability of passing through a rotor sweep area is 13.2%. The probability of flying through any one turbine “smear” is thus 13.2% divided by 3 turbines/mile = 4.4%. 3) Assuming a density of 15 turbines per mile2 (3 parallel rows of 5 turbines) one assumes a constant risk of 4.4% per mile2. The risk per turbine for a bird entering with equal probability anywhere within the mile2 is 4.4% divided by 15 turbines = 0.29% 4) The total number of birds observed in the rotor zone was converted to an annualized basis for an average daily 12-hour period of daylight. Thus, for each species this was quantified as the number of birds passing through the rotor sweep zone/mile2/hour X 12 hours of daylight/day X 365 days per year X 0.29% probability. The units for the Risk Exposure Index for each species are computed as strikes/turbine/year during daylight hours. Caveats. the Risk Exposure Index, shown in Table 2, potentially represents a worse case scenario because it assumes:

1) A rotor is always spinning and blades always occupy the rotor sweep area. 2) All entries into the rotor sweep area are fatal.

11

3) A bird always flies perpendicular to the rotor, thus maximizing contact probability. 4) No bird exhibits avoidance behavior. 5) A bird detected in the rotor sweep zone stays there (i.e., once detected, no altitude changes above or below the sweep zone are allowed).

A more pragmatic approach would relax some of the rigid assumptions noted

above. Specifically, a rotor is not always spinning (reduced wind speeds); a bird can fly in any direction; a bird can exhibit avoidance behavior (many do); and a bird does not have to stay within the strike altitude because it can move above or below the rotor sweep zone at any time. No attempt was made to record how much time an individual spent within the strike zone during each 5-minute point count. Thus, any individual detected in the rotor sweep zone is assumed to have remained there for the full five-minute count period. In reality, bird flight direction, altitude, and avoidance are dynamic factors. Table 2. Risk Exposure Index, which assumes a worse case scenario (see text for explanation of calculations and assumptions). Furthermore, this table does not address risks during nocturnal movements or nighttime migration. ‘Guild Classification’, as defined here, represents a group of species that share similar characteristics or represent common ecological or migrational units.

Common Name Guild

Risk Exposure Index (Strikes/turbine/year

during daylight hours)

American White Pelican Waterbirds 19.0918 Turkey Vulture Raptors 7.8658 Common Nighthawk Aerial Insectivores 6.2431 Brown-headed Cowbird Resident & Winter Birds 6.1485 Long-billed Curlew Shorebirds 4.6235 Sandhill Crane Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 2.3986

Dickcissel Neotropical/Summer Residents 2.0438

Northern Pintail Waterfowl 1.6570 Northern Shoveler Waterfowl 1.3431 Franklin’s Gull Gulls & Terns 1.3165 Red-winged Blackbird Resident & Winter Birds 1.2414 Laughing Gull Gulls & Terns 1.1442 Barn Swallow Aerial Insectivores 1.1128 Green-winged Teal Waterfowl 1.1119 Swainson’s Hawk Raptors 0.9635 Sprague’s Pipit Grassland Birds 0.8078 Greater White-fronted Goose Waterfowl 0.7645 Black Vulture Raptors 0.7402 Cave Swallow Aerial Insectivores 0.6955

12

American Pipit Grassland Birds 0.6883 Blue-winged Teal Waterfowl 0.6514 Mourning Dove Gamebirds & Doves 0.5994 Mottled Duck Waterfowl 0.5973 White-faced Ibis Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.5801 American Wigeon Waterfowl 0.5685 White-tailed Hawk Raptors 0.5464 Red-tailed Hawk Raptors 0.4427 Cliff Swallow Aerial Insectivores 0.4283 Crested Caracara Raptors 0.4255 Northern Rough-winged Swallow Aerial Insectivores 0.4132 White Ibis Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.4070 Gadwall Waterfowl 0.3309 Lesser Yellowlegs Shorebirds 0.3155 Gull-billed Tern Gulls & Terns 0.3147 Killdeer Shorebirds 0.2942 Stilt Sandpiper Shorebirds 0.2763 Snow Goose Waterfowl 0.2613 Northern Harrier Raptors 0.2435 Willet Shorebirds 0.2275 Long-billed Dowitcher Shorebirds 0.2214 American Golden-Plover Shorebirds 0.1980 Cattle Egret Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.1832 Upland Sandpiper Shorebirds 0.1799 American Avocet Shorebirds 0.1788 Peregrine Falcon Raptors 0.1783 Black Tern Gulls & Terns 0.1463 American Kestrel Raptors 0.1053 Greater Yellowlegs Shorebirds 0.1001 Ferruginous Hawk Raptors 0.0975 Merlin Raptors 0.0813 Osprey Raptors 0.0650 Great Blue Heron Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.0650 Whimbrel Shorebirds 0.0650 Tree Swallow Aerial Insectivores 0.0579 Bank Swallow Aerial Insectivores 0.0496 Least Sandpiper Shorebirds 0.0488 White-tailed Kite Raptors 0.0325 Wilson’s Snipe Shorebirds 0.0325 Solitary Sandpiper Shorebirds 0.0325 Purple Martin Aerial Insectivores 0.0323 Reddish Egret Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.0322 Scissor-tailed Flycatcher Flycatchers 0.0180 Double-crested Cormorant Waterbirds 0.0163 Ruddy Turnstone Shorebirds 0.0163 Tricolored Heron Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.0163 Cooper’s Hawk Raptors 0.0163 Forster’s Tern Gulls & Terns 0.0163 Burrowing Owl Raptors 0.0163

13

Black-necked Stilt Shorebirds 0.0163 Western Sandpiper Shorebirds 0.0163 Short-billed Dowitcher Shorebirds 0.0104 Great Egret Herons, Ibises, & Cranes 0.0091

Summary

72.3

strikes/turbine/year General Comments

Understanding the biology, behavior, and distribution of each species is critical to understanding the true risks of a turbine collision. Furthermore, seasonal movements and weather-related flight patterns are important factors not specifically addressed in the tables above. For example, 11% of the 4447 birds noted passing through the rotor sweep area resulted from two species and two singular flock events in late spring of 2005.

Table 1 indicates that 93% of all Common Nighthawks detected passed through the rotor zone. This is misleading, namely because on May 15, 2005, two large flocks of Common Nighthawks, totaling 370 birds, passed over two point count stops only 10 minutes apart. At the time, there was a light rain and winds were calm: These are the typical weather conditions – drizzly, overcast, and dead calm — when one would expect to see large numbers of diurnally migrating Nighthawks traveling in large flocks within a few hundred feet of the ground. If turbines had been present, stationary rotor blades would have been no risk to these birds.

Table 1 also shows that 95% of all the Dickcissels in the turbine siting area passed through the rotor strike zone. Again, this represents one flock of 120 individuals migrating north at about 300 feet on April 29, 2005. This was the only large flock observed during the point counts in the turbine siting area. It should be emphasized that more than twice as many Dickcissels were detected in the Control area (285) as were in the turbine siting area (132). Like other diurnal migrants, they are likely adept at avoiding turbines during the day.

While 87% of the American White Pelicans observed in the turbine siting area

also passed through the rotor sweep zone, 1086 did so on a single day, October 20, 2006. These too are daytime migrants likely adept at avoiding collisions.

Raptors have traditionally been a source of strike concern ever since the bird-

unfriendly lattice turbines erected in Altamont Pass many years ago resulted in a significant mortality of hawks and eagles. Modern turbines are smooth and do not provide perching surfaces. Turkey and Black Vultures, however, accounted for 75% of all Raptors noted within the rotor strike zone (see Table 2). Turkey Vultures, Black Vultures, and Crested Caracaras specialize on carcasses, so the risk to the ‘scavenger guild’ can be mitigated by prompt removal of large mammal carcasses — cows, feral hogs, and Nilgai antelope — from the turbine siting area.

14

As for traditional raptors, the Swainson’s Hawk may be a potential risk because

they typically hunt while migrating and prefer hovering over open areas, especially grasslands. Some birds, especially non-adults, may linger in an area for several days. Swainson’s Hawks are mainly present during spring migration in April, but avoid the area during the fall hawk migration. Despite their conspicuous use of coastal grasslands during wet years (none were recorded in the turbine siting area in the dry Spring of 2006), most migrating Swainson’s Hawks pass well to the west of the turbine siting area.

The above observations suggest that perhaps the most important data of all

concerning migrating Raptors is what WAS NOT seen in the turbine siting area. The Coastal Bend is well-known for its spectacular fall hawk flights. Every year, up to a million Broad-winged Hawks may be tallied as they pass over Hazel Bazemore Park in Nueces County about 45 miles to the NNW of the turbine siting area. No Broad-winged Hawks were ever detected on the point count in the turbine siting area.

In fact, on September 24, 2004, Perrigo specifically set out to verify the lack of

migrating hawks over the proposed turbine siting area. Weather conditions were ideal that day for a spectacular hawk movement through the Coastal Bend, yet no Broad-winged Hawks were observed anywhere in or near the turbine siting area. Fifteen miles inland to the west of the turbine siting area Perrigo found the sky peppered with 100,000 Broad-winged Hawks passing overhead at 3000-5000 feet between noon and 1:30 PM (see photo in Appendix I, Figure AI-1). This sort of observation is not surprising. First, migrating hawks avoid traveling over large bodies of water where they lose the rising hot air currents (thermals) that allow them to soar without flapping. Baffin Bay is a significant water barrier to the north of the Kenedy Trust, so migrating hawks travel around its far western edges. And second, migrating hawks need trees and forests to roost in overnight when they settle down in the evening. There are no suitable roosting areas in the turbine siting area except for a few isolated oak mottes.

Although not quite as concentrated as in the fall, thousands of hawks make the

return flight through the Coastal Bend during mid-March through mid-May. Although there are no significant water barriers to the south, it was expected that most northward bound hawks would avoid open grassland areas and stay inland where there were trees. Indeed, this clearly seemed to be the case. Perrigo, who has lived on Baffin Bay for 12 years, has noted several spectacular April morning ‘liftoffs’ of thousands of Mississippi Kites and Broad-winged Hawks leaving the trees on the Kenedy Foundation and Trust property from the far west end of Baffin Bay (including the April 24, 1998 report on TexBirds listserv referenced by EDM; see photo of this phenomenon in Appendix I, Figure I-2). On April 24, 2005, hundreds of Mississippi Kites, as well as hundreds of Franklin’s Gulls, were flying northward over the Control Area. Most birds were at altitudes greater than 1500 feet. In sharp contrast, and with the exception of one lone Mississippi Kite at >2000 feet, not a single group of any of these species was observed in the turbine siting area that day.

15

While there are some risks for raptors in the Wind Resource Area, including several resident White-tailed Hawk pairs and several Peregrine Falcons that hunt the coastal prairie in the winter, the million+ hawks that migrate through the region in spring and fall mainly remain over wooded areas well inland and away from the coast and potential turbine sites.

As for waterfowl, it’s been estimated that 70-80% of all the Redhead ducks in the

world winter in the salty Laguna Madre. While thousands of Redheads purge their saltwater daily during the winter in a series of freshwater ponds to the north of the turbine siting area, only 6 Redheads were detected in the turbine siting area during the 24-months of data collection.

APPENDIX I Figure A I-1. This photo of the overhead sky peppered with Broad-winged Hawks was taken on September 24th, 2004, 2 miles east of the main Kenedy Trust gate (on Highway 77) and 15 miles west of the Wind Resource Area (560 mm telephoto lens, photo by G. Perrigo). In contrast, no Broad-winged Hawks were observed in or near the turbine siting area (see text for details).

Broad-winged Hawks

Figure A I-2. This photo shows a late-April morning liftoff of Mississippi Kites and Broad-winged Hawks over the Laguna Salada at the far west end of Baffin Bay. Birds are leaving wooded areas of the Kenedy Foundation property were at least 12 miles inland from the nearest point in the proposed wind resource area. (photo by G. Perrigo).

Broad-winged Hawks and Mississippi Kites