• Avoid siting in and fragmenting any climate corridors. These climate corridors encompass areas that species are likely to use for periodic or seasonal movements and shifts in ranges over time in response to climate change, generally in upward (in elevation) and northward directions across the landscape.

• Where appropriate, use wildlife-friendly fencing or unfenced wildlife corridors. Use fencing that allows small-to-medium sized animals (e.g., turtles, raccoons, birds) to pass through.

• When implementing wildlife-permeable fence, equally important is providing on-site vegetation that provides cover for animals when moving through the site. The best method for allowing movement of both large and small animals, and particularly appropriate in larger solar installations (i.e., >50 acres), is to retain unfenced wildlife passageways through the solar facility. Solar developers typically avoid development near rivers, streams and their associated riparian areas and wetlands, and these areas can then serve as wildlife passageways.

Siting solar facilities to avoid areas with high biodiversity should be a priority. These areas are likely to have the highest levels of species biodiversity now and in the future and should remain undeveloped. It is not recommended to mitigate biodiversity loss by moving sensitive species from a solar site to natural habitat, due to the low success rates associated with these efforts.

Note: While this is an important consideration, the majority of land in Kansas is used for agriculture and does not have high natural biodiversity.

Happy neighbors are more important than ever to the solar industry. Instead of designing for least cost, we encourage all solar farm developers to consider centralized locations for their inverters, and utilize higher DC voltages to facilitate this topology, to lower perceived noise levels. The further that any background noise has to travel to reach the farm boundaries, the better.

• Agrivoltaics and grazing should be encouraged wherever possible, so that the land can provide in multiple ways.

• Integrate the planting of native and/or pollinator vegetation where appropriate. While one goal may be to mitigate impacts of solar facilities on wildlife, another vision is that solar facilities have the potential to produce net wildlife habitat benefits, playing a key role in restoring native grasslands plants and wildlife.

• Native grassland habitats were once plentiful, but with development and other changes in land use and management, there is now less than 1% of historical native grassland habitat remaining. Solar facilities represent an opportunity to restore this vegetation to the landscape.

• When compared to turf grass, the use of native vegetation increases biodiversity at the site, requires less mowing and herbicide use, minimizes erosion issues, more effectively attenuates the flow of stormwater, and increases soil health and carbon sequestration. Restoration with native plants may not always be feasible, in which case non-native, non-invasive pollinator-friendly plants (e.g., clover) can be an acceptable alternative.

• Pollination is a key service that this practice provides, and thus its implementation may be most relevant for solar facilities located within an agricultural matrix, although natural ecosystems will also benefit from this service.

• Provide supplemental wildlife habitat as appropriate: Create or restore vegetation on the site and focus on native plant species and communities that provide wildlife cover, food (e.g., fruit, mast, pollen), and breeding habitat.

• Optimally, and as practical, the solar site should be designed with open areas spread throughout and planted and maintained with taller plant species. This practice would benefit pollinators, create diversity across the site, and provide needed shelter islands to aid in the movement of small-to-medium sized animals.

• Supplemental habitat features can also be added to a site to encourage native wildlife to use and live near or on the site

With leased land you are not only helping farmers/landowners monetarily, you are allowing for the possibility of the land being returned to agriculture in the future. And, properly maintained, the land will be more fertile after a long resting period of being a solar farm, and even better suited to future agriculture.

For example, utilize driven galvanized steel posts, instead of posts encapsulated in concrete, for easier removal. Minimize the footprint in every system on the farm, so that decommissioning is easier and less expensive. Consider allowing a site option for transmission and communication lines inside of conduit lying on the ground, instead of being buried, so soils don't have to be dug up and the farm is easier to decommission.

Soil compaction can have long term negative consequences for plant growth and erosion control. Soil compaction occurs when soil particles are compressed together—especially when the soil is wet—destroying soil structure, reducing porosity, and leading to a more dense soil that is hard for roots and water to penetrate.

• Avoid construction when the soil is wet

• Practice controlled and limited construction and maintenance traffic

• Utilize equipment with tires (or tracks) and pressures to minimize compaction

• Mechanically mitigate any compaction after construction 

Avoid clearing and grading the land. Work around existing features rather than re-contouring the site. Utilize panel trackers and mounting systems that can handle hilly terrain and use posts of varying length to even out the swells in rows. Consider running wiring inside of ground mounted conduit, where allowed, to avoid trenching. Build as few access roads as possible, and avoid maintenance during wet periods. Use drones for routine inspections.

• Agricultural lands represent previously disturbed land, and most are ideal for commercial solar farm siting.

• Clearing native forestland or grasslands should be avoided. Clearing forestland disturbs sequestered carbon, thus reducing the benefits of clean energy production in the short term. While ultimately an acre of PV solar will result in far less carbon emissions than the equivalent amount of forestland can sequester, the optimal scenario is when forestland is left intact to continue its role in carbon sequestration, and solar is sited elsewhere.

• Solar farms can also be sited on previously contaminated properties.

• Original, intact grasslands should be approached carefully. If an intact grassland is cleared and graded for solar development, in the short term it could result in loss of carbon from the soil organic layer, decreased microbial biomass and activity, and additional loss of soil through erosion. If commercial solar is sited on grasslands, minimal soil disruption should be a top priority, and developers should work around existing terrain and vegetation.

• Retain or plant native vegetation/trees in buffers or outside of perimeter fence. After the solar facility is sited, biologic carbon sinks can be incorporated into the site via vegetated buffers or trees, which provide additional benefits (wildlife, pollinators, etc.).

Erosion during solar farm construction has proven to be an issue. Therefore regulations should should focus on holding the developer responsible for comprehensive planning and execution in this area. A complete stormwater, erosion, grading, revegetation, and construction management plan should be required. At a minimum:

• Avoid clearing and grading the land. Work around existing features rather than re-contouring the site.

• Do not site solar farms in floodplains to both protect floodplain ecological functioning, and also protect solar facilities from flooding, ensuring the resilience and reliability of our energy supply.

• Generally, avoid steeply sloped sites that require extensive grading which will reduce potential for erosion, sedimentation, and runoff, and thus reduce impacts to water quality.

• Disruptions to stream or wetlands should be avoided.

• Off-site sedimentation must be prevented, and a ground cover sufficient to prevent erosion should be installed if grading has occurred.

Bi-facial panels collect light from the rear of the panel as well as from the front. Snow covering these panel melts off faster, and will not completely block power output. In addition, bi-facial panels require less land for the same output and have been shown to be somewhat more durable in the long term. Note: In areas with high hail risks, standard single faced panels have been shown to be more resistant to hail, and may be a better choice.

Single axis solar trackers allow panel placement on undulating terrain without disturbing the soil. They also allow water and light to penetrate below the panels, thus encouraging plant growth and lessening runoff potential. Additionally trackers allow for more energy output from the same acreage, increasing efficiency and reducing project size requirements of the farm. And finally, trackers can protect panels from hail damage and help to shed snow in winter.