[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

New federal rule loosens industry restrictions to protect eagles 

Credit:  By Bo Petersen | The Post and Courier | December 28, 2016 | www.postandcourier.com ~~

The once-endangered bald eagle has run smack into human progress. Federal regulators have approved a controversial proposal to allow the take, or unintended killing, of the protected birds without penalty, under a single permit issued for as long as 30 years.

In contrast, a hunter killing an eagle without a permit could be fined $15,000 and jailed for six months. In other “take” cases, a permit is required for each kill.

The loosening of permit restrictions is designed, like the permits themselves, not to unfairly penalize industries using equipment such as wind turbines or power lines. The permit requires the take to be monitored and periodically reviewed, and for the permittee to show measures have been taken to reduce the number of birds killed.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe said the rule used the best science to promote conservation of the bird. “The service has a long history of working cooperatively with multiple industry sectors through the permitting process to reduce impacts to eagles and other federally protected wildlife species,” he said.

Wildlife groups such the American Bird Conservancy and the National Audubon Society said the ruling doesn’t do enough.

“It’s a tough issue,” said Jim Elliott, director of the Center for Birds of Prey in Awendaw. “There’s a lot of emotional attachment to that bird. It’s about finding a balance between the risks and the needs of a wind company or utility.”

But, as with the original rules written in 2009 when the eagle was removed from the Endangered Species list, the concern is how closely the operations and the take will be monitored, he said, because the monitors would be hired by the companies.

Elliott expects the rule to continue to be revised as more is learned about its impact, he said.

The ferocious-eyed bald eagle is the national symbol and an iconic animal in the federal Endangered Species program, having recovered from virtually wiped out in the lower 48 states by pesticide poisoning to more than 140,000 birds today.

In South Carolina, the eagle has come back from as few as 14 nesting pairs to more than 200 in 40 years. It’s now common to see the raptor cruising the Lowcountry skies or in trees around suburban ponds.

The ruling could have an impact here. Wind turbines are beginning to go up on land, and wind farms are being studied offshore. The birds now are occasionally lost to things such as pollution poisoning or electrocution by accidental grounding while on power lines.

They also get struck by cars and shot. As Elliott spoke Tuesday, center staff treated an eagle found with its foot shot off.

The issue became hotly controversial in June when U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., proposed an amendment to federal regulations characterized as eliminating penalties for accidental bird deaths such as from wind turbine blades. The amendment’s language, though, would have removed all penalties under that particular regulation, although not all regulations protecting eagles.

Duncan was forced to remove the “accidental” language from the amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations bill in the House of Representatives because of a House rule prohibiting legislating in an amendment to an appropriations bill made from the House floor, spokesman Allen Klump said then.

Source:  By Bo Petersen | The Post and Courier | December 28, 2016 | www.postandcourier.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

Tag: Wildlife

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky