Act now to save the bald eagle!

Submit your comment to the federal register to save our national bird

Bald eagles are our national bird. Golden eagles are just as majestic. They have just returned from the verge of extinction, after years of being shot and poisoned. Obama’s Department of the Interior and the Fish & Wildlife Service are on the verge of granting industrial wind turbine companies a “programmatic” or blanket license to kill potentially hundreds of eagles every year, for years on end.

This is unconscionable. You can help save the eagles by following the instructions below. The Fish & Wildlife Service has proposed a “rule” that would allow wind turbine operators to “take” (bureaucratic speak for “kill”) bald eagles and golden eagles. It would make these magnificent birds extinct in many parts of the country – especially if wind turbines are allowed to proliferate near eagle habitats.

It would be a national and ecological disaster. CFACT has submitted a detailed comment opposing the rule. How can you help?

Click here to submit a comment opposing the proposed rule.

Before federal agencies make a new rule official, they must publish it in the federal register and accept comments from the public on the proposed regulations. The comment period closes Thursday, July 12, so your immediate action is necessary.

You can write your own comment or select from the following talking points:

  • I oppose granting any take permits to industrial wind turbine operators. The wind industry should be obligated to abide by the very same rules that apply to everyone else in America. If its facilities are likely to disturb, maim or kill eagles – or cause eagles not to nest in many areas – turbines should be prohibited, and permits to erect wind turbine facilities should be denied. (Or else no one should be subjected to FWS rules and fines for harming eagles.) The proposal is harmful, hypocritical and completely unjustifiable. It should not be promulgated in any form.
  • I oppose the proposed rule because it covers up the true extent of eagle fatalities on wind farms. Under the proposed rule we would never know how many eagles are slaughtered by wind turbines because the wind industry controls its facility sites and thus its secretive and self-serving mortality studies are flawed. It prevents independent study teams from investigating bird injuries and deaths. Its personnel pick up and bury bird carcasses. (Its motto seems to be “Slice, shovel and shut up.”)  Coyotes, foxes, wolves, vultures and other scavengers cart away other evidence. Neither currently nor under the proposed rule does the FWS require that available information be made public, or that turbine operators allow independent studies.
  • I oppose the proposed rule because it is not just eagles that would be mangled and destroyed. It is also California condors, hawks, falcons, snow geese, bats and other majestic flying creatures, many of which are on the threatened and endangered list – or soon will be because of wind turbines. The proposed regulation is a wholesale sellout to Big Wind and would prevent the actual impacts on eagle populations from ever being known. If this rule is allowed to take force, any existing populations will be driven below replacement levels before anyone realizes what is happening. And eagles (and other important species) will be decimated or prevented from establishing habitats and new populations in numerous areas around the country.
  • I oppose the FWS rule because it is harmful, hypocritical and completely unjustifiable. The FWS has threatened, fined and jailed people for pursuing, injuring, molesting and disturbing eagles and eagle nests – even when the harm was unintentional. It even punishes the mere possession of an eagle feather, even if the feather was taken from an eagle that was killed by a car or wind turbine. The FWS has even threatened a town with thousands of dollars in fines if the town held a Fourth of July fireworks display and an eaglet was startled enough to leave its nest. For the proposed rule to then give industrial wind farms what amounts to a “007 License to Kill” and maim as many bald eagles and golden eagles as they like is the height of hypocrisy and absurdity.
  • I oppose the FWS rule because there is no benefit — local or national, economic or ecological — to allowing the wind industry to kill our magnificent bald and golden eagles. The wind energy system requires massive subsidies, has never generated actual black ink revenue, and requires vast amounts of land and enormous amounts of raw materials to generate expensive, subsidized, and unreliable electricity that raises costs for families, factories, farms, small businesses, internet companies, hospitals, churches, schools and every other entity in the United States.

Please join with CFACT in opposing this absurd rule. Click here to submit your comments immediately. Time is of the essence, for the comment period will close on Thursday, July 12. To read the technical details of the rule, click here to see it on the website of the Federal Register.

For more information about why industrial wind farms are bad energy policy, bad for the economy, and bad for the environment, see these articles by CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen:

“Time to terminate Big Wind subsidies” and

“Charles Manson energy”

 

Categories

About the Author: CFACT

CFACT defends the environment and human welfare through facts, news, and analysis.

  • Carolyn Lewis

    Version:1.0
    StartHTML:0000000167
    EndHTML:0000006778
    StartFragment:0000000457
    EndFragment:0000006762

    I
    am a citizen who is deeply concerned about the pair of nesting Bald
    Eagles at the Norfolk Botanical Garden [NBG]. I have followed this
    nest for five years and have a deep respect and love for the species.
    I count myself a member of “The Eagle Nation” and I must state I
    am confused.

    I
    left town on Sept. 30th. The NBG Board of Directors had
    voted to send a letter to the City Manager, Mr. Jones, stating they
    would like to suspend the removal of the eagles’ nests and form a
    Task Force to study alternatives. (Mr. Jones had requested this be
    done.) There was a concern that the NBG Board was not a part of the
    decision to remove the nests.

    This
    seemed like a good option. The FAA should be done with their study of
    the Merlin Radar System’s effectiveness. And if that proved a viable
    alternative the Airport should be able to obtain a grant to purchase
    the system. Therefore, no money out of the Airport or City’s pockets.

    Imagine
    my surprise when I returned on Oct. 6th to learn the nests
    were removed on Oct. 4th and no one seems to know why this
    happened so swift. Why all of these meetings were behind closed
    doors, with no opportunity afforded citizens opposed to this action.

    One
    explanation we heard was, it is a matter of liability on the City’s
    part. You (Norfolk) does not want to be sued if someone really gets
    hurt by an eagle strike. Even if you do own NBG why would you think
    you would be sued. It would be no different than one of the deer,
    that come on my property to eat from my fruit trees, runs into the
    street and gets hit. Deer cause a tremendous amount of damage to
    vehicles and do cause physically injuries, even death. I would not
    expect to get sued.

    In
    order to remove ALL possible
    safety hazards to the public and/or birds the trees will need to be
    cut down to dissuade other nesting birds, as well as another pair of
    eagles. Then after you cut all of the trees you will need to remove
    all of their food sources, bugs, small animals (squirrels, rabbits,
    voles, etc.)and fish. Because we both know that Eagles are not as big
    a problem for the airplanes as small birds. Over the past ten (10)
    years, including the 2 eagles killed last year, the were 9 large bird
    strikes, 40small birds, 23 medium to large birds, 6 gulls, 5 ducks, 5
    doves and etc. As I stated at the beginning, Eagles are not the
    problem, merely one problem.

    What is the Council’s plans for eliminating those other
    hits? What about the turtle and the fox. Unless The City’s plan is
    eliminate all living creatures in that area, removing the eagles’
    nests is not going to fix anything. There have been 99 strikes in the
    past 10 years, only 2 were eagles. And eagles do not cause as much
    damage as a flock of starlings, geese or ducks.

    Removing the Eagles’ nests is a “knee jerk”
    reaction based on a “Concern” by the airport. Believe that and I
    have a Bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you. The airport wants to
    expand and the only way they can is to get rid of NBG. The garden’s
    big draw over the last several years has been the eagles. It put the
    garden on the map. People came to Norfolk to see the eagles, not the
    flowers. People in the local area yes but not out-of-towers. There
    are wonderful gardens in PA,NY,WV and the Carolinas that I know about
    and probably many more. There is no reason to go to NBG if the eagles
    are not there. Norfolk is going to loose tourist money and donations.
    I’m not going to support an flower garden out of state, as I have
    done in the past. Remember I am only one (1) of many. We, Eagle fans,
    put $125,000 dollars in NBG’s budget; we, Eagle fans, built the
    garden and statue honoring Mama Eagle last year. That brought more
    money into your area, via purchases and labor. We, Eagle fans, are
    not just a few but number the thousands in many different countries.
    That is where the votes came from that put that Chase money in the
    NBG coffers.

    All
    we want is the curtsey to be heard. There are other methods of
    deterring birds around airports. Most large airports on the East
    Coast are near water, which means water fowl and raptures. Other
    airports and cities don’t go out and remove the nests or chop down
    trees. Some airports use dogs, cannons, radar systems, strobe lights.
    There are other ways but Norfolk City Council has deemed them all
    useless, therefore harass or harm the eagles.

    And last I would like to mention that pair of nesting
    eagles keeps other eagles, or nesting birds, away. It is their
    territory and they will defend it to their death. Before Dad made a
    selection of a female there were, on one day, 9 eagles in and around
    the garden.

    Sincerely,

    Carolyn Lewis

  • Baromar

    my favorite animal is golden and bald eagle i love them see this an d vote what you love more bald or golden eagle. to vote press reply and write your answer.

  • BS7SDEN

    Why do we allow Environmentalists to damage the Earth and kill protected birds?

    These degenerate, Lib-Retards must be ignored!