Feds Propose Allowing Killing Of Golden Eagles

Really?

Damn...

Nice headline...sure gets your attention doesn't it.

Read more (along with the pdf document of the application) and closely look at the definition of "take".

http://usnews.msnbc.ms​n.com …per-to-kill-golden-eagles

What if the take goes into the dozens? I saw a recent NatGeo hour that claims the bag limit seems to have been kept quiet for years, because it's so high it would make everyone furious if it got out. Not just eagles, but owls, and raptors of all kind, among other birds.

So, their proposal is to make it legal, so that when the word does get out that it's been going on for years, they can just say, well, they got a permit.

I pointed out the definition of "take" because a lot of people obviously just read the headline (where I saw the story orginially posted) and thought they were just going to randomly kill Eagles for the hell of it.

And I think...no, I know you're right about the numbers we don't know about that are killed each year. Is this why they're doing it? Don't know but I'd like to think it's for other reasons....one can only hope.

I don't think they would ever admit what the real reason is, but knowing they have already been killing them for years without permits, I am skeptical of any claim they make now. Windmills have been up in the hundreds in California and other places for more than 20 years. That's a lot of birds.

I would rather see them relocate them.
I would love a population increase of goldens in New York.

Relocation would be nice, but I think they would just fly back. Maybe instead, they could just put marshmallow blades on the windmills? Or big screeching whistles on the blade tips to scare them off?

Relocate the to England please, as we have 1 golden eagle yes 1 left in the wild, the rest are all in scotland....

Well I hope it doesn't succeed. Im sure theirs 100 times as many Starlings creating some sort of problem up there.Let's get rid of those!

Some farms do use screens around the blades or some sort of protection for wildlife that may fly into the blades.

MakeMeShutter wrote in post #13657643
I would rather see them relocate them.
I would love a population increase of goldens in New York.

Relocation is tricky, because it is the same conditions that they look for when siting wind farms (hills with a good updraft) that also attract soaring birds of prey such as eagles.

I am sure that the numbers of birds killed must be higher than that article suggests, we have had quite a number of raptors killed by wind turbines in the UK. Red kites in particular seem to be hit by them. It is also a problem anywhere that wind turbines are built. I saw a figure by the Spanish Ornithological Society that reckoned almost a million birds a year were killed, in Spain, every year (although most would be more common species such as starlings of course). And it's not just the wind farms, Power lines can kill up to 800 birds per year, per mile.

Scotland seems to be wind power crazy, wanting to reach 40% of it's total electricity generation from turbines. To make this happen, they are building wind farms on islands where not just golden eagles but the even rarer sea eagles live. One wind farm currently under construction is being placed right on the area where young eagles learn to soar, as it has the ideal wind conditions that both need. Initial calculations were that it would kill 137 eagles over 25 years, which made it unviable (the maximum allowable for population conservation being 15) so they changed a couple of numbers (such as increasing the avoidance rate from 95% to 98%), removed a small number of turbines and re ran the calculations. Guess what, the new model gave exactly 15 eagles killed, so the plans were approved.

Since the persecution of raptors and the DDT poisoning of a few decades ago reduced populations enormously, we have been gradually increasing the numbers and some species have been recovered from the edge of extinction in the UK (or beyond, in the case of sea eagles, which did actually disappear but have been reintroduced in recent years). Now it seems they are, potentially at risk of populations falling again because of wind farms, and not just birds but bats (also protected species) also fall foul of turbine blades.

If wind turbines were a truly practical way of producing electricity it might be understandable, but they are inefficient, cost a huge amount of money and produce quite low amounts of electricity. On top of that, they are starting to blight more and more beautiful landscapes as they appear on more and more hilltops.

The only good thing about the feds proposal, posted by the OP, is that they have stipulated that the operators must engage in conservation measures to increase the population of the birds in equivalent numbers to those killed. Something we should do in the UK, in my opinion.

Insanity...pure and simply. Now....I believe in wind farms...we need them in this day and age of no oil on the horizon but really....I love the point that was made that as long as the killing did not effect future breeding. Now, qualify that please...what? how can anyone guarantee that killing these three eagles will not impact tomorrow...pure insanity. Am i watching the movie Catch 22? jim

No, I think we are in the movie.

lmans wrote in post #13667712
Insanity...pure and simply. Now....I believe in wind farms...we need them in this day and age of no oil on the horizon but really....I love the point that was made that as long as the killing did not effect future breeding. Now, qualify that please...what? how can anyone guarantee that killing these three eagles will not impact tomorrow...pure insanity. Am i watching the movie Catch 22? jim

Those "three eagles" almost certainly won't impact tomorrow unduly.

The problem is, we aren't really talking about just 3 eagles. Over the whole of the US, it is hundreds of eagles every year.

In California, the Altamont Pass wind farm has been averaging 67 golden eagle deaths a year for the past 4 decades or so (and that is just a part of the annual kill of 2,000 or so raptors altogether). In order to compensate for such high losses, it has been estimated that a population of at least 167 breeding pairs is needed. Sadly, there are just 60-65 pairs of golden eagles left in the area. Eagle kills are likely to go down as time goes by, but sadly only because there will be fewer and fewer eagles.

Taking in the rest of California, that death toll of golden eagles rises to 80 annually, against a statewide population of around 2,500. That is a little more optimistic for their survival but still very worrying, particularly as California is planning to triple the number of wind turbines over the next few years. Although more modern blade designs, combined with taller towers, is reducing the lethality of the newer turbines, they still kill many eagles.

Multiply that figure of 80 deaths across all States which use windpower and the number of dead eagles annually is going to be high, especially as thousands more are killed by power lines stretching across the country.

It all makes the fuss about THREE eagles seem almost pointless.

Of course, here in England we have a male golden eagle in Haweswater who would probably be grateful of three more to keep him company and help prevent the loss of the golden eagle as a resident bird in England.