Extensions Would Allow More Killing of Our National Bird

The Interior Department is on the cusp of finalizing a rule that would give wind farms 30-year permits that authorize killing eagles.

Challenger, a Bald Eagle, is displayed during a wildlife event 28 February, 2007 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Ben Geman
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Ben Geman
Dec. 5, 2013, 7:41 a.m.

The In­teri­or De­part­ment ap­pears close to fi­nal­iz­ing a con­tro­ver­sial per­mit­ting rule that au­thor­izes wind farms to kill eagles for dec­ades.

The White House Of­fice of Man­age­ment and Budget signed off Wed­nes­day on the heav­ily lob­bied rule, which would boost the avail­able per­mit peri­od from five to 30 years, re­cords show.

The rule, which has faced op­pos­i­tion from en­vir­on­ment­al groups, au­thor­izes the non-in­ten­tion­al deaths of eagles but also con­tains con­ser­va­tion pro­vi­sions, ac­cord­ing to a sum­mary of the plan on OMB’s web­site.

The sum­mary touts pro­vi­sions de­signed to “en­sure the pre­ser­va­tion of eagles.”

The wind in­dustry has pushed for the change, ar­guing that it would provide reg­u­lat­ory cer­tainty for de­velopers, and notes that the eagle “take” per­mits in­clude con­ser­va­tion and mon­it­or­ing meas­ures.

Ac­cord­ing to the Amer­ic­an Wind En­ergy As­so­ci­ation, eagle col­li­sions with tur­bines at “mod­ern” wind farms ac­count for less than 2 per­cent of all re­por­ted hu­man-caused Golden Eagle deaths, and “only a hand­ful of Bald Eagle fatal­it­ies ever.”

The group ac­know­ledges that some wind farms de­veloped in the 1980s were more prob­lem­at­ic but ar­gues that eagle deaths will fall sharply as older wind farms re­place their short­er, faster tur­bines with the taller, less nu­mer­ous, and slower-ro­tat­ing mod­els.

The As­so­ci­ated Press re­por­ted in Septem­ber on a study by gov­ern­ment bio­lo­gists that found wind farms in 10 states have killed at least 85 eagles since 1997 and that the ac­tu­al fig­ure was likely much high­er. Most of the deaths oc­curred between 2008 and 2012, when the in­dustry was grow­ing fast, ac­cord­ing to AP.

Sev­enty-nine of the fatal­it­ies were Golden Eagles, ac­cord­ing to AP’s story on the re­search.

Con­ser­va­tion groups have cri­ti­cized the pro­posed 30-year per­mits, al­though ad­voc­ates with some groups con­tac­ted Thursday morn­ing did not com­ment as they awaited more in­form­a­tion on the fi­nal rule.

The Na­tion­al Audu­bon So­ci­ety, in re­marks on its web­site pos­ted earli­er in the rule­mak­ing pro­cess, said 30 years is “in­con­sist­ent with the pro­tec­tion of eagles.”

“There is simply too much un­cer­tainty over the status of eagle pop­u­la­tions to com­mit to such long time frames, and the pro­pos­al may con­strain fu­ture ad­apt­ive man­age­ment ac­tion,” the group states.

The In­teri­or De­part­ment on Thursday con­firmed that its fi­nal rule main­tains the pro­posed 30-year per­mit­ting.

An In­teri­or of­fi­cial said the agency’s Fish and Wild­life Ser­vice has been con­duct­ing “ex­tens­ive” out­reach on the meas­ure, which was first pro­posed in 2012.

The of­fi­cial said the de­part­ment is also look­ing at eagle pro­tec­tion more broadly.

“The ser­vice is also work­ing on a com­pre­hens­ive re­view of all eagle-per­mit­ting reg­u­la­tions to de­term­ine if oth­er modi­fic­a­tions are ne­ces­sary to in­crease their ef­fi­ciency and ef­fect­ive­ness,” the of­fi­cial said.

“In April 2012, the ser­vice is­sued an Ad­vance No­tice of Pro­posed Rule­mak­ing seek­ing pub­lic in­put on the Bald and Golden Eagle Pro­tec­tion Act Per­mit Pro­gram along with the Dur­a­tion Rule. A Na­tion­al En­vir­on­ment­al Policy Act doc­u­ment will be pre­pared for this rule­mak­ing and tribes will be con­sul­ted on this ac­tion,” the of­fi­cial said.

The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion also agrees with the wind in­dustry’s ar­gu­ment about provid­ing cer­tainty to de­velopers.

“This change will fa­cil­it­ate the de­vel­op­ment of re­new­able en­ergy and oth­er pro­jects that are de­signed to be in op­er­a­tion for many dec­ades. These reg­u­la­tions will provide a meas­ure of cer­tainty to pro­ject pro­ponents and their fun­ders, while con­tinu­ing to pro­tect eagles con­sist­ent with stat­utory man­dates,” the rule sum­mary on OMB’s web­site states.

What We're Following See More »
ANOTHER GOP MODERATE TO HER SIDE
John Warner to Endorse Clinton
10 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton will score another high-powered Republican endorsement on Wednesday, according to a campaign aide: retired senator John Warner of Virginia, a popular GOP maverick with renowned military credentials."

Source:
AUTHORITY OF EPA IN QUESTION
Appeals Court Hears Clean Power Plant Case
10 hours ago
THE LATEST

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday "heard several hours of oral arguments" over the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan rules. The 10-judge panel "focused much of their questioning on whether the EPA had overstepped its legal authority by seeking to broadly compel this shift away from coal, a move the EPA calls the Best System of Emission Reduction, or BSER. The states and companies suing the EPA argue the agency doesn’t have the authority to regulate anything outside of a power plant itself."

Source:
$28 MILLION THIS WEEK
Here Come the Ad Buys
10 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Spending by super PACs tied to Donald Trump friends such as Ben Carson and banker Andy Beal will help make this week the general election's most expensive yet. Republicans and Democrats will spend almost $28 million on radio and television this week, according to advertising records, as Trump substantially increases his advertising buy for the final stretch. He's spending $6.4 million in nine states, part of what aides have said will be a $100 million television campaign through Election Day."

Source:
GOP REFUSED VOTE ON FCC COMMISIONER
Reid Blocks Tech Bill Over “Broken Promise”
15 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Monday night's debate may have inspired some in Congress, as Senate Minority Leader has decided to take a stand of his own. Reid is declining to allow a vote on a "bipartisan bill that would bolster U.S. spectrum availability and the deployment of wireless broadband." Why? Because of a "broken promise" made a year ago by Republicans, who have refused to vote on confirmation for a Democratic commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission to a second term. Harry Reid then took it a step further, invoking another confirmation vote still outstanding, that of Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.

Source:
FLINT FUNDING STILL AT ISSUE
Spending Bill Fails to Clear 60-Vote Hurdle
17 hours ago
THE LATEST
×