SELECT LANGUAGE BELOW

Biden’s wind energy regulations continue to harm eagles and need to be repealed.

Biden's wind energy regulations continue to harm eagles and need to be repealed.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has introduced new Eagle Permission Regulations. Last spring, there was a viewpoint that these changes would support eagle conservation. However, the latest rules appear to make it easier for wind energy projects to secure permissions, which could lead to increased eagle fatalities.

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act bars any “taking” of eagles, with “take” encompassing various harmful actions like chasing, shooting, or capturing. In 2009, the Fish and Wildlife Department established rules for permit approval under specific circumstances, allowing for “accidental take” under legally approved activities.

In 2013, guidance was issued to energy developers outlining how to develop an Eagle Conservation Plan to mitigate potential harm to eagles. This plan emphasized avoiding areas where eagles are highly concentrated while also highlighting the need to implement conservation measures before obtaining permits from the Fish and Wildlife Department.

Nevertheless, the Biden administration contended that the previous permitting process was overly complicated, deterring businesses from applying for Eagle Take permits, which were previously granted only after proving that preventative measures were put in place.

The agency claims that by streamlining wind energy permits, eagle conservation efforts may actually be enhanced. But one might wonder if the 2024 permit revisions genuinely offer better protection for eagles or simply allow for higher eagle mortality in wind energy projects.

The revised regulations offer two types of permits: specific and general. The general permits come with fewer requirements for mitigation and monitoring, making them easier and less expensive to obtain. These permits are available in regions deemed to have a lower eagle population.

Unfortunately, the approach taken by the general permits mistakenly downplays the risks posed to eagles by wind energy projects, especially in most parts of the U.S. outside of the Rocky Mountains. Areas with high eagle populations are not considered for these general permissions.

According to the new regulations, if a wind project in a particular area qualifies for a general permit, the staff have no discretion to deny it, even if prior projects have already resulted in eagle deaths.

Moreover, the new regulations seem to lessen the requirements for post-construction monitoring of eagle deaths in wind projects, potentially leading to underreporting. The survey distance for monitoring has been reduced from over 100 meters to just 40 meters, making it improbable that eagle remains would be discovered unless they’re right on the road or turbine pad.

The 2024 regulations do not provide the Fish and Wildlife Services with the authority to prevent wind projects from being located in areas with high eagle concentrations. If the established guidelines are ignored, the reliability of the agency comes into question.

Due to the 2024 regulations, there seems to be a shift in focus from protecting eagles to facilitating permits for wind energy projects that could result in unrestricted eagle fatalities.

Having spent 25 years with the Fish and Wildlife Service, I’ve seen how wind energy projects threaten avian and bat populations. In the past, our teams were instructed to uphold wildlife protection laws strictly, but this enforcement seemed to waver in the case of the wind energy sector, unlike for oil and gas industries.

In my view, the 2024 regulations seem more about granting approvals than actively contributing to eagle conservation, allowing wind energy developments that could lead to eagle fatalities.

The administration’s efforts in August aimed at ensuring compliance with existing laws for wind energy projects represent a welcome step. However, amending the 2024 Biden permit regulations is crucial to safeguarding our national symbol.

Biden appears to be steering wind energy projects away from existing laws meant to protect eagles, which is not aligned with what initially drew me to this work, nor would it likely resonate with future generations.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Telegram
WhatsApp

Related News