Wind Farm Seeks Permit to KILL GOLDEN EAGLES

[Saigon]

Mr H -

As I've stated, caribou thrive amongst commercial development in Alaska.

Post #18.

My reply, linked at #27 -

One of the oil sands industry’s most pressing concerns is its impact on woodland caribou herds. As an iconic Canadian species, and something of a bellwether for boreal forest health, we all want to see caribou thrive.

The first big declines of the woodland caribou in Alberta were observed in the late 1940s and the early 1970s, linked to extensive logging in old-growth forests. Caribou are dependent on old-growth forests because only there can they find abundant amounts of the slow-growing lichen on which they depend for 70 per cent of their diet.

Today, the principal threat to specific caribou sub-populations comes from oil sands development and associated road building and seismic lines within their roaming areas. The woodland caribou is a migratory species, so roads and lines can easily disrupt and fragment their habitat. Moreover, even if the actual area of habitat disturbed by roads and seismic lines is physically small, the amount of habitat that becomes unavailable to the caribou may be much greater, because they cannot or will not cross the disturbed areas.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I hadn't considered the ability of these machines to move air but now I wonder what effect they have on local patterns of air movement and possible subsequent weather effects. What global effects might occur as these huge spreads of wind generators increase worldwide?

Energy isn't created, it's simply transferred. The natural energy of the wind and the resultant weather patterns they affect are most definitely altered by these bombastic behemoth bastardizations of pretend science.

You have to laugh, don't you?!

And no, people - wind mills patently do not influence local weather, any more so than buildings or bridges do.

Beg to differ...
Buildings and bridges do not move immense masses of air, windmills do. Anything with blades wider than I am tall, with a rotational disk having a diameter of about 300 ft most certainly affects local air movement.
Buildings do disrupt natural air flow, though. Or do you think air currents flowing through Manhattan are the same as they would be without all those buildings? It's also verified that the density of human habitation does definitely affect local temperatures. According to the high priests of your religion, AGW, whatever people do has a definite, detrimental effect on our environment. Wind turbines are not naturally occurring phenomena, therefore they are harmful and should be torn down immediately. It it saves just one bird, it's worth doing without your microwave and big-screen TV, isn't it?

 

[Moonglow]

Oil kills animals also~duh.

But we can't eat those birds. We can eat the birds chopped up by wind turbines. Probably de-feathers them quite well too.

Does Eagle taste like chicken?

According to Ben Franklin it taste like turkey.

 

[Moonglow]

Energy isn't created, it's simply transferred. The natural energy of the wind and the resultant weather patterns they affect are most definitely altered by these bombastic behemoth bastardizations of pretend science.

You have to laugh, don't you?!

And no, people - wind mills patently do not influence local weather, any more so than buildings or bridges do.

Beg to differ...
Buildings and bridges do not move immense masses of air, windmills do. Anything with blades wider than I am tall, with a rotational disk having a diameter of about 300 ft most certainly affects local air movement.
Buildings do disrupt natural air flow, though. Or do you think air currents flowing through Manhattan are the same as they would be without all those buildings? It's also verified that the density of human habitation does definitely affect local temperatures. According to the high priests of your religion, AGW, whatever people do has a definite, detrimental effect on our environment. Wind turbines are not naturally occurring phenomena, therefore they are harmful and should be torn down immediately. It it saves just one bird, it's worth doing without your microwave and big-screen TV, isn't it?

oil derricks are not a natural phenomenon either.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Oil kills animals also~duh.

But we can't eat those birds. We can eat the birds chopped up by wind turbines. Probably de-feathers them quite well too.

Does Eagle taste like chicken?

According to Ben Franklin it taste like turkey.

A Native friend of mine says it tastes more like spotted owl.

 

[westwall]

Birds die in oil...

It's a bird. How important is it...Not very.

ALL life is important asshat. The problem is oil kills very few birds and windmills kill more birds in a year than Big Oil has in over 100 years. And they get a complete pass on it while Big Oil gets hammered by fines.

 

[westwall]

What's the penalty if you kill one?

There is an enormous difference between building a machine that provides people a necessary commodity but which is dangerous to eagles and other birds - and taking many measures to protect the birds from being harmed - and picking up your gun and going out into the fields and shooting one; whether or not it was your first or your second choice, whether or not you thought it was a buzzard or a bunny rabbit.

The purpose of the wind turbines is not killing one eagle a year. If Joe Blow takes a gun outside and looks up in the air for his next victim, he bears a great deal more of the responsibility for unintended death of an animal.

The cat is out of the bag and since they can no longer hide the fact they are killing endangered birds on a monthly basis they are instead asking for a permit so they can continue to kill them without being prosecuted.

The Golden Eagle is neither an endangered nor a threatened species.

From Wikipedia:

Once widespread across the Holarctic, it has disappeared from many areas which are now more heavily populated by humans. Despite being extirpated from or uncommon in some its former range, the species is still fairly ubiquitous, being present in sizeable stretches of Eurasia, North America, and parts of North Africa.

And those areas from which it has been driven were not covered with windmills. They were covered with roads, houses, factories and power plants. The open meadows where it once hunted its food have been turned into monocultural fields of grain for human consumption, the rodents poisoned or caught in traps. The golden eagle is neither threatened nor endangered but what harm it has received at the hands of humans has not, for the vast part, come from windmills.

Really? Then why do oil companies get huge fines when they kill protected species? By your logic (or lack thereof) they too should get a complete pass.

 

[westwall]

killing birds by fossil fuels =bad

killing birds by green energy = good

got the love the limited outrage of the left

killing birds producing green energy = bad

killing millions of times more animals by fossil fuels = millions of times as bad.

Got to love the selective blindness of the neocon.

I see you were looking in the mirror when you made this statement. Good to see you identifying the problem..

 

[westwall]

Jon -

Please go away and do a little reseach - otherwise you just come across as dumb and dishonest as the OP who started this train wreck.

Here is a list of what the indsutry is doing in the US, but obviously countries like Austria are much further down the road to long-term solutuons:


Siting: Bird-smart wind power (including wind farms and associated infrastructure) is sited to prevent harm to birds, ideally in already altered habitats such as farmland, and avoids sensitive areas. Examples of such areas may include migratory bottlenecks, wetlands, raptor concentration and key nesting areas, the edges of ridges used by migrants, key habitat or flight paths for endangered or declining species, breeding concentrations of species that avoid tall structures (such as some grouse species), and in or adjacent to Important Bird Areas. Maps with detailed data on wildlife are currently being developed by conservation groups for use by the wind industry. Pre-construction assessments should always be conducted to confirm whether a particular site presents an especially high risk to birds. Some areas are not going to be suitable for wind development.

Operation and Construction Mitigation: Bird-smart wind power uses the best technology and management practices to avoid and minimize harm to birds, such as by burying transmission lines in high risk areas, following Avian Power Line Interaction Committee standards for above-ground transmission lines, using lighting that minimizes nighttime migratory bird collision mortality (such as strobe lights), using unguyed rather than guyed meteorological towers, and restoring habitat disturbed by construction, e.g., re-compacting soils disturbed by construction and replanting native vegetation (or restoring the site if the wind farm is decommissioned).

Monitoring: Bird-smart wind power conducts effective, federally reviewed and approved, site-specific, pre- and post-construction studies/assessments to assist with improved siting and operation, and to properly quantify impacts. Pre-construction assessments must provide sufficient data to assist with micro-siting (e.g., by use of radar to detect local bird movements), create an annual baseline against which post-construction studies can be evaluated, use all existing available bird study data, and be conducted during months when bird use can be expected to be at its peak at the selected site. Post-construction studies must employ mathematical models that best account for variations in local conditions and the relative difficulty of locating bird carcasses in different habitats, as well as any scavenging by predators that may reduce the number of carcasses found, and run for at least two years (and long enough to determine the efficacy of, and make needed revisions to, operational mitigation measures).

Compensation: Bird-smart wind power redresses the loss of any birds or habitat unavoidably harmed by construction and operation to a net benefit standard. This includes bird deaths caused by collisions with turbines and their associated power lines, and lost or degraded habitat (e.g., areas of abandoned habitat) Such compensation could include acquiring additional land for the National Wildlife Refuge system or other off-site habitat conservation projects.

Wind Energy Frequently Asked Questions

btw The National Academy of Sciences (2007) reported that less than 0.003% of anthropogenic bird deaths every year were attributed to wind turbines in four eastern states in the United States, and confirmed that collisions with buildings and communication towers pose a much greater risk.

Fuck you, you sanctimonious twerp. Jon DID do his research you spew propaganda. HUGE difference as you very well know. Finished your remedial Finnish geography classes yet little liar?

 

[westwall]

5 eagle over a five year period?

Sounds reasonable to me.

What the problem?

Because it won't be 5....

While windmills kill lotsa birds just as building's do they are particularly deadly to the big raptors like eagles. Note that pretty well all logging was stopping on the west coast to protect one bird - the spotted owl. Why have these windmills wiping entire populations of raptors been allowed to operate. Answer - Big Oil and its wholly owned subsidiary Big Green have a lot more money than timber companies to buy off politicians and media always ready to sell out their country.

DRIESSEN: Wind-energy tax credits fund bird murder - Washington Times

"..In the 86-square-mile area blanketed by California’s Altamont Pass wind turbines, no eagles have nested for more than 20 years, and golden eagle nest sites have declined by half in surrounding areas, even though both are prime habitats, Mr. Wiegand notes. Wildlife specialist Shawn Smallwood estimates that 2,300 golden eagles have been killed by Altamont turbines in the past 25 years..."

When Big Oil's media paints wind projects in golden glory, it by political necessity omits the fact that these abortions have to be backed up to 100% nameplate with fast spooling low efficiency gas plant run inefficiently. Less gas, less carbon/ far less money, replacing the win/solar/inefficient gas backup scam with nukes or high efficiency gas.

Commercial without subsidy wind is running around 50 and 14 cents a kwh with gas backup and 5 times sized transmission facilities adding a further 20 cents a kwh. Ontario's tariff for onshore wind is 14 cents a kwh. Make wind green - add a buck a kwh for storage.

Dirt cheap, zero environmental footprint, clean and green nuke power build by public power needing no storage backup or extra transmission capacity available 24/7 costs less than 4 cents a kwh.


Are Wind Turbines Getting More Bird and Bat-Friendly?: Scientific American

 

[jon_berzerk]

I hadn't considered the ability of these machines to move air but now I wonder what effect they have on local patterns of air movement and possible subsequent weather effects. What global effects might occur as these huge spreads of wind generators increase worldwide?

yeah that is a possibility they do change the air patterns

that bird would not be there if the windmill was not there

as the video shows the bird is clearly using the updrafts to stay afloat

Obviously was using the artificial air movement. On a road trip this past summer, we drove by Abilene and Sweetwater, TX. There's a HUGE wind power project out there, mile after mile of those giant wind generators, as far as the eye can see. I cannot imagine the avian carnage inflicted by that many machines, but I'd wager it is not "insignificant" by any stretch of the imagination.

I cannot imagine the avian carnage inflicted by that many machines, but I'd wager it is not "insignificant" by any stretch of the imagination

we passed many today on our way through Nebraska

quite frequently we seen turkey vultures circling the blades

using the drafts to a float

eagles do the same thing

i hadnt thought about it

but the reports say

that the windmills take out a numerous amount of bats as well

i imagine they are doing similar in the dark

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr H -

As I've stated, caribou thrive amongst commercial development in Alaska.

Post #18.

My reply, linked at #27 -

One of the oil sands industry’s most pressing concerns is its impact on woodland caribou herds. As an iconic Canadian species, and something of a bellwether for boreal forest health, we all want to see caribou thrive.

The first big declines of the woodland caribou in Alberta were observed in the late 1940s and the early 1970s, linked to extensive logging in old-growth forests. Caribou are dependent on old-growth forests because only there can they find abundant amounts of the slow-growing lichen on which they depend for 70 per cent of their diet.

Today, the principal threat to specific caribou sub-populations comes from oil sands development and associated road building and seismic lines within their roaming areas. The woodland caribou is a migratory species, so roads and lines can easily disrupt and fragment their habitat. Moreover, even if the actual area of habitat disturbed by roads and seismic lines is physically small, the amount of habitat that becomes unavailable to the caribou may be much greater, because they cannot or will not cross the disturbed areas.

It seems that caribou continue copulating and populating in sufficient quantity...

http://americanpridefoods.com/caribou-meat.html

You're a petrophobe. Hydrocarbons don't kill caribou... people kill caribou..

 

[jon_berzerk]

Mr H -

As I've stated, caribou thrive amongst commercial development in Alaska.

Post #18.

My reply, linked at #27 -

One of the oil sands industry’s most pressing concerns is its impact on woodland caribou herds. As an iconic Canadian species, and something of a bellwether for boreal forest health, we all want to see caribou thrive.

The first big declines of the woodland caribou in Alberta were observed in the late 1940s and the early 1970s, linked to extensive logging in old-growth forests. Caribou are dependent on old-growth forests because only there can they find abundant amounts of the slow-growing lichen on which they depend for 70 per cent of their diet.

Today, the principal threat to specific caribou sub-populations comes from oil sands development and associated road building and seismic lines within their roaming areas. The woodland caribou is a migratory species, so roads and lines can easily disrupt and fragment their habitat. Moreover, even if the actual area of habitat disturbed by roads and seismic lines is physically small, the amount of habitat that becomes unavailable to the caribou may be much greater, because they cannot or will not cross the disturbed areas.

It seems that caribou continue copulating and populating in sufficient quantity...

http://americanpridefoods.com/caribou-meat.html

You're a petrophobe. Hydrocarbons done kill caribou... people kill caribou..

and eat them

 

[Saigon]

Jon -

I cannot imagine the avian carnage inflicted by that many machines, but I'd wager it is not "insignificant" by any stretch of the imagination

As I informed you several times now, windmills kill 0.003% of all birds killed by humans in the US. Also, wind mills kill less birds each year, down by1/3 in the past decade in some countries.

Please post honestly, and do not ignore facts simply because they make you look silly, petulant and childish.

 

[Saigon]

Beg to differ...
Buildings and bridges do not move immense masses of air, windmills do. Anything with blades wider than I am tall, with a rotational disk having a diameter of about 300 ft most certainly affects local air movement.
Buildings do disrupt natural air flow, though. Or do you think air currents flowing through Manhattan are the same as they would be without all those buildings? It's also verified that the density of human habitation does definitely affect local temperatures. According to the high priests of your religion, AGW, whatever people do has a definite, detrimental effect on our environment. Wind turbines are not naturally occurring phenomena, therefore they are harmful and should be torn down immediately. It it saves just one bird, it's worth doing without your microwave and big-screen TV, isn't it?

Buldings kill more hundreds of times more birds than windmills do.

Why?

Because the air is moving. It doesn't matter that the building is not moving.

I don't personally see the idea of tearing down all buildings as being very scientific, nor sensible.

 

[Gracie]

Geez. Can't even have a discussion thread about eagles being killed and abortion has to invade it.

Eye roll.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Mr H -



Post #18.

My reply, linked at #27 -

One of the oil sands industry’s most pressing concerns is its impact on woodland caribou herds. As an iconic Canadian species, and something of a bellwether for boreal forest health, we all want to see caribou thrive.

The first big declines of the woodland caribou in Alberta were observed in the late 1940s and the early 1970s, linked to extensive logging in old-growth forests. Caribou are dependent on old-growth forests because only there can they find abundant amounts of the slow-growing lichen on which they depend for 70 per cent of their diet.

Today, the principal threat to specific caribou sub-populations comes from oil sands development and associated road building and seismic lines within their roaming areas. The woodland caribou is a migratory species, so roads and lines can easily disrupt and fragment their habitat. Moreover, even if the actual area of habitat disturbed by roads and seismic lines is physically small, the amount of habitat that becomes unavailable to the caribou may be much greater, because they cannot or will not cross the disturbed areas.

It seems that caribou continue copulating and populating in sufficient quantity...

http://americanpridefoods.com/caribou-meat.html

You're a petrophobe. Hydrocarbons done kill caribou... people kill caribou..

and eat them

Because they are quite tasty.

 

[Sarah G]

Well well. The cat is out of the bag and since they can no longer hide the fact they are killing endangered birds on a monthly basis they are instead asking for a permit so they can continue to kill them without being prosecuted.

Environment enschmironment....


"SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 27 (UPI) -- A Solano County, Calif., wind farm would be the first renewable energy project in the nation allowed to kill eagles under a federal plan, a U.S. agency said.

Under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal, outlined in a draft environmental report released Thursday, the Shiloh IV Wind Project would be issued a golden eagle take permit for its 3,500-acre plant in the Montezuma Hills, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

The plan would allow the company's 50 wind turbines to kill as many as five golden eagles in a five-year period in exchange for measures to protect the birds, including retrofitting 133 power poles to prevent electrocutions, the Chronicle said."


Read more: Wind farm would be first renewable energy allowed to kill eagles - UPI.com


Wind farm would be first renewable energy allowed to kill eagles - UPI.com

Given the compensatory measures they will be required to make, less golden eagles may die than would have died had the facility never been built. And their 'take' is not dramatic: 1/year for five years is probably a fraction of the number killed by hunters and farmers/ranchers in the area.

And the lines about "the cat is finally out of the bag" and "can no longer pretend" are such complete bullshit. The cat has never been IN the bag and no one has ever pretended that birds weren't being killed by wind turbines. It has been the topic of open and widespread discussion for several years now.

Watching you folks pretending to suddenly be concerned environmentalists is really pathetic.

What's the penalty if you kill one?

Wth? You all are suddenly concerned about the ecological balance or is it just the eagles that have you all riled up because it makes you seem patriotic?

Lol, you sound like a freaking loon.

 

[Abraham3]

Beg to differ...
Buildings and bridges do not move immense masses of air, windmills do. Anything with blades wider than I am tall, with a rotational disk having a diameter of about 300 ft most certainly affects local air movement.

Beg to differ. Windmills do not move air, they are moved by air. Both buildings and windmills obstruct air flow. The amount of disruption is dependent on the area (facing the wind) and the configuration or shape of the object. Buildings, due to their more angular shape and their width, would generally be more disruptive to flow. Height, is, of course a factor. A two story house will not have as much effect as a 300 foot windmill.

Although both transfer energy out the atmosphere, neither nor both does so to a sufficient degree to affect the weather to a detectable degree.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Jon -

I cannot imagine the avian carnage inflicted by that many machines, but I'd wager it is not "insignificant" by any stretch of the imagination

As I informed you several times now, windmills kill 0.003% of all birds killed by humans in the US. Also, wind mills kill less birds each year, down by1/3 in the past decade in some countries.

Please post honestly, and do not ignore facts simply because they make you look silly, petulant and childish.

Please post honestly

First off

I cannot imagine the avian carnage inflicted by that many machines, but I'd wager it is not "insignificant" by any stretch of the imagination

is not my quote so get your shit together dude

Two i have not ignored any facts because you have not shown any

you post quite a bit opinion but not much more