Please Hit

Folks, This is a Free Site and will ALWAYS stay that way. But the only way I offset my expenses is through the donations of my readers. PLEASE Consider Making a Donation to Keep This Site Going. SO HIT THE TIP JAR (it's on the left-hand column).

Thursday, June 26, 2014

Why Do Barack Obama and Global Warming Enthusiasts Hate Eagles?

A California wind farm is getting off the hook. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Thursday they have signed a death certificate for thousands of eagles as they will not prosecute this or other wind-farms if eagles are injured or die when they run into the giant turning blades.

This is the same Obama administration signed a stimulus bill which spent among other things $3.4 million for a tunnel to protect turtles by allowing them to cross under a highway in Tallahassee. Or spent $30 million for wetlands restoration spend in Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco area district to protect, among other things, the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse. But killing eagles is fine.
The Shiloh IV Wind Project LLC, 60 miles east of San Francisco, will receive a special permit allowing up to five golden eagles to be accidentally killed, harmed or disturbed over five years. Previously, such a violation could potentially draw criminal charges and discourage private investment in wind farms known for catching birds in their rotors.

Agency Director Daniel Ashe said the permit encourages development of renewable energy while requiring the wind company to take steps to protect eagles from turbines and power lines. The move will help California reach its goal of producing one-third of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, he said.

"We can't solve the problem of eagle mortality at wind farms overnight," Ashe said in a statement. "But this commonsense solution merits the support of all who advocate for the long-term conservation of eagles."

Under President Barack Obama, wind energy has exploded as a pollution-free energy source that can help reduce the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming. But it is not without opposition from wildlife advocates.
The American Bird Conservancy sued the Obama administration this month over the permit, arguing the government failed to evaluate the consequences and ensure it would not damage eagle populations.

The government has offered five-year permits since 2009 to wind companies, but none other has obtained one. The permits are not required, and federal prosecutors have only once filed criminal charges against a wind farm, in Wyoming. 

The problem is (especially if you are an eagle) is even without the permits, the Obama administration pledges to do nothing. Last December the Obama administration said it will allow companies to kill or injure eagles without the fear of prosecution for up to thirty years.

Bald eagles nearly disappeared in the U.S. three decades ago due to habitat destruction, illegal hunting and the use of DDT insecticide. But government conservation efforts and the banning of DDT have helped bring populations back from the brink, and in 2007 the birds were removed from the federal list of threatened and endangered species. Golden eagles are still considered endangered in some states, including New York, but are not federally listed as such.

A recent study by federal and state scientists found that U.S. wind turbines could kill up to 1.4 million birds of all species per year by 2030 as the wind energy industry continues to expand.


Jeff Dunetz said...

"Under President Barack Obama, wind energy has exploded as a
pollution-free energy source that can help reduce the greenhouse gases
blamed for global warming."

While wind energy is touted this way, it's simply not true. In order to efficiently generate the electricity produced by a wind turbine, rare earth magnets are used. The production of these magnets produces a lot of pollution in it's own right, primarily around mines and processing plants in China.

Out of sight, out of mind, right?

Jeff Dunetz said...

This may be the first time I have ever disagreed with you, but in this case I beg to differ. The establishment and the dems will keep pulling this crap unless we put a stop to it. So is thad (doing indecent things with animals) any different than the dem he is running against. And what good will it do to have the majority if the rinos vote down anything that the Tea Party proposes.

Jeff Dunetz said...


Jeff Dunetz said...

Yep. Thad campaigned as a liberal using the same liberal tactics against a fellow conservative literally betraying his party's values. I am happy conservatives in MS will either write in McDaniel or vote for the Dem. No way a majority Senate will prevent Obama from vetoing anyway or using executive power. It's much more important for conservatives to let the establishment know that "Republicans" who win elections by campaigning as liberals will be resisted at all costs. Thad must go so the RINOs running in 2016 like McCain and Murkowski know not to pull the same things.