US Interior Department gutting protections for Migratory Birds
- Thread starter Suther
- Start date
First off, whether wind power kills birds or not is irrelevant to whether extractive industries should be held responsible for the birds they kill. Wind should be held to the same standards, but that doesn't somehow make eliminating fines and discouraging mitigation from other industries acceptable. While $100M might be a small addition to the cost to BP for deep water horizon, it has the potential to great things if it goes to conservation.
Second, this wind farm thing is totally overblown. Yes they kill birds but compared to other sources of mortality they're hardly the mass murderers you're trying to claim they are.
Sovacool, Benjamin. (2012). The Avian and Wildlife Costs of Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences. 9. 10.1080/1943815X.2012.746993.
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/white1/
Exact numbers are hard to come by and estimates vary greatly but they are all in agreement that wind turbines are a small contributor to bird mortality when compared to other sources.
That's a little disingenuous. Windmills are really hard on bat populations.
First off, whether wind power kills birds or not is irrelevant to whether extractive industries should be held responsible for the birds they kill. Wind should be held to the same standards, but that doesn't somehow make eliminating fines and discouraging mitigation from other industries acceptable. While $100M might be a small addition to the cost to BP for deep water horizon, it has the potential to great things if it goes to conservation.
Second, this wind farm thing is totally overblown. Yes they kill birds but compared to other sources of mortality they're hardly the mass murderers you're trying to claim they are.
Sovacool, Benjamin. (2012). The Avian and Wildlife Costs of Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences. 9. 10.1080/1943815X.2012.746993.
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/white1/
Exact numbers are hard to come by and estimates vary greatly but they are all in agreement that wind turbines are a small contributor to bird mortality when compared to other sources.
So, what I get from that is that Property Developers should be in line for WAY more in fines than the Oil Producers, is that correct?
Nobody punishes the Oil companies because they killed a few birds. They do it because they found an excuse to, and they hate the oil companies.
Come back when you find a solution that includes some levels of across the board fairness in the treatment from one industry to the next, that keeps some semblance of proportion in mind.
Just read through the thread and feel it totally derailed. The devil is in the details. This legislation is deeply flawed and that is specific to no particular industry. When a company screws ups and has an environmental disaster this legislations says mistakes are fine and no accountability is necessary. IT would be necessary to prove the company intended to do that. It is a free pass to be very irresponsible in how you conduct your business with no strings attached. Cannot support that.
1963beretta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vaughan, Ontario
You hit the nail on the head....out of sight, out of mind....
1963beretta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vaughan, Ontario
A lot of truth to that! Lets send money to the countries that ultimately use those funds for more harm than good. Makes no sense to me....
the spank
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Planet Earth Wearing My Tinfoil Hat
First off, whether wind power kills birds or not is irrelevant to whether extractive industries should be held responsible for the birds they kill. Wind should be held to the same standards, but that doesn't somehow make eliminating fines and discouraging mitigation from other industries acceptable. While $100M might be a small addition to the cost to BP for deep water horizon, it has the potential to great things if it goes to conservation.
Second, this wind farm thing is totally overblown. Yes they kill birds but compared to other sources of mortality they're hardly the mass murderers you're trying to claim they are.
Sovacool, Benjamin. (2012). The Avian and Wildlife Costs of Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences. 9. 10.1080/1943815X.2012.746993.
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/white1/
Exact numbers are hard to come by and estimates vary greatly but they are all in agreement that wind turbines are a small contributor to bird mortality when compared to other sources.
Damned I am going to have try harder this season to get on that chart!!
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
We’re doing our best to kill everything as hard and fast as we can. Unfortunately current US government is accelerating that process. Hunters more than anyone should be concerned with environmental protection, as the environment is our whole world.
Unfortunately big business agendas drive decision making and cleverly market the moves to appeal to the uneducated, you get farmers cheering for big oil when environmental protection is branded as “eco-whackos” and the like. Reality is we have less left every decade and sure as #### better all get on the bandwagon of protecting what is left as hard as we can. Or as hunters we’ll be some of the first to feel the major impacts.
Think about the differences in the world in 1800, 1900, 2000... 2100. I cringe to think what 2100 would look like. A century is duck all in time from earth‘s perspective, and less than a century ago there were grizzlies in Texas, and half a century ago they lived in Mexico. Hell they’re still on California’s flag. Because they’re locally plentiful doesn’t mean we don’t need to start protecting their environment until they start to collapse.
We have the worst track record going as a species, humans, with regard to the environment. I’m all for every move we can make to keep wildlife, and our freedom to enjoy the wilds through hunting and fishing alive for future generations. Rather than have one big party that lets us cut down any trees we want, clear and farm whatever forest land we want if we own it, and push the bottom lines and stock market ahead of preserving the environment.
I look forward to the day people can accept environmental protection isn’t some fringe cause full of alarmists, the evidence is scary clear. Hopefully we wise up as a species before it’s too late, but typically we need to be in dire straits before we’ll actually change and I’m afraid we’ll continue on that path.
Unfortunately big business agendas drive decision making and cleverly market the moves to appeal to the uneducated, you get farmers cheering for big oil when environmental protection is branded as “eco-whackos” and the like. Reality is we have less left every decade and sure as #### better all get on the bandwagon of protecting what is left as hard as we can. Or as hunters we’ll be some of the first to feel the major impacts.
Think about the differences in the world in 1800, 1900, 2000... 2100. I cringe to think what 2100 would look like. A century is duck all in time from earth‘s perspective, and less than a century ago there were grizzlies in Texas, and half a century ago they lived in Mexico. Hell they’re still on California’s flag. Because they’re locally plentiful doesn’t mean we don’t need to start protecting their environment until they start to collapse.
We have the worst track record going as a species, humans, with regard to the environment. I’m all for every move we can make to keep wildlife, and our freedom to enjoy the wilds through hunting and fishing alive for future generations. Rather than have one big party that lets us cut down any trees we want, clear and farm whatever forest land we want if we own it, and push the bottom lines and stock market ahead of preserving the environment.
I look forward to the day people can accept environmental protection isn’t some fringe cause full of alarmists, the evidence is scary clear. Hopefully we wise up as a species before it’s too late, but typically we need to be in dire straits before we’ll actually change and I’m afraid we’ll continue on that path.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Good assessment.
Question being how much protection is really necessary. When the process of complying with it becomes too cumbersome, gotta streamline it. The exorbitant price Suncor paid for a few dead birds, is a good example of protection gone awry.
Grizz
Really ? Suncor did everything reasonable to keep birds off the tailings ponds and in terms of the big picture, wildlife kill was insigificant. There was no intent and every effort to comply with regulations.
Grizz
Really ? Suncor did everything reasonable to keep birds off the tailings ponds and in terms of the big picture, wildlife kill was insigificant. There was no intent and every effort to comply with regulations.
Grizz
Which time? In 2008 when 1600 ducks landed in a tailing pond? In 2010 when another 550 birds did the same thing? More birds in 2015... Two more incidents in 2017...
Its not like whichever instance you are referring to was their first time getting in trouble for this.
This is all more of the same - the rich get richer, and the poor get ####ed. The Dow Jones has doubled between late 2007 (pre-financial collaspe) and now, while average salary has only gone up 4% when you account for inflation (in the US). Meanwhile, wildlife populations across the board (with some exceptions like Whitetails in the east) are suffering. It's more Rich people writing laws that put more money in their pockets while not giving a #### about the impacts on the environment, the lower/middle class, or anything else.
Last edited:
Really ? Suncor did everything reasonable to keep birds off the tailings ponds and in terms of the big picture, wildlife kill was insigificant. There was no intent and every effort to comply with regulations.
Grizz
Inisgnificant? They're our birds. If I went a took a bunch of their stuff and destroyed it I can guarantee they wouldn't say "Ah, well these things happen."
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Frankly we do far, far too little already so any steps the other way are asinine. There’s a big difference between red tape and responsibility, granted, but to tear down protections by blaming bureaucracy is a ruse.
We need to work on better technologies and techniques, as we’re robbing a cookie jar with no baker to refill it and calling it development. I definitely understand the need in our system to earn a living, but when you look at the actual flow of money a disproportionate amount of it flows off to large corporations and the 0.1% at great expense to the environment and non-renewable resources.
In my outfitting area I fight mineral drilling and blasting applications in prime habitat. I won’t win but I can buy time for the area, but big business and the corporate agenda always wins eventually. And it won’t be to the betterment of our childrens’ or hunting and fishing’s future. Trump would laud a stripmine and tailings heap here as “development” and rubber stamp it in a heartbeat. That’s not sensationalism I fought an application to exploration drill here, for real.
