As regular CFZ-watchers will know, for some time Corinna has been doing a column for Animals & Men and a regular segment on On The Track... particularly about out-of-place birds and rare vagrants. There seem to be more and more bird stories from all over the world hitting the news these days so, to make room for them all - and to give them all equal and worthy coverage - she has set up this new blog to cover all things feathery and Fortean.
Showing posts with label Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Show all posts

Thursday, 28 February 2013

Leading Bird Group Wants New DOI Secretary To Review Possible Revised Rule Weakening Eagle Protections For Wind Industry


In a letter to the U.S. Department of Interior, American Bird Conservancy (ABC) called on the agency to suspend further consideration of a revised rule that would weaken protections provided to eagles pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, by allowing private companies to apply for an unprecedented 30-year permit to kill these iconic species.

ABC, one of the nation’s leading bird conservation groups, instead called for the rule to be shelved until Sally Jewell, President Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Interior, has had time to fully review the proposal and evaluate its potential long-term impacts on eagle populations.

“The public places a high value on both Bald and Golden Eagles, two species that have inspired awe, pride, and patriotism in America’s citizens for generations. The Bald Eagle is America’s national symbol and was only removed from the endangered species list in 2007. Thus, this important and highly controversial decision should not be made without the full participation and careful consideration of the new Secretary of the Interior,” said Darin Schroeder, ABC’s vice president of Conservation Advocacy.

The new, far weaker, version of the eagle protection rule was drafted after requests from the wind energy industry, and represents a curious reversal of a FWS decision in 2009. At that time the USFWS wrote, “…the rule limits permit tenure to five years or less because factors may change over a longer period of time such that a take authorized much earlier would later be incompatible with the preservation of the Bald Eagle or the Golden Eagle.”


Tuesday, 23 October 2012

Protected Species May be Killed by Proposed Prairie Dog Control, Environmental Groups Charge


(Washington, D.C., October 16 , 2012)  Defenders of Wildlife, American Bird Conservancy, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Audubon of Kansas have urged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reject an application by Scimetrics to use the rodenticide Kaput-D for the control of black-tailed prairie dogs in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Montana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming.
The groups say that because Kaput-D, which contains the anticoagulant diphacinone that causes poisoned animals to bleed to death, is not selective in the animals it impacts, it has a high probability of killing non-target wildlife, including species protected under the Endangered Species Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Black-tailed prairie dogs are regularly exterminated from ranchland as pests, primarily because they are thought to compete with cattle for forage. Their populations have been reduced by as much as 95 percent of their historical numbers and continue to decline.
In a letter to the EPA, the groups point out that the proposed registration decision is based on information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for another pesticide, Rozol Prairie Dog Bait, which contains a different active ingredient, chlorophacinone.
The groups stress that the EPA cannot simply insert Kaput-D in place of Rozol in its scientific assessment.  They advise EPA to complete formal “Section 7” Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultations with FWS on endangered species impacts from the use of this specific pesticide. They suggest that EPA complete such a consultation prior to registration, both to avoid litigation risk, and so that endangered species concerns may properly be analyzed and necessary use restrictions incorporated.