By David Wojick
About 15 years ago, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) determined that the Golden Eagle population could not withstand an increase in human caused mortality. But there was a great queue of proposed wind projects that wanted FWS permits to kill these eagles under the Eagle Protection Act, which would certainly increase the kill rate.
In response, the FWS created an offset program in which eagle deaths due to power pole electrocution would supposedly be reduced by an amount equal to the increased deaths due to wind turbines. We now know that this offset program has completely failed as there has been no reduction in electrocution deaths.
The likely cause of this failure is that the FWS uses an electrocution death rate that is extremely incorrect. As a result the number of power poles that have been made safe is just a tiny fraction of what it would take to create the desired offset.
The FWS should issue no more wind power eagle kill permits until this issue is resolved. Accurate power pole death rates need to be determined. Given there are over a hundred million poles in America, the offset numbers may be so high that the program is not feasible. In that case wind development must stop.
Here are some technical basics. In 2016 FWS published detailed guidance and assessment of the electrocution offset program, which had already been in operation for a few years. It is called the compensatory mitigation program because the wind facility getting the eagle kill permit has to pay for the power pole refits that supposedly offset that facility’s kills.
The 2016 best estimate of the electrocution death rate was 500 eagles a year. The projected eagle kill rate increase from the steadily increasing number of deadly wind turbines is a FWS secret, but it is privately estimated to be at least several hundred a year by now. If the offset program worked, the electrocution death rate should have dropped at least an equal amount. In fact FWS requires it to drop even more.
But a major 2022 study found the electrocution rate to still be around 500 deaths per year. The 26 author study is “Age-specific survival rates, causes of death, and allowable take of Golden Eagles in the western United States,” Ecological Applications, January 2022 and it is here:
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2544
The death rate did not go down after six years, so the offsets did not work. Nor is there any reason to think they have worked since 2022 because the extremely low offset rate has not changed.
The number of power poles that must be made safe to offset each wind turbine death is the key number in the program. FWS uses 0.0036 deaths per pole. However, I estimate that there are around 120 million power poles in America. Given 500 deaths a year, that indicates a national average of about 0.0000042 deaths per pole.
The FWS number is a whopping 857 times the US average! On this simple account, the number of poles that need to be made safe will be over 800 times the number presently being done. In that case, it is no wonder the offset program does not work as the number of poles being made safe is trivial compared to what is needed.
Of course the reality is more complex, but the offset number(s) need to be made scientifically accurate before the program continues.
It is also very strange that the FWS has not made a Golden Eagle population estimate since 2016, or at least not a public one. About 100,000 MW of wind power, well over 30,000 turbines, have become operational since 2016. FWS should be tracking the population impact.
The dire need to carefully assess the efficacy and feasibility of the electrocution offset program before granting any new eagle kill permits fits in with the President’s executive order on wind power. Here is the key requirement abstracted from that EO:
“Review of the Federal Government’s Permitting Practices for Wind Projects
Sec. 2. Temporary Cessation and Immediate Review of Federal Wind Permitting Practices.
- In light of various alleged legal deficiencies underlying the Federal Government’s permitting of onshore wind projects, the consequences of which may lead to grave harm, the Secretary of the Interior and the heads of all other relevant agencies, shall not issue new or renewed permits for onshore wind projects pending the completion of a comprehensive assessment and review of Federal permitting practices. The assessment shall consider the environmental impact of onshore wind upon birds.”
No new eagle death offset permits can be issued under the Eagle Protection Act until the compensatory mitigation program can be made to work, if it
Where are the Attenburghees and Packhams etc on important issues like the wanton killing of animals by permit? It’s not as if they are without a track record.
All the way back to 2013
“Celebrities aim to raise $1.6 million to keep orangutan forests from the the chopping block in Borneo
David Attenborough, Bill Oddie and Chris Packham are supporting an effort to save the orangutan from extinction by raising £1m in just two weeks.
https://news.mongabay.com/2013/10/celebrities-aim-to-raise-1-6-million-to-keep-orangutan-forests-from-the-the-chopping-block-in-borneo/
A search for Attenborough, Oddie and Packham in conjunction with birds killed by wind turbines draws a complete, total and utter blank. What does that tell you? Some species are more expendable than others, depending…? They have absolutely nothing to say and they say it loudly.
It seems to me that modern right-on environmentalists tend to gauge their compassion for a species by their estimation of how cuddly or intelligent they perceive it to be. And in the case of the Polar bears and Penguins (birds and whales), how useful to the cause they are.
by their estimation of how cuddly or intelligent they perceive it to be
No. Not at all. The calculus is how much media attention they can draw and especially how much funding.
Save variola…
Well Attenborough is a patron of Population Matters (formerly the Optimum Population Trust) and he believes the only creature that should be culled is Homo Sapiens.
Where is the Audubon Society?
I keep writing to the RSPB here in the UK about likely rising raptor deaths on wind turbines, but they seem to think it’s a non issue so long as they blasted things are sited properly – what! And then of course in their latest journal they hand wring about raptors being killed on grouse shooting estates, which of course is wrong, but those are obviously the right sort of raptor deaths. I get so angry with them.
We have a raptor death study finding about one annual kill per 10 MW of wind which is roughly 16,000 per year. In the West the golden eagle is the most killed raptor species. In the East the bald eagle is third most.
The RSPB was captured some time ago. In fact, in 2023…
“RSPB blasted for ‘woke’ attack as UK charities are ‘indoctrinated’ by the Left – GB News.
But then Packham is: vice-president of the RSPB, the Wildlife Trusts, Butterfly Conservation, the Brent Lodge Bird & Wildlife Trust, The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust etc
Under the Bald Eagle Act (includes Golden Eagles and other raptors) having a single feather recovered from a dead raptor results in a minimum fine of $15,000.00, but CAGW fanatics can chop them up with phony permits. In Wyoming I saw a dead Golden Eagle underneath a wind generator, it wasn’t pretty.
That’s why offshore wind is so attractive (not). The dead or injured avians just drop unto the sea, out of sight. No muss, no fuss!
Sadly the whales wash up on the beaches.
Story tip Cheap, clean energy superpower edition
Dutch Renewables Champion Pulls Out of Huge Wind Farm Project Over High Costs
It is not only oil and gas projects going out of business. The globe’s largest offshore wind developer Ørsted has today announced it is cancelling all contracts and funding for Hornsea 4, a 2.4GW wind farm project in the North Sea for which it won a UK government contract last year. One of the largest to be in development with 180 plannes turbines – the contract breakaway costs range from £399 and £513 million…
CEO of the Dutch renewables champion Rasmus Errboe blames “adverse macroeconomic developments, continued supply chain challenges, and increased execution, market and operational risks have eroded the value creation.” Follows similar decision by Vattenfall to cancel the 1.4GW Norfolk Boreas offshore contract in 2023…
The National Energy System Operator’s November report, which Miliband claimed proved the viability of his Clean-Power-By-2030 plans, specified that among numerous other things his goal requires a sustained rollout of offshore wind at over double the highest rate ever achieved in Great Britain – which means tripling capacity – as well as a tripling of solar power and doubling onshore wind. Good luck…
DESNZ claims today it will “work with Ørsted to get Hornsea 4 back on track” and that it has “a strong pipeline of projects to deliver clean power by 2030.” There will be nerves in the energy department as businesses increasingly struggle to get renewables projects over the line…
https://order-order.com/2025/05/07/dutch-renewables-champion-pulls-out-of-huge-wind-farm-project-over-high-costs/
Miliband is a determined fool. He’s driving the UK into the ditch as fast as he can. Delusional.
One definition of insanity is repeating the same action over and over and hoping for a different (i.e., favorable) outcome each time.
Don’t say that. He likes playing with his map of the North Sea and his toy wind farms.
Like the lieutenant in Stripes?
Both Orsted and Equinor have scaled down their investments this year because they do not see sufficient profitability in the projects and have pulled out of several developments in Europe and the US and other markets.
“adverse macroeconomic developments, continued supply chain challenges, and increased execution, market and operational risks have eroded the value creation.”
Translation: Even with extortionate levels of subsidies we are running at a loss.
Well said!
From the article: “well over 30,000 turbines, have become operational since 2016.”
Such a travesty! Such a waste of taxpayer money! Thirty thousand windmills blighting the landscape and killing the wildlife.
Do power lines kill bats? Windmills do.
As I understand it, bats are more able to avoid obstacles due to their use of echolocation. Windmills kill bats by rupturing their lungs in the low-pressure area around the moving blades. Large birds tend to be less maneuverable but have a different lung structure, so the threats differ.
My (cursory) understanding of how power lines kill raptors is that long wings span the distance between conductors and ground wires. Thus “making power lines safe” means spacing these components further apart – say three feet. Makes me wonder if we aren’t selecting for smaller birds.
Hypocrites! The media splashes images of dead birds coated with crude oil after an oil spill, but refrain from publishing images of dead bald and golden eagle and other raptures from these wind turbines. Pathetic! What a waste of money over the last 20+ “investing” in this renewable energy dead end. When these wind turbines are no longer useful, I wonder if the media will display images of these relics abandoned across our landscape? Unless of course, there is a provision to dismantle them and return the environment to its original condition?
You expect sane actions amidst this insanity?
The OP neglects to mention that the report he referenced shows that the major cause of death of young Golden eagles was starvation! Another significant cause was shooting, which is illegal, apparently making it so has not solved the problem.
You might wish to explain the difference between First-year and After first-year.
Yes starvation is the leading natural cause of death and illegal shooting the leading human cause but these facts are not relevant to my point. Perhaps they will try to reduce shooting to make room for wind killing. Re starvation (a constant threat for predators) another proposed mitigation scheme is to clean up road kill so the scavenging eagles are not hit by cars but that means reducing their food supply.
In Northern Virginia deer killed by motorists appear daily along the roadsides. If they are left on road shoulders in these bustling cities, the turkey vultures are attracted. You know where another one has been hit because of they circle in hefty numbers before they swoop down and feast. I don’t remember seeing eagles in the the three seasons I was out there, although I’d be surprised if there weren’t nesting eagles along the Potomac River Valley. Thanks for the post.
Thank you for your continued attention to this situation. The migration path for
birds goes north/south along the Rockies clear to Alaska right thru several large wind farms
in both the US and Canada. I suspect it’s the farms along that route that have
led to the decline in the Golden Eagle population over the past 20yrs, at least in this region.
The radical enviros need to be confronted on this issue IMO.
But, but, but, we need to destroy the planet to save it!
/sarc
And where exactly are the ecowarriors protecting the Spotted Owls?
Oh. Right. They are now protecting small plants in California.
This is a perfect example of lunatic ecoloonies misplaced advocacy being a danger to wildlife.
A bird here. A bird there. And pretty soon you’re talking millions.
For young people taught that environmental protection reigns top over many human activities, man-made pollution can be seen everywhere. Power poles, power lines, cleared paths for the lines, are large scale pollution, but because of a need for distributed electricity, people do not make much agitation about them. Society has become used to cherry picking its environmental damage with little regard for amount of damage when the horror of damage tugs at many more gullible heart strings.
As another example, consider traffic signs on poles. When I drive from my home to the city, the first mile has 87 signs on substantial steel pipe a couple of inches in diameter and 6 feet high or so. That is a lot of metal, a lot of money and a lot of ugliness. Nobody seems interested in benefit:cost analysis. We are silent about that pollution.
Society has a choice about which pollution to protest about. It has been rather quiet about the pollution of power lines, towers, windmills and particularly about eagle kills because propaganda says they are lawful and offset by other measures.
I bet that modern youngsters feel ok about increased eagle kills because regulatory people have told them that they have the problem under control.
I do not know how to inject rational decision making into the eagle topic when emotional decision making is being used either straight or twisted. (I do not live in the US).
However, I hope that we all applaud the contribution of David Wojick and others like him, especially noting that measurement and data are a basis for understanding – and that the regulatory process is failing because keeping it quiet is not a valid way to improvement.
Geoff S
All the wind and solar systems currently in operation aren’t worth even one eagle death. Wind and solar don’t work, stop building them. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators. Build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators. Remove all wind and solar from the grid.
To be fair, golden eagles don’t live everywhere in the U.S., so it’s possible that the electrocution calculations are adjusted based on exposure to a subset of electrical poles. There are likely still errors with that, but it would be a reasonable argument.