By David Wojick
The hearing topic was the big law that protects almost all American birds from being deliberately killed. This is the so-called Migratory Bird Treaty Act or MBTA. Passed in 1916 as part of a treaty with Canada, it has since expanded to protect over 1,100 species, migratory or not.
It was originally passed to prevent over-hunting to the point of extermination, when feathers were a big fashion item. A big issue today is whether the law should be extended to cover accidental killing the way the Eagle Protection Act does.
Accidental killing is called “incidental taking.” It is not incidental to the bird, just to the operation of the facility.
The point of the House hearing was ostensibly to consider possible changes to the MBTA, including adding provisions for incidental taking. A hearing video is here.
(The hearing was delayed, so it does not start until around minute 43.)
This is where wind comes in, as wind turbines have become a huge incidental killer of birds, over a million a year by some estimates. Remarkably, the topic of wind killing birds never came up, even though one of the four witnesses was an avian safety expert from a major utility. The silence was deafening.
Instead, the utility witness talked briefly about the industry’s voluntary program to reduce birds being killed by power lines. The message seemed to be “we are doing stuff so leave us alone.”
The utility witness also emphasized that the industry needs “regulatory certainty” for long term planning. This sounds like code for “don’t change anything,” no doubt including the MBTA.
During the question period, these two messages were simply repeated with every question asked of that witness. They clearly did not want to talk about wind killing birds or how the MBTA might address that crucial issue.
A closely related topic that came up repeatedly was a recent study claiming that many American bird species are losing population. This was termed a crisis, but the central role that wind might be playing in killing off our birds was never mentioned. The study is “State of the Birds 2025,” available here.
In fact, a House bill has been submitted to add incidental taking to the MBTA, but that too was never discussed.
To her credit, Chairman Hageman actually mentioned wind killing birds several times, including in her opening remarks. She even said she was trying to get the Interior Department to do something about wind killing eagles in her state, Wyoming. She also mentioned the Albany County (Wyoming) Conservancy’s fight to stop the “wall of wind” going up there.
But the committee members and the witnesses all ignored the catastrophic issue of wind killing birds, in ever increasing numbers. There are well over 50,000 operating onshore wind turbines in America today, with many more coming. If you set out to kill millions of birds, this would be the way to do it.
Instead, what got most of the discussion was just two bird species that have become so destructively abundant that they need to be killed off to some extent. That the hearing should focus on wanting to kill birds instead of saving them was ironic to the point of amusement.
The first bad bird is the black vulture. It has transitioned into a pack predator that kills calves and other small domestic animals. Under the MBTA, farmers and ranchers cannot simply shoot these big birds when they attack, though I am sure they do. One witness was a rancher who described a calf attack in gory detail.
The second criminal critter is the double-crested cormorant. Huge flocks of these highly successful birds sometimes devastate aquaculture facilities by eating all the fish. These are diving birds, so they can decimate sport fish populations in smaller lakes and ponds as well. One witness was a prominent bass fisherman.
Given that two out of the four witnesses wanted to kill birds, not save them, and they were the best talkers by far, it is no wonder this topic dominated the hearing.
So while I learned a lot about black vultures and double-crested cormorants, I heard nothing about much-needed legislation to protect birds from being slaughtered by wind turbines. That should be a House or Senate hearing all by itself. Nor should this critical discussion be limited to the MBTA. Taming wind turbines needs a law of its own.
