Accidentally killing birds isn’t prosecuted beneath the legislation, however there have been notable exceptions, like when the Obama administration prosecuted seven oil companies in North Dakota for the deaths of 28 birds.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was additionally a part of the premise for a $100 million settlement with BP for the deaths of multiple million birds within the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill. And, in 2009, Exxon Mobil paid $600,000 after pleading responsible within the deaths of protected owls, raptors and waterfowl that died in uncovered pure fuel pits, oil tanks and wastewater services.
Activists mentioned that simply the potential of penalties has helped push business to take precautions to stop chicken deaths. By asserting that protected birds will be legally killed so long as killing birds isn’t the objective, some mentioned, they nervous that the federal authorities would successfully be eradicating incentives for firms to take measures to guard birds.
In truth, the Trump administration not too long ago acknowledged as a lot. An environmental-impact assertion issued in late November by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service mentioned that with out the inducement of legislation, business might be anticipated to reduce on voluntary chicken protections.
Sarah Greenberger, vice chairman of conservation on the Audubon Society, famous that the Trump administration’s transfer got here simply because the group’s 121st annual chicken census, often known as the Audubon Christmas Bird Count, was underway. In 2019, she mentioned, regardless of document participation, 6 million fewer birds had been counted.
“While we don’t yet know exactly what caused this decrease, it comes amid new science showing alarming trends in bird declines, like the loss of 3 billion birds in North America since 1970,” she mentioned.
Mr. Glitzenstein mentioned his group and others had been planning to problem the rule in court docket whilst they push the incoming Biden administration to reverse course. A federal choose in August rejected the Trump administration’s legal rationale for the regulation.