SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
national audubon society
'No One Voted to Slaughter Hummingbirds': Trump's DOI Guts Bird Protections, Again
"Trump is breaking the law and flouting a court order by handing the fossil fuel industry and polluters this blank check to kill millions of migratory birds," one advocate said.
Apr 12, 2025
The Trump administration moved on Friday to weaken protections for migratory birds threatened by industrial activities, including oil and gas operations.
Acting Solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Gregory Zerzan restored an opinion from the first Trump administration that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) "does not apply to the accidental or incidental taking or killing of migratory birds," despite the fact that this opinion was already ruled illegal in federal court.
"Trump is breaking the law and flouting a court order by handing the fossil fuel industry and polluters this blank check to kill millions of migratory birds," said Tara Zuardo, a senior campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity. "The United States has lost billions of birds over the past 50 years, and that decline will accelerate horrifically because of this callous, anti-wildlife directive. No one voted to slaughter hummingbirds, cranes, and raptors, but this is the reality of Trump's illegal actions today."
"We're not going to succeed in addressing the crisis facing birds and other wildlife if we let this and other historic rollbacks stand."
The new directive comes as birds in the U.S. are under threat, with their numbers falling by around 30% since 1970. A number of factors are responsible for this decline, among them the climate emergency, habitat loss, falling insect populations, window strikes, and outdoor cats. However, conservationists toldThe New York Times that industrial activities would be a greater threat if not for the protection the law provides.
For example, Zuardo told the Times that if U.S. President Donald Trump's interpretation of the law had been in effect following BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010—which likely killed over 1 million birds—the company would not have been charged the around $100 million in fines that went to support bird conservation after the disaster.
Friday's directive is part of an ongoing effort over the course of both Trump administrations to weaken the MBTA so that it only targets the purposeful killing of birds, dropping enforcement against accidents such as as oil spills, drownings in uncovered oil pits, trappings in open mining pipes, and collisions with power lines or communication towers.
In 2017, lead Interior Department lawyer Daniel Jorjani issued an initial legal opinion claiming the MBTA only covered purposeful killings. This interpretation was struck down by a federal court in 2020, which argued that the act's "clear language" put it in "direct conflict" with the Trump opinion.
This didn't stop the Trump administration from issuing a final rule attempting to enshrine its interpretation of the MBTA at the end of Trump's first term, which was widely decried by bird advocates.
"We're not going to succeed in addressing the crisis facing birds and other wildlife if we let this and other historic rollbacks stand," Erik Schneider, policy manager for the National Audubon Society, said at the time.
However, months into the presidency of Joe Biden, DOI principal deputy solicitor Robert T. Anderson withdrew the initial 2017 Trump administration opinion after an appeals court, following the request of the U.S. government, dismissed the Trump administration's earlier appeal of the 2020 court decision.
"The lower court decision is consistent with the Department of the Interior's long-standing interpretation of the MBTA," Anderson wrote.
Later, the Biden administration also reversed the formal Trump-era rule weakening the MBTA.
Now, in his second term, Trump is coming for the birds again. The Biden-era withdrawal was one of 20 Biden-era opinions that the Trump DOI suspended in March. It was then officially revoked and withdrawn on Friday.
In justifying its decision, Trump's DOI cited the president's January 20 executive order "Unleashing American Energy," which calls on federal agencies to "suspend, revise, or rescind all agency actions identified as unduly burdensome," making it clear the weakening of protections is largely intended to benefit the fossil fuel and mining industries.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Is Huge': Biden Proposes First Gulf of Mexico Offshore Wind Lease Sales
"There is no time to waste in making bold investments to address the climate crisis, and building a strong domestic offshore wind industry is key to meeting that challenge head on."
Feb 22, 2023
Clean energy advocates on Wednesday applauded an announcement from U.S. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who said her department is proposing the first-ever offshore lease sale for wind power in the Gulf of Mexico, long a center of oil and gas extraction.
Haaland said the proposed sale is part of the Biden administration's efforts to "jump-start our offshore wind industry and harness American innovation to deliver reliable, affordable power to homes and businesses."
"America's clean energy transition is happening right here and now," said the interior secretary. "There is no time to waste in making bold investments to address the climate crisis, and building a strong domestic offshore wind industry is key to meeting that challenge head on."
The Biden administration aims to open up more than 100,000 offshore acres near Lake Charles, Louisiana and nearly 200,000 acres near Galveston, Texas as part of President Joe Biden's plan to develop wind power along every U.S. coastline.
"These areas have the potential to power almost 1.3 million homes with clean energy," the Department of the Interior said.
The development of wind power in the Gulf of Mexico would be significant in the United States' shift toward renewable energy. The Gulf is the country's primary source of offshore oil and gas, generating about 97% of the country's supply from offshore sources.
The Gulf was the site of the largest marine oil spill in history in 2010, when an explosion on BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig killed 11 people and sent about 210 million gallons of oil into the water.
"This is huge," said Antonio Arellano, vice president of communications for NextGen America, of the news that Biden is planning to begin the region's shift away from fossil fuel energy.
\u201cBREAKING: Biden administration announces first-ever wind energy lease sale in Gulf of Mexico. \n\nThe White House and US Department of Interior said they are proposing to open up more than 300,000 acres of offshore waters for offshore wind development. This is huge.\u201d— Antonio Arellano (@Antonio Arellano) 1677074837
Haaland's announcement came a year after a wind power lease sale off the coast of New York and New Jersey brought in $4.37 billion, an unprecedented amount for energy leases. In December, companies paid the federal government more than $757 million for
wind leases in the Pacific Ocean.
Biden aims to deploy a total of 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030, which could power 10 million homes and create 44,000 jobs in the industry as well as an additional 33,000 jobs in communities supported by offshore wind, according to the administration.
A 60-day public comment period on the proposed sale will commence later this month after the proposal is published in the Federal Register. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is seeking feedback on lease stipulations including:
- Bidding credits for bidders that commit to supporting workforce training programs for the offshore wind industry, developing a domestic supply chain for the offshore wind industry, or a combination of both;
- Establishing and contributing to a fisheries compensatory mitigation fund or contributing to an existing fund to mitigate potential negative impacts to commercial fisheries caused by offshore wind development; and
- Requiring that lessees provide a regular progress report summarizing engagement with tribes and ocean users potentially affected by proposed offshore wind activities.
"BOEM is committed to ensuring any offshore wind activities are done in a manner that avoids or minimizes potential impacts to the ocean and ocean users," said BOEM Director Elizabeth Klein. "Today's announcement comes after years of engagement with tribes, other government agencies, ocean users, and stakeholders."
The National Audubon Society applauded the proposal and said it plans to work with the Biden administration and wind energy producers to protect North America's migrating birds, half of which rely on the Gulf of Mexico.
\u201cThe Gulf Coast supports nearly half of North America\u2019s migrating birds\u2014including Piping Plovers & Red Knots. Offshore wind leasing must fully consider habitats & the wildlife that rely on them to avoid significant impacts on bird populations across the US. https://t.co/vIhiE44Z2o\u201d— Audubon Society (@Audubon Society) 1677092474
"Clean energy is a critical part of reducing emissions and climate threats that affect both people and wildlife, and we are committed to working with energy producers to make sure projects are sited and operated responsibly," said Garry George, director of the Audubon Society's clean energy initiative.
American Clean Power (ACP), which represents the renewable energy industry, called the Interior Department's announcement "another significant milestone in the development of domestic offshore wind production."
"This proposed lease sale will continue the legacy of energy production in the Gulf of Mexico, providing Americans with an affordable clean energy supply. It will also help secure our nation's energy independence while reducing costs for consumers," said Josh Kaplowitz, vice president for offshore wind at ACP. "By harnessing our abundance of renewable natural resources, these projects will unleash economic growth here at home and create good paying jobs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Risky and Reckless': Environmental Groups Renew Fight Against Shell
'This is the largest, loudest, and dirtiest exploration plan ever proposed in the American Arctic Ocean,' conservation alliance says
Jun 02, 2015
On Monday, a coalition of environmental and conservation groups renewed their challenge of a federal lease that opened nearly 30 million acres of Arctic waters to offshore drilling and was recently upheld by the U.S. Department of the Interior.
The coalition, which includes the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, the World Wildlife Fund, and several other environmental organizations, filed a report with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Anchorage, Alaska, outlining its intent to challenge the 2008 lease, which it called "risky and reckless."
"Drilling in the Arctic is a recipe for disaster," said David Yarnold, president and CEO of the National Audubon Society, one of the groups in the coalition. "It's reckless and defies common sense. Oil and water don't mix."
"There's no worse place on earth to drill for oil than the Arctic Ocean, and no company with a worse recording trying than Shell," added Nathaniel Lawrence, Arctic director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "And as reckless as it is to drill there, it could do even more harm by pumping all that carbon into the atmosphere since science tells us Arctic oil has no place in a world grappling with the challenge of climate change."
In May, the Interior Department's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management gave conditional approval for Shell to drill into the Arctic Ocean's Chukchi Sea after reviewing the company's environmental and safety plans. On Monday, the coalition called the review "rushed and cursory" and said it "inadequately assessed its threats and effects."
"There's no worse place on earth to drill for oil than the Arctic Ocean, and no company with a worse recording trying than Shell."
--Nathaniel Lawrence, Natural Resources Defense Council
In addition to the potential release of significant carbon emissions, activists have long warned that fossil fuel exploration in the Chukchi Sea would harm endangered species that rely on the Arctic's pristine ecosystems to survive and that an accident in those remote waters could be more devastating than the 2010 BP oil spill which killed 11 workers and poured millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
Moreover, offshore drilling in the Arctic--which could start as early as July--also puts a heavy burden on Indigenous populations in the area, particularly those that rely on whaling.
"The lease sale decision...is directly contrary to President Obama's commitment to take essential action to limit the worst effects of climate change for future generations," said Earthjustice.
A month before Shell's drilling plan was approved, one of its rigs failed a Coast Guard inspection, while another was held in port over pollution control problems. In 2012, the oil giant's Kulluk drilling rig was wrecked during an exploratory mission that was ultimately abandoned.
"Interior unlawfully approved Shell's problem-riddled Arctic drilling plan. In doing this, it has failed the communities and wildlife of this region," said Erik Grafe, Earthjustice staff attorney. "Allowing oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean takes us in the wrong direction on combating climate change and downplays the catastrophic consequences of an oil spill here. Shell proved itself unprepared in 2012, and it remains so today and should not be permitted to drill in our fragile Arctic Ocean."
Friends of the Earth climate campaigner Marissa Knodel added, "This is the largest, loudest, and dirtiest exploration plan ever proposed in the American Arctic Ocean. Shell's revised Exploration Plan sets us on the path toward climate catastrophe, as the latest science says Arctic oil must be kept in the ground to have a chance at keeping the planet safe. The only place for these dirty fossil fuels is in the ground."
"Shell Oil's planned exploration of the Chukchi Sea poses a heavy burden and risk on Inupiat cultural livelihood," said Faith Gemmill, executive director of Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Lands (REDOIL). "Moving forward with drilling in the Chukchi Sea without any concrete measures to address a large oil spill in broken ice conditions is a perilous venture that could have disastrous consequences for the Inupiat and their whaling way of life. No amount of profit is worth the potential loss of a culture's livelihood."
The lawsuit is the latest move in the fight against Shell's offshore drilling plans. In recent weeks, activists in Seattle have blockaded terminals holding one of the oil giant's rigs, organized a "flotilla rally" to oppose the company's operations, and protested from kayaks in an action they dubbed 'Paddle in Seattle.'
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular