Texas oil company to plead guilty in North Dakota duck death

[ChandlerJr]

BISMARCK, N.D. - A Texas oil company will plead guilty and pay a $1,000 fine for killing a duck during drilling operations in western North Dakota, according to an agreement filed today.

Dallas-based Petro-Hunt LLC was charged under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for the death of a northern shoveler found May 6 in one of the company's waste pits. Under the third such plea agreement filed in federal court, Petro-Hunt will pay the fine to the nonprofit National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.

U.S. Attorney Timothy Purdon said he could not comment on plea deal because it still must be approved by a federal judge. Petro-Hunt did not immediately return telephone calls today seeking comment.

Prosecutors charged seven oil companies in August after federal wildlife officials discovered 28 dead birds in uncovered waste pits in May and June. The maximum penalty for each misdemeanor charge under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is six months in prison and a $15,000 fine.

A $1000 for a duck? What happens when Ducks Unlimited or the Audubon Society goes after the wind farms for shredding thousands of migratory birds? You just know some lawyer is just salivating at the prospect. They'll make millions.

http://www.twincities.com/ci_19265995

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[saras]

2. It's a fair price if you understand the duck's ecological contribution

That's what's really going to disrupt consumerism - when we finally understand what things will REALLY cost when corporations quit pushing the cost onto the poor and the future.

[OKIsItJustMe]

3. I don’t think the Audobon Society is likely to mount such a lawsuit…

(…if turbines are sited responsibly.)

http://policy.audubon.org/audubon-statement-wind-power

Audubon Statement on Wind Power

…

The bad news is that wind turbines sometimes kill a lot of birds. Some early wind projects like Altamont in California are notorious for killing many raptors, including golden eagles. Modern wind turbines are much safer for birds than their predecessors, but if they are located in the wrong places, they can still be hazardous and can fragment critical habitat. In cases where the birds affected are already in trouble, such as sage grouse in windy parts of the plains states, the turbines could push them closer to extinction.

On balance, Audubon strongly supports wind power as a clean alternative energy source that reduces the threat of global warming. Location, however, is important. Many National Audubon Society Chapters and State Programs are actively involved in wind-power siting issues in their communities. Each project has a unique set of circumstances and should be evaluated on its own merits.

In Massachusetts, Mass Audubon (which is an independent state Audubon organization) recently completed an http://www.massaudubon.org/advocacy/wind.php">extensive review of the proposed Cape Wind project on Nantucket Sound that set a new standard for analyzing the potential effects of wind turbines on birds.

Every source of energy has some environmental consequences. Most of today's rapidly growing demand for energy is now being met by natural gas and expanded coal-burning power plants, which are this country's single greatest source of the greenhouse-gas emissions that cause global warming. If we don't find ways to reduce these emissions, far more birds—and people—will be threatened by global warming than by wind turbines. Our challenge is thus to help design and locate wind-power projects that minimize the negative impacts on birds.

…