I am not arguing lead contamination does not take place with eagles and condors. Nor am I going back to the waterfowl non tox question at the moment. I accept that lead shot does impact Eagle populations, however I also hold that Eagle populations are overall doing well and that the principle of acceptable attrition is part of the professional government wildlife establishment.

When researching over the last few days I did notice a pattern in the description of “lead fragments” from dead carrion and its role in poisoning condors. What I found curious was that I have yet to find bird shot as a factor with condors ( I centered on the condor question as it appears to me a major driver in justifying the lead ban California).

Oddly every reference I find on California Condor diets parallel the bird fact.com website.

“What birds do condors eat?
California condors do not eat birds. Their diet consists of large mammals, and very occasionally, in coastal regions, marine mammals and fish.
Andean condors have been observed to hunt for small birds, as well as raiding the easily accessible nests of seabirds for their chicks and eggs.”
https://birdfact.com/articles/what-do-condors-eat

If Condors do not, or rarely eat birds, If eagle populations are healthy, is there really a need to ban lead bird shot?

Though officially there have not been any Condor wind farm deaths they are preparing for them. The federal government and many state governments appear to accept a level of eagle and condor attrition from wind farms, not to mention all the other birds. That the US Fish and Wildlife Service seems to believe that it is ok with the death of up to 11 condors and 11 condor chicks over a 30 year period in the Kern County California area alone. Their “incidental take” rules Included that the wind farm will provide $6 million toward Condor programs In mitigation over the 30 years of the rule. https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-06/us-fish-and-wildlife-service-issues-incidental-take-permit-multiple-wind#:~:text=The%20permit%20covers%20the%20incidental,of%20these%20wind%20energy%20projects.
 

I note that California hunters and fishermen provide significant financial input to care for wildlife in terms of sales tax, licensing fees, and Pittman-Robertson taxes.
The California one year share of Pittman-Robertson income from hunters and fishermen is roughly $22 million a year. Somewhat more than the $6 million contribution over numerous years by the wind energy industry to compensate for their “taking” of Condors over. https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/news-attached-files/WRFinalApportionment2021.pdf

I will not even get into the complex permitting of Wind Farm Eagle ““incidental take” except to say the body counts are both extensive and acceptable to the USFWS. Look it up online, but prepare for skillfully delivered doublespeak in support of the wind energy industry at the expense of birds to include but not limited to all species of Eagles.

Having shown that Condors are less likely to suffer from bird shot than wind farms blades and wind farm “incidental take” is acceptable for both Eagles (not a threatened species) and of the valued scavenger California Condor. That the acceptable mitigation for 11 Condors plus 11 Chicks is $6 million (as set by USFWS) along with the green energy gained. That in today’s dollars sportsmen, over the same time as the USFWS condor rule, will possibly contribute a minimum of at least $660 million which benefits wildlife across the state, mitigating any negative impacts by sportsmen. Yes the case of sportsmen more than paying their way is solid. Having shown all that why not let sportsmen use lead bird shot?

The greenies accept their attrition, we are forced to do likewise by government action. Real EQUITY would be their acceptance of our attrition as sportsmen are significantly contributing and mitigating both in the past, currently, and in the future.

Last edited by old colonel; 08/29/23 12:37 PM.
Michael Dittamo
Topeka, KS