# Thank You US Fish and Wildlife Service



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

They are in no way ever going to fill the need. They take up far too much acreage. Also, for those who don't know, the wind does not always blow.

Cleaner energy? Gutting mountain tops is cleaner? Remember 60,000 acres worth of wind farms to equal one nuke plant. 

It will take around 583,000 off shore wind turbines to power the nation.


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> They are in no way ever going to fill the need. They take up far too much acreage. Also, for those who don't know, the wind does not always blow.
> 
> Cleaner energy? Gutting mountain tops is cleaner? Remember 60,000 acres worth of wind farms to equal one nuke plant.
> 
> It will take around 583,000 off shore wind turbines to power the nation.


You talk as though the government intends to supply all of our nation's energy with wind turbines. That was never the intent. It is my understanding that the stated goal of DOE is to supply 20% of the nation's energy by 2030.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php

That is the best info that I was able to find about the Fish and Wildlife Service and wind turbines.

I do agree with you that nuclear energy is probably the "densest" form of available energy and is probably the best candidate to supply our needs. However, a new nuke plant has not been commissioned in this country for quite a while. Also there is a terrible NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) syndrome when it comes to all forms of energy production, especially nuclear energy.

BTW, I live among wind turbines in the center of a wind farm. I think that wind turbines are a hell of a lot prettier than a smoke stack.


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

Sofa King what? said:


> ...but it's "green"! It must be good....it's a shame the coal burning power plants are being phased out. Coal is cheap,plentiful, and efficient compared to other fuels. The modern, western coal burning plants put out alot less pollution than you might think.


Clean coal is like Santa Claus. It is a myth. 

Well maybe it works if you use natural gas.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesc...-power-plant-in-america-turns-to-natural-gas/


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

John Singer said:


> You talk as though the government intends to supply all of our nation's energy with wind turbines. It is my understanding that the stated goal of DOE is to supply 20% of the nation's energy by 2030.
> 
> https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php
> 
> That is the best info that I was able to find about the Fish and Wildlife Service and wind turbines.



OH shock OH shock, it is NOT the governments job to supply us with energy, no matter how it is produced. IF the government is doing it, it is likely not by any means the best way to produce energy.


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> OH shock OH shock, it is NOT the governments job to supply us with energy, no matter how it is produced. IF the government is doing it, it is likely not by any means the best way to produce energy.


Did you read the link? Here is what it says:

_"The Department of Energy (DOE) has a stated goal of wind energy sources contributing 20 percent of the nation’s total energy need by 2030."_


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> OH shock OH shock, it is NOT the governments job to supply us with energy, no matter how it is produced. IF the government is doing it, it is likely not by any means the best way to produce energy.


If that is the case, why are we involved in wars in the Middle East?


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

John Singer said:


> Did you read the link? Here is what it says:
> 
> _"The Department of Energy (DOE) has a stated goal of wind energy sources contributing 20 percent of the nation’s total energy need by 2030."_


It is NOT the job of government to determine that. 

The industry has outlived it's usefulness. It's time for something totally new. The best way to have that happen is to get government out of it. If government is backing it, it is likely a loser. Remember, those energy companies are part owners of our elected officials.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

The DOE would be one of the first departments I would eliminate, along with Education.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Davis Besse Nuclear facility is on track to be shut down in 2022(?) I believe.


----------



## Far Beyond Driven (Jan 23, 2006)

Windmills going offshore on Lake Erie. Not sure what to think about that.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

John Singer said:


> You talk as though the government intends to supply all of our nation's energy with wind turbines. That was never the intent. It is my understanding that the stated goal of DOE is to supply 20% of the nation's energy by 2030.
> 
> https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php
> 
> ...


Thank you!!! You said exactly what I was thinking. I'm all for them too. No one said they would supply a large percentage of our power. But to stick your heads in the sand and knock them simply because you think they are ugly is ridiculous! Do I love the way they look? No! But do I think we need to look at ALL options for power as we go forward? Yes!

I first saw them in the late 90's when I started going to North Dakota. The locals out there were also worried about them killing waterfowl. But now a couple of decades in, guess what? There aren't piles of dead waterfowl around them. 

I'm not going to get into a debate on these, but we consumers have an insatiable desire for energy that only gets worse each year. This is one part of the puzzle as we move forward.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Solar, wind, and water....use what is in front of us not below us.


----------



## chromer101 (Oct 21, 2011)

I live near an area covered with wind turbines and man is the duck hunting bad around here. The last two years were the highest number of birds killed for our group. Just remember if you see a wind turbine make sure you drive at least 100 miles away, heck maybe 200 miles. Those things scare birds big time. Stay far away from them!


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

chromer101 said:


> I live near an area covered with wind turbines and man is the duck hunting bad around here. The last two years were the highest number of birds killed for our group. Just remember if you see a wind turbine make sure you drive at least 100 miles away, heck maybe 200 miles. Those things scare birds big time. Stay far away from them!


LOL!


----------



## Dead Bird (Oct 2, 2001)

what if we had a natural water system that ran enough water and at a rate large enough to produce an energy source...


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Dead Bird said:


> what if we had a natural water system that ran enough water and at a rate large enough to produce an energy source...


There is NO such thing as "free energy". All forms of energy production causes harm. Damning rivers destroys river systems, destroys fisheries, etc. We don't even know what harm wind turbines could cause, or are causing, not speaking of bird kills. 

Solar could be good, but not if we cover up zillions of acres with solar farms. The same with wind, make use of it, but, taking up hundreds of thousands of acres, gutting mountain tops, lowering property values with their ugliness?


----------



## Shiawassee_Kid (Nov 28, 2000)

John Singer said:


> You talk as though the government intends to supply all of our nation's energy with wind turbines. That was never the intent. It is my understanding that the stated goal of DOE is to supply 20% of the nation's energy by 2030.
> 
> https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php
> 
> ...


have you stood under one and picked up the dead birds laying on the ground yet?


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> have you stood under one and picked up the dead birds laying on the ground yet?


No.


----------



## Shiawassee_Kid (Nov 28, 2000)

been hunting around windmills for about 10 years (out of state). I've seen enough in patterns to understand i do not want them anywhere near the flats here. They change bird patterns...for the worse. I used to be neutral on this. After years of reading and watching windmills populate areas that i used to hunt...we are in trouble if they keep expanding.

the raptor mortality rate is pretty substantial...they are justifying it as "acceptable mortality that won't hurt the population" lol. basically the benefits outweigh the gains. Funny as most treehuggers would end anything that kills things (spotted owls anyone?)...but if its "green" keep on chugging, get them up.


----------



## Shiawassee_Kid (Nov 28, 2000)

just one tidbit, pulled from investor business daily



> Using birds as the standard, let's examine this assertion.
> 
> In latest U.S. oil spill off the coast of California, 161 birds died, as of the most recent count.
> 
> ...


source Investors Business Daily


----------



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> have you stood under one and picked up the dead birds laying on the ground yet?


That's where you got all those bands eh?


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> Funny as most treehuggers would end anything that kills things (spotted owls anyone?)...but if its "green" keep on chugging, get them up.


The "tree huggers" in PA don't mind it at all when they cut down all the trees on a mountain top to put those ugly things up there. They don't even complain about all the damage they do when they cut a road, through the woods, from the hardtop, to put that thing up there either.


----------



## bronc72 (Nov 25, 2008)

chromer101 said:


> I live near an area covered with wind turbines and man is the duck hunting bad around here. The last two years were the highest number of birds killed for our group. Just remember if you see a wind turbine make sure you drive at least 100 miles away, heck maybe 200 miles. Those things scare birds big time. Stay far away from them!


Paint the propellers Black and white and you will have the largest spinner decoy in the world!


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> just one tidbit, pulled from investor business daily
> 
> 
> 
> source Investors Business Daily


The part of the article that you cited promotes a false and deliberately misleading argument. Bird mortality from fossil fuel use is not entirely due to oil spills. 

Do a quick online search for bird mortality per megawatt generated by various forms of power generation and educate yourself.

BTW: I have never argued that wind turbines do not cause bird mortality or affect migration. If the FWS has determined that birds are negatively impacted by turbines and imposes a moratorium on their placement in known migration staging areas or flight paths, breeding areas, etc, I support that.


----------



## Shiawassee_Kid (Nov 28, 2000)

John Singer said:


> The part of the article that you cited promotes a false and deliberately misleading argument. Bird mortality from fossil fuel use is not entirely due to oil spills.
> 
> Do a quick online search for bird mortality per megawatt generated by various forms of power generation and educate yourself.
> 
> BTW: I have never argued that wind turbines do not cause bird mortality or affect migration. If the FWS has determined that birds are negatively impacted by turbines and imposes a moratorium on their placement in known migration staging areas or flight paths, breeding areas, etc, I support that.


the point is...they suck. they suck for duck hunters. they suck in a lot of ways. a lot of the "they are good for the enviroment" is misleading.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> a lot of the "they are good for the enviroment" is misleading.


Or a flat out lie. Follow the money, who has been receiving campaign contributions from that industry? Who owns stock in them? The same can be said for the ethanol business, oil, coal, etc etc.


----------



## Buddwiser (Dec 14, 2003)

I think I'd rather have wind turbines spinning around than a nuke plant melting down as has happened in the past and could happen in the future. How many of you were around in 1966/67 when the Fermi plant almost blew up. Although I was thousands of miles away, I remember the headline...."We almost lost Detroit". Do turbines kill birds...sure....but I'd rather see dead birds than a dead city. Just my opinion.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/14/nuclear-power-plant-accidents-list-rank


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

There will never be enough wind turbines to power us. You pick your poison. Kill off the rivers, cover millions of acres with wind turbines or solar farms, all to save the environment.


----------



## Buddwiser (Dec 14, 2003)

DecoySlayer said:


> Kill off the rivers, cover millions of acres with wind turbines or solar farms, all to save the environment.


Take a ride up to Elkton, Pidgeon or Bad Axe and see where they are sitting. Heres a hint....they are on farm land earing the owners of those farms a nice pay check with the ability to continue farming the land, saving the environment while still utilizing the land. Of course, we could always lose a nuke plant or two, causing the land surrounding them for miles to be radioactive for years to come, not to mention having the people living near them glow a nice green color while in their casket.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Buddwiser said:


> Take a ride up to Elkton, Pidgeon or Bad Axe and see where they are sitting. Heres a hint....they are on farm land earing the owners of those farms a nice pay check with the ability to continue farming the land, saving the environment while still utilizing the land. Of course, we could always lose a nuke plant or two, causing the land surrounding them for miles to be radioactive for years to come, not to mention having the people living near them glow a nice green color while in their casket.


And screwing up migration patterns. Be VERY careful. When "everyone" says it's a "good idea", double when government says it is, start looking for the real problems. 

Put enough up and it will start making hunting far more difficult too. When hunting is cut back, or taken away, then you WILL see a real decline in wildlife populations.

We don't even know what other damage those things could be doing. 

By the way I have been up around Bad Axe, they are as ugly as they are in CA, PA, OH and every where else they have been put up. 

The answer is stop using as much energy, AND, end the idea of bulk production and shipping it to far away places.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

What are the downside to those contracts those farmers sign? NOTHING is free.


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

Nothing wrong with reducing our dependence on oil, coal, etc AKA non-renewable resources. If we can harness natural energy, the we most definitely should be. Nothing is ever perfect and we can find faults all the way around with anything.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

craigrh13 said:


> Nothing wrong with reducing our dependence on oil, coal, etc AKA non-renewable resources. If we can harness natural energy, the we most definitely should be. Nothing is ever perfect and we can find faults all the way around with anything.


So you have no problem damming rivers, destroying marshes etc? How will that help the environment? 

This is a waterfowl hunting forum. Wind turbines, damns, etc harm waterfowl. How is that going to improve our continental waterfowl numbers?


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

DecoySlayer said:


> So you have no problem damming rivers, destroying marshes etc? How will that help the environment?
> 
> This is a waterfowl hunting forum. Wind turbines, damns, etc harm waterfowl. How is that going to improve our continental waterfowl numbers?


You’re right. Waterfowl numbers have plummeted since the invention of damning rivers and wind turbines. Oh wait....


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

craigrh13 said:


> You’re right. Waterfowl numbers have plummeted since the invention of damning rivers and wind turbines. Oh wait....


We have been fighting for YEARS to rebuild marshes, the pot holes, etc., to get rid of damns that stop the natural rebuilding of marshes. We spend millions upon millions of dollars to restore the damage that has been done. 

Groups like Waterfowl USA, Duck Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl and the Pointe Mouillee Waterfowl Festival and Michigan Duck Hunter's Tournament work year around to help pay the bill for the damage. 

Pointe Moulliee is no longer able to restore itself, as is should, because of the damns on the Huron River and the hard banks on the Detroit River. SO, we have to build dikes, pump water in or out, etc, to at least TRY to mimic what used to take place. It is a never ending battle just to keep up the less than 1% of the natural wet lands we have in SE Mich.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Go ahead, damn some more rivers, then tell me how it is going to help the environment


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

DecoySlayer said:


> We have been fighting for YEARS to rebuild marshes, the pot holes, etc., to get rid of damns that stop the natural rebuilding of marshes. We spend millions upon millions of dollars to restore the damage that has been done.
> 
> Groups like Waterfowl USA, Duck Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl and the Pointe Mouillee Waterfowl Festival and Michigan Duck Hunter's Tournament work year around to help pay the bill for the damage.
> 
> Pointe Moulliee is no longer able to restore itself, as is should, because of the damns on the Huron River and the hard banks on the Detroit River. SO, we have to build dikes, pump water in or out, etc, to at least TRY to mimic what used to take place. It is a never ending battle just to keep up the less than 1% of the natural wet lands we have in SE Mich.


Have waterfowl populations declined since wind turbines?


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

craigrh13 said:


> Have waterfowl populations declined since wind turbines?


No, but ONLY because of the work those groups are doing. They will be changing migration patterns due to them. Put enough on the prairies and it will start to lower their numbers.

Waterfowl numbers are up. We MUST do everything possible to continue that trend. It will take very little to reverse it. We should be increasing the amount of wetlands everywhere, not decreasing them.


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

DecoySlayer said:


> No, but ONLY because of the work those groups are doing. They will be changing migration patterns due to them. Put enough on the prairies and it will start to lower their numbers.
> 
> Waterfowl numbers are up. We MUST do everything possible to continue that trend. It will take very little to reverse it. We should be increasing the amount of wetlands everywhere, not decreasing them.


There’s a middle ground to be reached here. There’s a lot of arguments being made with very little backed by actual facts. They are only looking at producing roughly 20% of our energy from wind. It’s not the end of the world. 

Would you rather a prairie region be converted into wind turbines that DU estimates will reduce breeding populations by 20% or a housing complex that will reduce breeding populations by close to 100%?


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

There is no need for either in those areas.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Never even heard of it.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

DecoySlayer said:


> Neither, I am opposed to the very idea of bulk production and shipping of electricity. IF Detroit needs more power, generate there, it's already a wasteland. There is no need to do an more damage to the land in the Thumb, or any other rural area, there has been far too much loss of habitat as it is.
> 
> The cities are the biggest consumers of power, make it there. Don't tell me how it will "mess them up", they have no problem messing up the country side to feed their lust for lights.


Alright I've read enough of your "doomsday" BS about mass production of power in this country. So what is your solution? Our society (globally by the way) has an insatiable lust for energy, that just gets worse by the year. And don't say "we all need to use less energy", because you and I and everyone reading this knows that is not going to happen. So how do you propose to meet the need 5, 10, 50 or 100 years down the road when our grand kids and their kids need power? Are you asking each homeowner, no matter where you live, to put up their own small wind turbine or solar panels to be self-sufficient? Cause that's not only not efficient, it's WAAAY too costly for most Americans to even consider. 

Some of the candidates for Governor are spouting off on their ads about "fixing the roads", or "repealing the retirement tax", and I've contacted their offices and asked the same question..."tell me how you plan to do it?" No more political sound bites just to get elected. Give me a SOLID PLAN on how to get those things done. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just saying I'm tired of you blasting away at any new form of energy production, and so I'm asking what's your solution? Give me a solid plan that American's could get behind. And let me tell you now...if it costs them more than their average monthly power bill, it's a non-starter...don't go there


----------

