Kelly et al.,

I too have noticed dramatic increases in Bald Eagle populations in the
King Co. area in particular. When I wrote my King Co. bird book in 1982 I
scoured the sources for specific nest site reports and could find just
three in the whole county (Seward Park, O.O. Denny Park, and ne of
Issaquah). Now there must be 20. Clearly something dramatic has
happened, something to cheer about, which is rare enough these days. I
say we should not hold onto a listing that is no longer justified solely
because such a charismatic megafaunal symbol provides legal leverage for
the broader goal of habitat preservation. In these time we need to be
able to point to clear instances of our "reasonableness" re. land use
regulation. However, a continuing voluntary program should be
sustained. Many property owners should be willing to make room for
nesting eagles on their property.

Gene Hunn.

On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Kelly Mcallister wrote:

> Tweeters,
>
> It's late, I'm at home, it's my time, and I want to know your opinion.
> They say everyone has one.
>
> Bald eagles were listed as threatened in Washington in 1978. At the time,
> 114 nesting pairs were known in the state. Habitat loss was considered a
> big issue (at the time Washington's human population was growing!!!),
> past poisoning and shooting were believed to have reduced bald eagle numbers
> well below historical levels, and contaminants (primarily DDT) were thought
> to have disrupted successful reproduction here as they had in other parts of
> the United States.
>
> At the time, it seemed likely that bald eagles were headed toward the brink
> of extinction (or extirpation, if you like).
>
> Regulatory "wanna bes" tried to influence developments on private lands and,
> when disagreements were pressed, the stories on the news pointed out the
> government's general lack of authority to require a private landowner to
> provide wildlife habitat, threatened or not. When Pope and Talbot's
> north Camano Island subdivision was planned around a nest site, some newspapers
> found a front page story and Senator Diane Woody found an opportunity to
> sponsor a bill to protect bald eagle habitat. It passed!!!
>
> For ten plus years, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildife has
> negotiated land use agreements around bald eagle nests and communal night
> roosts. Over 200 such agreements have been signed, mostly with private
> landowners. The legal authority for requiring a private landowner to enter
> into these agreements is an administrative rule that starts off by saying that
> its goal is to provide for recovery of the bald eagle so that it may be
> delisted.
>
> Washington currently has at least 550 nesting pairs of bald eagles. They
> have found adequate habitat where many of us thought there was none. There
> are even 3, maybe 4 pairs, on Lake Washington (a big lake but a very urban
> lake). The bald eagle population has grown virtually everywhere on this
> continent. Numbers alone now dictate that the population can sustain, in the
> short-term, many of the purely local effects of adverse developments,
> pollution, maniacs with rifles...
>
> Is the job done? Do we delist now and get on with other business?
>
> Consider the cons. Bald eagles need big trees for nesting and night roosting.
> Half of Washington's occupied nesting habitat is within one half mile of the
> Puget Sound shoreline, an area where human development proceeds at a rapid
> pace. Sixty four percent of all of the nest sites in Washington are on
> private land. In the important Puget Sound region, 78% are on private land.
> On the lower Columbia River and on Hood Canal bald eagles are reproducing
> poorly, possibly too poorly to be self-sustaining (if it weren't for the many
> more healthy reproductive areas elsewhere). Contaminants, mostly of unknown
> origins, are the cause. Is this phenomenon going to increase in the future...?
> decrease...? stay about the same?
>
> The specter of the bald eagle as a species this nation could easily lose has
> been raised. Now that the sacrifices have been made, the expenses absorbed,
> and the bird restored to good numbers, perhaps its time to loosen up. Let
> individuals..., local communities (??) decide how to shoulder the
> responsibility for maintaining habitat for this great bird into the distant
> future.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Kelly McAllister
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>