It's true that some birds get caught in the windmill wings but most of them fly higher.
One would hope. I'm all in favor of survival of the fittest, to the utmost degree. This includes 4 and two-footed animals. But you use logic, and frankly, the only thought process that exists in politics is hyperbole.
Let me illustrate a point:
I hunt on approximately 500 acres of swamp/marsh land (quite literally) on the Eastern Shore of Maryland with no ability to farm a crop because of the high water table. This is, BTW, not a federally protected wetland. Of this, nearly 300 acres was slotted for logging by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. My uncle, who owns the property, uses the logging income to finance the purchase cost and operating expenses of the cabin there. He receives (after paying the logger) around $3,000 per acre logged. All of the 300 is cleared, save about 65 acres because of 2 Delmarva fox squirrels that live there. So as to not disturb them, we can hunt there, but we can't clear the land, and certainly can't shoot the damned things. Here's the rub: The fox squirrel is federally protected because it is a rediculously stupid animal. How stupid?
When you cut down a tree a squirrel lives in, it will migrate across fields/roads/ditches/marshes to another tree, re-establish a nest, and that's that. Not the fox squirrel. It makes its home permanently, and once its cut down it will die because it can't possibly go up another tree to nest. It becomes food for foxes, coyotes, etc. It will not migrate anywhere. Because of the logging of the Eastern Shore over the past, oh, 400 years, the fox squirrel is protected. Protected for its stupidity. It is too damned stupid to move to another tree. Cost to my uncle: approximately $195,000. That's no chump change for an animal that should otherwise be dead because it is dumb.
This is the same thought process that permeates all environmental policy here in the States. The examples are numerous. ANWR drilling is verboten because it could theoretically (not factually) disrupt the mating and migrational patterns of certain animals. Nevermind that that Alaskan Pipeline has never had an incident and didn't in one iota disrupt the migration of the local fauna. In fact, it was designed to be elevated above the tallest caribou for just such a reason.
Or for that matter, the wind farms will churn up migratory birds, etc. as I've previously mentioned.
My personal favorite is the nuclear power issue, and the disposal of waste from nuclear power stations. Vessels have been designed to hold them safely for 1,000's of years, but where to put them? Nobody wants it in their back yard, so when a suitable location is found its immediately under fire from the environmentalists, regardless of the safeguards in place. Same goes for a nuke station- ever since Three Mile Island, not a single one has been built in the US. And Three Mile Island was an isolated incident, the liklihood of being repeated are billions to one.
The China Syndrome did a fair job of convincing everyone in this country that nuke power is inherently evil.
So, while we all sit here and bemoan the cost of oil, the dependance on foreign energy sources, and best yet, the "lack" of localized sources of energy to satisfy our insatiable thirst for oil/gas/power, the real answers are right in front of us, clear as day. For that matter, the hullaballoo over electric cars and hybrids is merely symbolism over substance, a bandaid on a problem that isn't going to get any better, in spite of the Tesla cars, Prius, or any other panacea.
