Man claims Bountiful department violated Migratory Bird Treaty Act, but did it?

BOUNTIFUL — Alan Rawley was strolling around a park earlier this month when a nest in a baseball dugout caught his eye. In the nest were young baby birds, which he believed were robins.

After calling around, Rawley alerted the Bountiful parks and recreation department about the nest on May 14, hoping to protect them in such an open place as West Mueller Park.

“I’m afraid there are people out there who, if they find a nest like this, they are going to take the birds out thinking they’re helping them, which is going to be a death knell for the birds, or they’re going to vandalize it and kill the birds,” he said.

However, Rawley said he later found the birds dead in a garbage bin — in his mind, a violation of one of the nation’s oldest wildlife protection laws, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. He then quickly reported the deaths to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which enforces the law.

Brock Hill, the city’s parks director, on the other hand, said the department did move the nest and birds were dead, but they weren’t robins, they were starlings.

The department contacted the Division of Wildlife Resources about the situation and was told to verify what kind of birds they were, Hill said.

"(Rawley's) claim is incorrect," Hill added. He contacted the Mueller Park Baseball Association, which went out and took care of the nest and fixed the roof of the dugout.

So if the birds were intentionally killed, was it legal or illegal? That depends on the species of the bird.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act protects both the American and Rufous-backed robin, which are the two species of the bird found in Utah. It doesn’t protect one of the most common birds found in the populated parts of the state, the European starling.

The act, according to the Audubon Society, “provides that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, possess, sell, purchase, barter, import, export, or transport any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or egg or any such bird, unless authorized under a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior.”

It dates back to 1918 to help protect certain birds which were facing extinction because they were hunted for sport or for their feathers.

The Bountiful case isn’t too uncommon of a story. With birds nesting in spring and many also completing spring yard work, it’s easy for Utahns to either unintentionally or intentionally destroy nests. The violation of the law centers around intent — and if the bird is protected by the act, said Christina Meister, public affairs assistant for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

“Migratory bird conservation remains an integral part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s mission. The (Department of the Interior’s Solicitor's Office) concludes that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act’s prohibitions apply when the purpose of an action is to intentionally take migratory birds, their eggs or their nests,” she explained. “Conversely, incidental take of migratory birds, their eggs or their nests is not prohibited by the MBTA.”

In the Bountiful case and most situations, the species makes the difference. If indeed the birds were common starlings, then the city employee didn’t break the act. If they were robins, then the department could face a punishment if the birds were intentionally killed.

The maximum punishment of the act, usually for rarer and bigger birds, is a $250,000 fine and two years of imprisonment in a felony case and a $5,000 fine and six months of imprisonment for a misdemeanor case, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

“We will continue to develop voluntary best management practices to protect migratory birds and their habitats in partnership with any entity who wishes to help conserve these species,” Meister said. “We will also continue to enforce the MBTA to the fullest extent of the law when appropriate.”

Related topics