America's national symbol, the bald eagle, has so successfully recovered from hunting, pesticide poisoning and other threats that the federal government plans to remove it from the endangered species list by this summer. Exactly what its new status will mean is not yet clear. Shooting, injuring or capturing eagles will continue to be illegal, but some controversy remains about what protections bald eagles will enjoy after the June 29 deadline for de-listing. In 1999, President Clinton announced the bird would be removed from the Endangered Species List, but the US Fish and Wildlife Service dragged its feet after Minnesota landowner Edmund Contonski sued the agency and won a court order requiring removal by June 29. The man owns seven acres of rural property he wants to divide into five lots but can't because there is an eagle nest on his land. "I have had to continue paying taxes on property I had no use for,'' he said. "Nobody's going to buy it if you can't do anything with it. In my old age, I can't get the benefit of the considerable sum of money that could come from the sale of lots." The 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the killing, injuring or capturing of eagles or their eggs. It also makes it a crime to "disturb'' the birds. The Bush administration has proposed that "disturb'' would mean any activity resulting in death, injury or abandoning of a nest. But environmental groups say that doesn't go far enough. They want "disturb'' to include agitation of the bird. "Otherwise, if you are flushing eagles out of their winter roosts where they take refuge from the cold or if you are scaring them away from their favorite feeding grounds, they might die,'' Michael Bean, wildlife director for Environmental Defense, said. "But being able to prove that disturbance was the cause -- and prosecute that person -- is going to be virtually impossible.''

Paul Rogers, San Jose Mercury News
As the bald eagle is set to be taken off the endangered species list do you feel that the definition of the word "disturb" in the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act should be deemed less restrictive in order to appease property owners who have been affected by the law despite concerns by environmetal groups?