From an FWS press release June 28, 2007 Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne states:

After years of careful study, public comment and planning, the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are confident in the future security of the American Bald Eagle," Kempthorne said. "From this point forward, we will work to ensure that the eagle never again needs the protection of the Endangered Species Act.

The good news is that earlier in June, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service implemented the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and published a set of National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. These rules protect the birds from developers who might be tempted to destroy their nests. Also, to stabilize this healthy, flourishing population, the Service is establishing a permit program that will allow a limited take of bald and golden eagles. This means we can still remove some from the wild by permit, but without permit we are prohibited to take, sell, kill, or harm eagles.

More good news is that we have a month to adjust to the fact that there are more Bald Eagles out there than most of us thought. The removal of the Bald Eagle from the list will be official thirty days after publication.

The original weakened population was due to widespread use of DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane), the first modern agricultural pesticide used widely after World War II. The eagles began laying eggs with weakened shells, which put a great stress on the population. When it finally reached the low point of 417 pair, protection was set in place in 1967. The Endangered Species Act followed, and was initiated in 1973, headlining the Bald Eagle as one of the first species.

The fact that the population has risen due to this protection is a national model for cooperation with environmental protection laws. Yet the question is, if we were doing so well, why stop protecting them? And, I hate to say it, but if we take them off the list and dilute the penalty, will the population continue to flourish? Certain states with a lower population are requesting to keep their state protected under the Endangered Species Act, but they have been denied thus far. Arizona governor Janet Napolitano requested their exemption, saying Arizona's native populations (which use eagle feathers for ceremonial purposes) were not adequately consulted. That request was denied, saying the region had "the appropriate number of eagles" and that Arizona's eagles did not meet the criteria to be protected as a distinct population segment.

What will happen? We will have to find out, but there is a way to communicate with the top dogs in charge. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is currently accepting public comments on this topic.
Comments on the monitoring plan must be received 90 days after publication in the Federal Register. Comments may be sent by mail to Bald Eagle Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan Comments, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rock Island Field Office, 1511 47th Avenue, Moline, Illinois 61265. Comments may also be transmitted electronically to baldeaglePDM@fws.gov or by following the instructions at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: .

A little history on DDT, I thought you might like to know:

• In World War II it was used as a mosquito repellant the prevent the spreading of disease like malaria and typhus
• Paul Hermann Muller won the Nobel Prize in 1948 “for his discovery of the high efficiency of DDT as a contact poison against arthropods”.
• Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring, which catalogued DDT as the most detrimental pesticide in terms on environmental impacts. Her
• Silent Spring let to a public outcry that eventually got DDT banned in the U.S.

See also:

Environmental Defense, "Eagle's Return Shows Species Law Works"

The directive issued by the State Environmental Protection Administration, the Ministry of Construction, the Ministry of Culture and the State Administration of Cultural Heritage now requires approval from authorities before any shooting or set construction can begin, and calls for proper restoration of the affected areas.

The regulation came about after Chinese director Chen Kaige was fined 90,000 yuan (11,600 USD) for environmental damage caused by the making of his movie The Promise (budgeted at $35 million USD). Chen was then nominated for a "Green Chinese" award, which is given to those who have made a significant contribution to the environment. The government sponsors of the award defended their decision to include Chen in their selection because the controversy surrounding the environmental damage of his film led to a greater awareness of environmental protection.

China's nature reserves cover only about 15% of the country's total land area, and performances and filming will still be allowed peripherally around these sites. The fine for offenders is 500,000 yuan (62,500 U.S. dollars) and 1 million yuan(130,000 U.S. dollars). Some critics note that these fines are not much of a deterrent considering the costs of making a film often run upwards of several million dollars.

Via China Daily; China Daily/BizChina
and TreeHugger; Yahoo News