The Minnesota Vikings’ New Stadium Will Be a “Death Trap” for Birds

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ddebold/10645979194/in/photolist-ayhjag-aePGkG-7dEsXh-4xNzZA-7w1h29-i68KCM-9v1NLH-oq6iwV-neeDzX-dwJhX6-dLzMs4-cpe4bA-5hNKJx-dWsBUv-hdKqHq-cWfh4y-bfTDTR-hqjkuM-dMXBTm-wftQM-xccUM-5v4MLV-4zGtNh-57KSLC-i68Yry-6netvJ-346pKb-6b2iHJ-obfxs-m594YK-jyusUy-aiHtpw-aiEERp-4uNdbL-6VkBMq-5o1DKW-8Wxv2o-6vsHa4-4wmLAW-ajEA3Q-KzdWP-5seqZ-4yvYm9-cdCebA-5QV8qY-6vx2CW-8gVdN2-6VgnmV-6BymDH-ftPtzL">Don DeBold</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The Minnesota Vikings’ new football stadium was supposed to be a point of pride for fans. The $1 billion state-of-the-art facility in the heart of downtown Minneapolis is set to be completed in 2016, and will put the crumbling Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome out of its misery. But a number of groups are getting angrier about a darker side to this dream project: The stadium’s shiny glass walls, which are almost certain to pose a lethal hazard to migrating birds.

The Mississippi River is just blocks away from the structure, and it’s a superhighway for seasonal migration. 250 different species of birds—mostly small songbirds like sparrows and warblersmigrate through Minnesota every year by the hundreds of thousands. When they saw the plans for the new stadium, said Matthew Anderson of Audubon Minnesota, “we realized immediately the potential this had to be a death trap.” Migrating birds will get tricked by the stadium’s glass walls; thinking they’re just more sky, the birds will slam into them at high speeds. (Check out artists’ renderings of the stadium here.)

At first, Anderson says, the Vikings organization and the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority overseeing the project seemed eager to fix the problem. They agreed to lighting restrictions that would make the area safer for birds at nighttime, for one. As for the transparent walls, the fix was relatively cheap: A different kind of glass—with lots of small dots that signal to birds it’s a hard surface—would cost just over a million dollars extra. That’s one-tenth of one percent of the total cost of the project. Plus, the Vikings had already contracted with the manufacturer of this special glass—a Minnesota company to boot.

But on July 17, Anderson said, the Vikings and MSFA balked, claiming the special glass would make the project too expensive. The improvement had seemed like a PR slam dunk. Now, the Vikings’ resistance puts them squarely at odds with a growing trend of eco-friendliness in stadium construction. For instance, several structures constructed in recent years have achieved some degree of LEED certification, including Minneapolis’ Target Field, home of MLB’s Minnesota Twins. 

“We don’t want the people’s birds running into the people’s stadium. It’s gonna be a mess.”

It’s not just Audubon making a stink about the Vikings’ decision. Politicians have taken interest in the controversy. Minnesota State Representative Phyllis Kahn (DFL-MN), whose district is adjacent to the site of the new stadium, chairs the state legislature’s Legacy Committee, which finances conservation-related projects. She said there’s a state law that mandates bird protection measures if a project is financed by state bonds—the new stadium is getting $468 million worth of them. (MSFA officials claim that because the project was approved before the law was passed, they are exempt.) Meanwhile, the Minneapolis City Council passed a resolution on Friday to support the push for bird-safe glass.

As of now, the Vikings haven’t budged on the issue, despite the mounting outcry. (The organization did not respond to my requests for comment). Audubon’s Anderson told me that if nothing gives, the organization might call on Governor Mark Dayton to step in. Dayton led the push for the new facility, calling it a “people’s stadium.” “This is the people’s stadium, these are the people’s birds,” Anderson says. “We don’t want the people’s birds running into the people’s stadium. It’s gonna be a mess.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate