The wind energy industry presents a green-green dilemma whereby it aims to reduce CO2 emissions and combat climate change which benefits biodiversity, but biodiversity can be negatively impacted through its development. In order to reconcile this dilemma, the first action in the mitigation hierarchy is to avoid development in areas considered too risky for vulnerable species. For eagles, development has often been restricted within a certain distance from nests, or more recently, by using predictive habitat use models to define site-specific areas of high risk. One such model has been used to predict risky areas for Verreaux’s Eagles (Aquila verreauxii) in South Africa, but there has been declining use of this tool by industry (research-implementation gap, RIG). Uncertainty over the model outputs is a likely cause of the RIG, because the model results in variably sized exclusion areas for each development. To reduce this uncertainty and increase implementation of the model, we explore if limiting this predictive model to protect the same amount of space, or less, as a circular buffer around the nest, could still provide improved protection of the species. We found that by fixing the area of risk to be equal to the area of current circular buffer recommendation, eagle protection was improved by around 6–7 % compared to circular buffers, or by 2–3 % compared to our previous threshold-based model. This fixed-area approach removes variation in the amount of area excluded from development. This ensures that by applying the collision risk model there is no unexpected loss in the developable area for wind energy development. Our study demonstrates the importance of understanding and adapting tools that aim to promote sustainable development of renewable energy. Responding to stakeholder needs and balancing conservation with practical applications is critical, particularly in countries where policy enforcement is lacking.