The candidates on birds
Sep 25th, 2008 by Butter
The Obama and McCain campaigns responded to a set of questions on environmental policy sent to them by the Auduban Society. I thought it might be appropriate here to cite their responses to the question about bird management policy:
AUDUBON SOCIETY: Eagles are rebounding from the brink of extinction, but many other birds continue to experience serious declines. Audubon data shows even bird species we consider common today are losing ground, falling as much as 68 percent in the past 40 years. How would you use laws like the Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and Clean Water Act to reverse this trend?
| Obama Campaign | McCain Campaign | |
| I support strengthening the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and other environmental laws that have been weakened by the Bush administration. My EPA will ensure that rule-making upholds scientific principles and the law, not corporate and ideological interests. I will also work with Congress and scientists to determine other legislative or regulatory steps that may be needed to protect our wildlife. | As president, I would support reforms that maintain strong and responsible protection for threatened and endangered species and promote species recovery while bringing greater levels of cooperation, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness to the effort. We must ensure we have effective policies and international agreements in place that maintain the spirit of laws like the Migratory Bird Treaty Act while affording private landowners their rights. Wetlands are a vital component of our natural aquatic ecosystems and should be recognized as such. I will work to develop a wetlands policy that provides necessary protection of our aquatic resources, builds strong an d lasting partnerships, and respects local conditions and needs. |
(The entire set of questions and answers is available in the September-October issue of Audubon magazine, pp. 58-61).
Obama’s answer at least indicates support for current wildlife-protection laws and acknowledges the Bizarro World of Bush-administration science policy. Less genericness would have been nice, though, like maybe actually using the word “bird.”
McCain’s answer scares the shit out of me. Beneath the progressive-sounding veneer is a contempt for federal regulation in general, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in particular. The Act has been a cornerstone of our country’s efforts to protect native bird species from disappearing forever since 1918. Signed by the U.S. and Canada (actually, at the time, Great Britain signed for Canada), it’s what makes it illegal for you to go out and shoot, capture, or molest any bird you like. It currently protects about 800 species from unregulated killing and entrapment, and forbids tampering with their nesting sites. I don’t want the spirit of this law maintained, I want this law. Further, a lack of “cooperation” with the private sector is hardly the current administration’s problem. Regulators are supposed to enforce the law; I expect them to do their jobs.
The bit about wetlands is encouraging; it may be a sop to the hunting enthusiasts among his base. I agree with hunters that wetlands must be managed properly and conserved to protect waterfowl populations (I respect their right to their hunt for food, although I find the glee with which some waterfowl hunters approach killing repulsive), and it’s good that private organizations of them are committed to that cause. But that management must be done under competent, objective, rational federal control, something that his party’s behavior has put in jeopardy.
