Bush to Create Largest Protected Marine Area
Now there’s a title I never thought I’d get to use.
But it’s true … the president today will announce the designation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as a national monument, making the 140,000-square mile area the largest protected marine area in the world (surpassing even the Great Barrier Reef). According to reports in the NY Times and WaPo today, the region of uninhabited islands and atolls is home to more than 7,000 marine species, including several that are listed as endangered (and nearly 25% of which are found nowhere else on earth).
The president had planned to designate the area as a marine sanctuary, which would have required a year-long approval process (with the potential for many years of lawsuits) to construct rules for the use of the area. By using the National Antiquities Act (for only the second time), the area is protected immediately, and the papers report that Bush will announced a “suite of strict rules for the area, including a five-year phasing out of commercial and sport fishing.” The rules “will allow Hawaiians to have access to the area for other traditional activities and will include the Midway World War II memorial, a facility that is open for research, education and ecotourism. Visitors wishing to snorkel, dive or take photographs in the area will have to obtain a permit, and no one may take fish, wildlife, corals or minerals from the region,” according to White House sources.
I’m stunned, to say the least. I never in a million years expected this president to take such a protective action. Does this make up for all the nasty things he and his Administration have done to the environment in the last six years? Not a bit. But it’s still a good step, and one I will applaud even as I continue to urge him to do more.
Jean-Michel Cousteau recently showed a documentary about the area at a White House screening, which apparently had a “powerful effect” on George and Laura Bush and helped prompt his decision to name the area a national monument. Perhaps a screening of “An Inconvenient Truth” should be arranged.
[Cross-posted at Charging RINO]
9 Responses to “Bush to Create Largest Protected Marine Area”
Can you take a moment and list all the “nasty things” Bush has done to the environment in the last six years? I am just curious
David,
Your question prompted me to do a little quick research, because I had only impressions of his record, no real knowledge. A Google search brought me a slew of overviews, this being the most thorough. I’ve visited your website and I’m going to guess the Wilderness people aren’t going to command your respect as an environmental interest group.I tried in vain to find a more recent conservative , pro-Adminstration review, but the best and most recent I could find is an AEI/Brookings working paper from April of 2002. Most everything else is not very supportive. I would be interested in reading something recent and thoughtful in support of Bush’s environmental policies.
There is no oil in that area. If there was oil there, all this protection business would be thrown out the white house window immediately.
Its a big area of mostly open ocean. I suspect the republicans will be saying goofy stuff like “we protected a larger area than all them Democrats put together”….but really….so what?
I don’t think that screening an Inconvenient Truth would do much good, there is steady contention about the film from independent scientific communities. It seems the only scientists, according to the recent slew of articles, who support the statements of the film are scientists included in Democratic lobbyist groups.
This is, though, another example of the “Damned if you do / damned if you don’t” political endeavor. Conservatives largely won’t care about this, so it won’t increase any Conservative base for the Bush Administration or the Republicans, and Liberals would only serve to criticize the measure as being politically motivated. From just the most basic Machiavellean perspective, I don’t get the point in any of it.
OutofContext:
Thanks for the links to the information. I don’t claim that Bush is a strong “environmental” President, but I do believe that the left has exaggerated the “damage” he has done to the environment and ignored the things he has done to protect it (as the 2002 paper you linked to pointed out). The “so what” comment here is a great example.
As to the oil deal. We need oil. And we are going to need it for the foreseeable future. And we need to be able to find our own and not be dependent on other nations to provide it for us. Bush critics complain about the price of gas and then about how oil drilling is going to ruin the environment. Something has to give.
You are right David, something does have to give. I’d say both sides. Additionally, everyone needs to understand why gas is high, its not just oil, anyone that thinks oil is the only factor in the price we pay for gas is flat out uneducated about it. And drilling for more oil in the U.S. won’t bring down the price of gas, at least not in the next 5-10 years. Conservation should be step 1, drilling step 2.
Personally, I think our current president hasn’t done a ton to ruin the environment in the last 6 years, its what he is looking to get passed as laws, or remove/revoke from law that bothers me. This includes clean air &water, endangered species, land use rights, drilling rights, and protections being removed from parks and BLM lands for drilling or atv use. All these things will affect everyones future. I wouldn’t call him an enemy of the environment, but I also wouldn’t call him a friend of the environment.
I can’t think of anything to say other than, I don’t think you really know George Bush. I would suspect that he is a much nicer man than the democrats realize. They are so bitter, I for one would like to Teddy Bear go out in a blaze of glory. We all know what really happened in Chappaquidick Bay. Democrats don’t want to admit it, Teddy certainly won’t. Why in the he.. do you think Joan took to drink. Married to a no-good jerk like Teddy would drive anyone to drink.
I am thoroughly digusted with the democrats. Pandering to the extremeists in their own party. I would suspect that due to their bitterness, they would rather see the US go down in flames just to prove their point. I am thoroughly disgusted with the Democrats. Bill Clinton is a liar and a cheat and does not deserve my respect. If I would have been his wife, he wouldn’t have had any cajones to even begin to cheat with
I think it’s great that Bush has signed on to this. I know Congressman Case (D) of Hawaii, where I live, has been fighting for this for a few years. It’s great that it got done and that they actually took the Hawaiian cultural and social issues into account as well, especially since the Republicans just shut down the Akaka Bill about native Hawaiian recognition. So kudos to a Pres for not opposing the idea when it was brought to him. In my favorite cliche, “even a broken clock has the right time twice a day.”
Actually, Brazell, if you’re going to make statements like that you’d better provide quotes or links to back them up. While there are minor points in the Gore movie that some disagree with there aren’t any really independent climatologists who disagree with the overall point of the film or the majority of claims in it. You have it reversed, in fact. Remember Jim Inhofe.