Date: 4/14/18 3:28 pm
From: David Gibson <20cabot...>
Subject: Re: [MASSBIRD] Migratory Bird Treaty re-interpreted (weakened)
Mark, I'll have to read the document a little more closely then, and do
further research. Laws like this, of course, are always open to
interpretation and then subject to change. And I would also submit, that as
is always the case, because former officials or present officials or any
officials repudiate an interpretation, never means that that interpretation
(the one repudiated) was in fact incorrect. Dave

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Mark Faherty <msfaherty...> wrote:

> You are not correct, David. As the article itself points out, it
> fundamentally changes how the law has been interpreted since the 1970s at
> least. It says:
> "Seventeen former Interior officials
> <>,
> including U.S. Fish and Wildlife directors under presidents Richard Nixon,
> George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, repudiated
> the reinterpretation when it was first announced in December.
> “This legal opinion is contrary to the long-standing interpretation by
> every administration … since at least the 1970s, who held that the
> Migratory Bird Treaty Act strictly prohibits the unregulated killing of
> birds,” the former officials wrote in a letter
> <> to Interior Secretary
> Ryan Zinke dated Jan. 10."
> Mark
> On Saturday, April 14, 2018, 10:26:20 AM EDT, David Gibson <
> <20cabot...> wrote:
> Important to note though, if I'm correct, this only reverses the
> interpretation of the MBTA that was put forth by the previous
> administration. That being the case, the law basically remains unchanged.
> Dave Gibson, Chesapeake, VA
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:34 PM, Jeffrey Boone Miller <
> <jboonemiller...> wrote:
> As birders, we understand that the Migratory Bird Treaty of 1918 provides
> a vital legal foundation for bird conservation.
> As reported by the Washington Post, however, the Department of the
> Interior has recently re-interpreted (i.e., weakened) the law:
> wapoMigratoryBirdTreaty
> <>
> Readers can reach their own conclusions, but contacting oneâ~@~Ys
> representatives to express support for the original interpretation of the
> law seems, at least to me, the first step that anyone interested in
> protecting birds should take.
> J. Boone Miller
> Belmont MA
> jboonemiller at

Join us on Facebook!