Date: 4/16/18 2:19 pm
From: Kathryn Ostermier <kathryn...>
Subject: Re: [MASSBIRD] Migratory Bird Treaty Act changes
I don’t have a ton of time for a complete refutation, though I would like
to tip my hat to your email. Implying that you are the cool, logical
intellectual while your opponent is a hysterical reactionary - even
helpfully providing instructions to them on how to respond to you - is a
time-honored internet tradition. It was dark in here; thank you for turning
on the gaslight.
I do want to point out that the Heritage Foundation is absolutely a
Mercer-funded conservative (“right wing”) think-tank which publishes
scholarly works in support of its pro-business / anti-regulation mission -
in this case, at the expense of avian life.
That said, while theirs is certainly an interpretation with an agenda,
‘propaganda’ may have been the slightest shade too far.
I appreciate the way they carefully couched their concern-trolling as
preventing Grandma Smith or Little Joey from being prosecuted for a window
strike or a naughty cat and oh - as a side note - “land developers, oil and
gas company workers, and even wind-turbine operators can breathe a little
easier too.”
At a time when there is a rapid movement towards de-regulation and reducing
protections for our public lands via the EPA and Interiors, I certainly
understand and share the concern of Suzanne and others about a more
pro-business (apologies - “pro-Grandma Smith”) interpretation of the MBTA,
which begins the erosion of protection. This in itself may not have a
devastating impact on the avian population, but it sets precedent for
rolling back additional protections. The drip-drip-drip of a rainstorm
erodes a hillside; you’re not too worried until suddenly there’s 2’ of mud
in your living room.
I think we all know who is getting the short end of this stick to perch on,
and it isn’t the land developers and oil companies.
I hope this refutation is cool enough, while also lacking troublesome
Good birding,
Kathryn Ostermier

Somerville, MA

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 12:29 PM, David Gibson <20cabot...> wrote:

> Suzanne, Would appreciate a more thoughtful response. A little less
> passion, and a little more reason. Coolly refute some of the points made in
> the article. The article isn't propaganda (let alone 'right wing'), but
> represents another, but perhaps not prevailing, point of view. I, and many
> others (including serious birders), do not think that changes to the MBTA
> that reflect its original interpretation/implementation will be calamitous
> for birds or the environment. Dave Gibson, Chesapeake, VA
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:29 AM, Suzanne Sullivan <swampy435...>
> wrote:
>> Wow what a bunch of right wing propaganda. What an insult to the
>> intelligence of birders. The “dewatering" of the migratory bird act is
>> nothing more than to give relief to corporations in the energy sector for
>> “inadvertently” killing birds with turbines and oil spills. Plain and
>> simple. How about really “draining" the real swamp instead of protections
>> for birds.
>> Suzanne Sullivan
>> Wilmington Ma <swampy435...>
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, David Gibson <20cabot...> wrote:
>>> Hi all, For folks who are concerned about changes that have been made to
>>> the above, here is an article that hopefully will shed some light on those
>>> changes. It isn't all gloom and doom.
>>> -and-justice/commentary/bird-regulation-might-have-made-you-
>>> criminal-not-anymore
>>> Dave Gibson Chesapeake, VA
>> --
>> Suzanne M. Sullivan
>> Wilmington, MA
>> <swampy435...>
>> "The self evident vision of who we are as a free and caring nation, and
>> the ideal to fulfill this destiny is stronger than the division of those
>> who's only vision is of themselves. “ SMB
>> Be the Voice of the River

Kathryn Ostermier

Join us on Facebook!