NATURAL HERITAGE
Oceans: Marine Life [click here to read question nineteen]
"YES. The Pew Oceans Commission states that more than half of the US population lives on the coast, and then of thousands of jobs are tied to the quality of our coastal and marine resources. Yet, climate change, coastal development, non-point and point source pollution, and over fishing among other things are degrading our marine ecosystems at an unprecedented rate. Full protection and restoration of marine ecosystems may result in short-term economic hardship. But, the good news is that reversing these trends can unlock a huge amount of wealth, create jobs, and increase supplies of sustainable, healthy seafood to US consumers so they don’t have to rely on questionable supplies from other countries.
All pollution eventually ends up in the ocean. Pollution equals inefficiency. So reducing pollution increases economic efficiency. By reducing the use of toxics, re-using products and materials, and recycling the rest we can save money, create new jobs, and sell environmentally smarter products that will tap into this huge emerging market. Reducing pollution by shifting to non-toxic materials in manufacturing is the first priority, because it has multiple benefits: it helps the environment, it reduces exposure of workers to toxics, and it reduces risk to consumers. Strictly enforced worldwide safety standards will be necessary to keep countries from “racing to the bottom” (i.e., relaxing environmental standards) in order to maximize short-term economic gains, at the expense of their credibility and ultimately of markets. Look at what is happening to China in the wake of recent findings that toys and food made there are contaminated. We need to understand that our oceans should not be treated as our dumping grounds.
Over fishing and the use of big, heavy gear that damages ocean habitats results from poor management, not greedy fishermen. Most of our fisheries are less well managed than your average pre-school, where kids are taught to share. Instead of sharing the catch, fishermen compete to maximize their individual shares. Bigger and bigger boats, heavier gear, over fishing, waste, and habitat destruction are the results of this competition. Competition is good, but the contest should be about who can make the most money, supply the best products, and take the best care of the environment – not about who can catch the most fish. The solution is simple: share the catch. That way, fishermen and communities have a financial stake in the long-term health of fish populations and marine ecosystems.
To really get at these serious threats to our ocean ecosystems and wildlife, we have to be smarter and more coordinated. Smarter regulations are needed that allow ocean resource users to profit from their conservation efforts, and for treating the ocean as the precious asset that it is. More coordination is needed because we have carved up the ocean, land, rivers, and air into artificial sectors for our convenience and assigned various aspects of these sectors to different agencies to manage. Ecosystem-based management recognizes the reality that all of these systems are connected, and that it is foolish to mistake our artificial categories and boundaries for reality. When we manage the land, rivers, bays, and ocean as if they are connected, our efforts will be more effective for the ecosystems and for the people and economies that depend on them.
As President, I will push to establish a system of marine protected areas, an interagency oceans council, and a national oceans policy to enhance coordination and protection of our marine resources."
Oceans: Offshore Drilling [click here to read question twenty]
"Yes. Drilling for oil on our coasts is a hazardous and unnecessary step in the wrong direction. I have opposed such efforts in Congress since elected. Encouraging the production of the energy sources of yesterday is only in the interest of a select few shareholders. We can do better."
Endangered Species Act [click here to read question twenty-one]
"I opposed efforts in the Congress to weaken the Endangered Species Act. Here, my reverence for nature merges with my reverence for all natural life and drives to protect life. But the ESA faces new challenges with global warming, and needs to be re-examined in light of current rapid change induced by global warming. Whole ecosystems are being impacted by global warming-induced drought, storms, glacial melting; habitats are shifting, moving, changing. The IPCC says that up to 30% of all species will go extinct because of climate change. We need to look at what our best investments should be with limited funds. We must ensure that vital ecological processes and functions are preserved and focus on limiting our human negative impacts in order to ensure that negative impacts to biodiversity are minimized. We need to examine how effective the ESA and evaluate whether endangered species are being protected when they are listed, and examine ways that the ESA can be used to protect ecological processes and ecosystems. We need ways to monitor the progress of species recovery and ways to change our strategies if land preservation alone is not working. The ability to change your plan based an evaluation of its effectiveness is commonly called adaptive management and should be a fundamental element of all environmental laws."
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge [click here to read question twenty-two]
"I have been a consistent leader in the House fighting efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling for oil and gas. Not only is it a step in the wrong direction from an energy portfolio standpoint, but also it is a violation of human rights. Indigenous Peoples depend on the land for all or part of their diet, their religion, and their culture. Drilling in the Refuge places all that at risk in exchange for very little oil when we should be using that money and effort for renewable energy. True “protection”, though, requires that we take a long view; to truly “protect” the ANWR, we need to stabilize climate change, which is causing the permafrost tundra of the Arctic to melt, and causing irreversible harm to this incredible place."
National Forest Roadless Areas [click here to read question twenty-three]
"Yes. I have consistently fought efforts by the Bush Administration to roll back this rule at the behest of the timber industry. Roadless areas are ecologically precious and we should expend every effort to maintain them in their natural state. We must preserve some areas for wildlife and minimize human impact. Existing wildlands should be just that—kept wild. Roadways are for humans and are not necessary for limited human use of wildlands. WALK!"
Mining [click here to read question twenty-four]
"Yes. I am a cosponsor of the bill that would update this outmoded law that gives away public land to mining companies."
 |
 |
Complete Dennis Kucinich Questionnaire (.PDF) | More About This Project