Jump to content


Photo

Update on MBTA legislation


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 Ellen Paul

Ellen Paul

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 1,328 posts
  • United States

Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:21 PM

This news and analysis are provided by the Ornithological Council, a consortium supported by 11 ornithological societies. Join or renew your membership in your ornithological society if you value the services these societies provide to you, including Ornithology Exchange and the Ornithological Council!

 

In November the Ornithological Council reported on pending legislation that would codify the view that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act does not cover incidental take:

 

http://ornithologyex...treaty-act-r257

 

Here's the current status:

 

The bill as reported by the committee to the full House does NOT include the Cheney amendment (not sure why but it doesn't) so it would have to be offered from the floor if the matter goes to the full House for a vote.

 

This particular legislation (H.R.4239) seems not to be moving. No one seems to be pushing it. It has 16 co-sponsors with no new co-sponsors added since early December. It was reported out of Committee (i.e., it could now be taken up by the full House) on November 8 but there is no indication that it is going to be scheduled for a floor vote. That isn't surprising when you consider that this is an election year and the Congress already has a full load of far more pressing legislation to address. Further, very knowledgeable colleagues who spend most of their time addressing such legislation advise that there seems to be some reason that the Republican leadership is not interested in pursuing this legislation.

 

That's not to say that it won't move. It could and if there is any indication that it will, then letter-writing and sign-ons might be  advisable. 

 

In that case, OC will post an action alert.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members(s), 0 guests(s) and 0 anonymous member(s)