Bush May Create Largest Marine Reserve in the World (NPR)

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Based on the rapid esculation of prices and the global crude oil situation in general, I veiw that with mixed emotion. Hopefully, the designated areas are known to be oil free.
Yes, we should drill on every last remaining acre of unspoiled earth before we consider surrendering our 8-cylinder SUVs and central air-conditioning.
 
He should make one here in Alaska as well.
Wait, I forgot, we have Oil up here.

I think enough of our huge state is already locked up by the federal government. Alaska doesn't need a marine preserve to add to that. What we need is to explore ANWR. The area in question is tiny compared to the enormous size of this state.

I'm all for conservation efforts. It's when we start talking preservation that the government gets stupid.
 
Yes, we should drill on every last remaining acre of unspoiled earth before we consider surrendering our 8-cylinder SUVs and central air-conditioning.

Both our cars are 4 cylinders, I sure want to keep my AC and my wife and I do our part in a number of ways.

Quesion for you... for gasoline, at what price would it have to rise to for you to say, okay, its time to drill a few holes and build a refinery? $6.00, $8, $10? Today, in Bristol, England, gasoline is £1.22/liter and that's over US$9 a gallon. We can be in control of this fuel situation if we want to be... or, we can abdicate to OPAC and Hugo Chavez.

Noting your location; you may drive very little or don't have a car at all.
 
Whose crafting it? I detect the faint whiff of Sylvia Earle (who is an old friend of Papa Bush and was Chief Scientist of NOAA under him).
Well, glad to see someone knows what's going on around here! Thanks, Thalassa
 
This is the part that scares me. We wouldn't be at war right now if the President didn't have broad powers without the approval of Congress. :shakehead: The system of "checks and balances" takes another hit.

While I, like everyone here, am glad to see nature preserved, I can see the potential for abuse.

Actually, he does have Congress' approval. Congress funds the war, therefore approves the war. They have every ability to cut funding at any time, but neglect to do so.

On the other side, the war is unconstitutional because the "war on terrorism" isn't against a specific entity in a specific geographic location. It's against anybody who you can call a terrorist, therefore the war can take place anywhere, against anybody. This is a significant loophole that Congress failed to have the forethought to close up.
 
Both our cars are 4 cylinders, I sure want to keep my AC and my wife and I do our part in a number of ways.

Quesion for you... for gasoline, at what price would it have to rise to for you to say, okay, its time to drill a few holes and build a refinery? $6.00, $8, $10? Today, in Bristol, England, gasoline is £1.22/liter and that's over US$9 a gallon. We can be in control of this fuel situation if we want to be... or, we can abdicate to OPAC and Hugo Chavez.

Noting your location; you may drive very little or don't have a car at all.
As a consumer, I am completely insensitive to the price of oil. Nevertheless, I choose to live in places where I don't need a car--I haven't driven one regularly in 15 years, although I do rent a Prius when I need one. Those are the choices we need to start making as a country. The benefits are manifold, from curtailing suburban sprawl to cleaning our air to curbing obesity to shrinking the trade deficit. I hope crude stays above $100/bbl and if it goes below, a smart (albeit unlikely) policy would be to tax it back up to that price.
 
Last edited:
As a consumer, I am completely insensitive to the price of oil. Nevertheless, I choose to live in places where I don't need a car--I haven't driven one regularly in 15 years, although a do rent a Prius when I need one. Those are the choices we need to start making as a country. The benefits are manifold, from curtailing suburban sprawl to cleaning our air to curbing obesity to shrinking the trade deficit. I hope crude stays above $100/bbl and if it goes below, a smart (albeit unlikely) policy would be to tax it back up to that price.

Wow!!! No surprise though. Cool dude.
 
After the initial leak to NPR the administration seems to be keeping this rather close to the vest. The media has paid very little attention to the story. I don't think NPR even did any follow-up on their scoop.

Greenpeace is asking its members to write and encourage Bush to create the reserves:

Take Action for More Marine Reserves

President Bush is considering designating sizeable portions of U.S. territorial waters as marine protected areas. Back in 2006, Bush was in a generous mood and established a Marine National Monument in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the world’s largest fully protected marine reserve.

Most U.S. waters remain unprotected from overfishing and habitat destruction, so additional steps are urgently needed to help reverse the alarming decline of the health of our oceans.

Take action >> We need more marine reserves in the ocean to restore biodiversity, help endangered species and provide a safe haven for marine life. And, we need to encourage President Bush to follow through and make this a reality!

Link


The Wall Street Journal focuses on its implications on domestic oil.
How will President Bush’s quest for a green legacy play just as Memorial Day kicks off the big summer driving season?


The New York Times mentioned it in an editorial.
 
I guess it is symptomatic of the times that people can only grudgingly concede that somebody on the other side of the aisle did some good. Not that I'd expect Greenpeace to bridge any divides.

Thanks for the links, Oddsnends, I missed those stories.
 
I guess it is symptomatic of the times that people can only grudgingly concede that somebody on the other side of the aisle did some good.
When someone does something that seems especially out of character, it is normal to question their motives.

That's hardly a "sign of the times". It is human nature and applies equally to the Pres as it would to your kids. Shakespeare recognized this in human behavior 400 years ago, and his plays would hardly be classics if they didn't reflect the human condition so accurately.
 

Back
Top Bottom