A Common-Sense Vote

National Wildlife, Oct-Nov, 2000

All of us who vote November 7 can make our ballots count for common- sense conservation.

But beware of candidates who talk the talk of "common-sense" measures to conserve our natural environment with no intention to walk the walk.

Common-sense conservation means finding solutions that work for people and for wildlife. But, to strike that balance we must be willing to change our behavior and recognize that laws and regulations are often important tools to make it happen. We must also curb wasteful consumption and invest in restoring the health of the habitats that sustain human and wildlife communities alike.

In short, we must take responsibility for the future of our world and expect our government to help guide the way.

For example, common-sense conservation has restored wolves to the Northern Rockies and the upper Midwest while respecting the legitimate needs of people living in wolf habitat. But those people have had to adjust to living with wolves, including running the risk of occasional livestock losses and other inconveniences. And it took a strong federal government role to develop, implement and fund the recovery plan. Federal leadership, individual sacrifices and money will also be needed to expand wolf recovery and to bring back other species.

A similar mix of private and public involvement is necessary if we hope to stem the threat of global climate change without forgoing economic growth and opportunity.

Cutting U.S. emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gasses will take federal action to close legal loopholes that let old coal-fired power plants avoid modern pollution limits. Government intervention will also be needed to require the same fuel economy of sport-utility vehicles that's now expected of cars. In addition, both government and private industry must invest more in energy-efficient technologies. And each of us will need to change how we use energy, including the kind of appliances and light bulbs we buy.

Unfortunately, during election season, some candidates seek to convince voters that conservation progress comes easy. They use "common sense" as a mantra to shout down ideas that involve cost, sacrifice or federal involvement. Then, they go off to establish their conservation credentials by having their pictures taken planting trees or picking up litter. Don't let them get away with it.

Find out whether the candidates recognize the legitimate federal role in setting and enforcing conservation safeguards. Of course, federal action is not the only-nor always the best-approach. But strong federal safeguards like the Endangered Species Act, clean air and water laws and energy-efficiency standards provide the foundation upon which others can build innovative, common-sense solutions.

Ask whether the candidates acknowledge the responsibilities that accompany rights such as property ownership. A candidate who is passionate about property rights but less committed to a "land ethic" that conserves and restores habitat is unlikely to help strike a balance between the needs of people and wildlife.

And, of course, check any conservation voting records.

Then, choose carefully whom you elect to public office, at every level. Applying common sense on election day can help keep the wild alive for future generations.