Search people, articles, bills, and more
Voters should care about this bill because it aims to resolve a long-standing legal debate about how migratory birds are protected in the U.S. For years, there has been uncertainty about whether accidental harm to birds falls under the existing Migratory Bird Treaty Act, leading to inconsistent enforcement and legal challenges. This bill provides a clear answer, establishing that such harm is prohibited.
If this bill becomes law, it will create a predictable system for both conservation and industry. Businesses will have a clear process to obtain permits for activities that might incidentally affect birds, reducing legal risks and providing regulatory certainty. At the same time, it ensures more consistent protection for bird populations by holding entities accountable for incidental harm and dedicating resources to conservation. Without this bill, the legal interpretation of incidental take could continue to fluctuate, creating instability for both wildlife and the industries that might impact them.
No reactions yet. Be the first to weigh in.
Voters should care about this bill because it aims to resolve a long-standing legal debate about how migratory birds are protected in the U.S. For years, there has been uncertainty about whether accidental harm to birds falls under the existing Migratory Bird Treaty Act, leading to inconsistent enforcement and legal challenges. This bill provides a clear answer, establishing that such harm is prohibited.
If this bill becomes law, it will create a predictable system for both conservation and industry. Businesses will have a clear process to obtain permits for activities that might incidentally affect birds, reducing legal risks and providing regulatory certainty. At the same time, it ensures more consistent protection for bird populations by holding entities accountable for incidental harm and dedicating resources to conservation. Without this bill, the legal interpretation of incidental take could continue to fluctuate, creating instability for both wildlife and the industries that might impact them.
An AI model extracted this from the bill’s official record and can make mistakes. Check the official text ↗ (opens in new tab)
An AI model extracted this from the bill’s official record and can make mistakes. Check the official text ↗ (opens in new tab)
| AMOUNT | PROGRAM | TYPE | YEARS |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000,000 | To carry out the new incidental take provisions (Section 14 of the MBTA as amended) | discretionary | For each fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment. |
An AI model extracted this from the bill’s official record and can make mistakes. Check the official text ↗ (opens in new tab)
| TYPE | AMOUNT | WHO |
|---|---|---|
| civil | Not more than $10,000 per violation | A person who incidentally takes a migratory bird without an authorization or in violation of its terms and conditions. |
| criminal (implied, by reference to existing penalties) | Subject to the penalties of subsection (a) of Section 6 of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (not specified in this excerpt) | A person whose unpermitted incidental take is caused by conduct that is reckless or grossly negligent. |