http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/news/article/0,19912,696240,00.html
Bush Vs. Kerry
An exclusive interview with the two presidential candidates on gun rights, conservation and other issues that affect your hunting and fishing.
By The Editors
In many respects it is difficult to imagine two candidates less alike than President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry. Even geographically, the contrast between their respective hometowns—the hardscrabble environs of Midland, Tex., and the historical elegance of Boston, Mass.—is extreme. Politically as well, the two candidates have different views on a host of issues. But when it comes to the sportsmen’s vote, these two men want your support and they want it badly. Here, in their own words, Bush and Kerry, both self-described sportsmen, answer key questions on gun rights, conservation, public-land access and other issues that will affect your ability to fish and hunt and enjoy the outdoor traditions you hold so dear.
Outdoor Life: Why should a voter who is interested in hunting and/or fishing issues vote for you?
George Bush: As a fisherman and hunter, I am committed to protecting our water and public lands so that future generations will be able to enjoy our environment. I have also taken a firm stand to protect the rights of responsible gun owners, and will ensure maintenance of and continued access to our public lands so men and women who hunt and fish can participate in recreational activities. In fact, under my direction, the federal government opened over 50 of our nation’s wildlife refuges to hunting. This policy decision opens up recreational opportunities to millions of Americans. In 2003 the Justice Department prosecuted over 13,000 offenders for federal firearms crimes, the highest figure on record for a single year. My record on these issues is clear.
John Kerry: As a lifelong hunter and fisherman, I am proud to be among the millions of American sportsmen and sportswomen who are dedicated to conserving fish and wildlife and passing along the American hunting and fishing traditions to the next generation.
When I was growing up, hunting and fishing taught me about the importance of clean water, abundant fish and wildlife habitat and sound natural resource management. I also have become increasingly aware that we need to take greater steps to ensure that the public always has access to places to hunt and fish. Finally, it does not do much good to have well-managed and abundant wildlife and great places to hunt if you can’t own and use a rifle or a shotgun.
During my time in public service, I have always supported all the elements necessary for successful hunting and fishing. As President, I will continue to support funding for federal and state fish-and-game managers, seek ways to expand access to places for the public to hunt and fish, and protect the rights of law-biding Americans to buy and use rifles and shotguns, so that the future of hunting and fishing in America is assured.
OL: Do you support a renewal of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, a bill that outlawed certain models of semi-automatic firearms? Why or why not?
Bush: The best way to reduce gun crime is to vigorously enforce existing gun laws, so that guns are kept out of the hands of criminals but are not denied to responsible and law-abiding citizens. I support reauthorization of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, but I oppose additions to or expansion of the ban.
My administration has proven that enforcing existing gun laws is a highly effective strategy of combating violent crime. My administration has devoted over $1 billion, since 2001, to Project Safe Neighborhoods, my initiative for enforcing existing gun laws, and has succeeded in increasing the rate of gun crime prosecutions by 68 percent during the last three years. At the same time, the violent crime victimization rate has dropped by 21 percent.
Kerry: Yes, I support extending the assault weapons ban. The weapons that are the subject of this ban are not used for hunting, and extending this ban will not infringe on the rights of any Americans to hunt, including those who hunt with semi-automatic shotguns. It will, however, help police deal with the violence that we are witnessing in too many American cities. Today, one in five law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty is killed with an assault weapon. Innocent citizens continue to be caught in automatic weapon crossfire on city streets. Simply put, I stand with the police officers who have called for extending the ban. Police officers who put their lives on the line every day should not be outgunned by the criminals they are seeking to stop.
OL: In your view, does the Second Amendment protect the individual’s right to own firearms? Why or why not?
Bush: I firmly believe in the right of an individual to bear arms, as granted by the Second Amendment. My administration filed a brief in the Supreme Court asserting that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own firearms and is not limited to protecting state militias.
Noted in a recent court decision, “the history of the Second Amendment reinforces the plain meaning of its text, namely that it protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are a member of a select militia or performing active military service or training.†This same conclusion has been reaffirmed by numerous legal scholars from across the ideological spectrum.
Kerry: Yes. As a hunter and a gun owner, I believe that law-abiding American adults have the right to own firearms. As President, I will defend the Second Amendment right of law-abiding American adults to own firearms.
OL: Do you think firearms manufacturers should be responsible for the criminal misuse of their products?
Bush: I do not believe that manufacturers or distributors of legal and non-defective products should be held liable for the criminal or unlawful misuse of their product by others. If we hold entire industries responsible for the illegal actions of a few, we risk the confidence of Americans in our laws and we diminish our basic constitutional liberties. Unnecessary lawsuits are also an abuse of the legal system. They set a poor precedent for other lawful industries, cost millions of taxpayer dollars in legal fees, and result in job loss and burdens to interstate and foreign commerce.
My administration strongly supported the passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which would have prevented frivolous litigation against gun manufacturers and protected the thousands of workers employed by gun manufacturers and in related businesses. This legislation struck a good balance, reducing frivolous lawsuits while carefully preserving the right of individuals to have their day in court with civil liability actions. The Senate failed to pass this bill, but I will continue to support this legislation in the future.
Kerry: In cases where firearms are criminally misused, the blame should be placed on the person perpetrating the crime. However, in the few cases where it is clear that a gun dealer is consistently selling guns to criminals, gun manufacturers should exercise common sense and stop supplying those dealers. For example, 1.2 percent of licensed gun dealers supply 57 percent of the firearms recovered from criminals. In such cases, if a gun manufacturer knows that this dealer is supplying criminals and yet continues to sell guns to the dealer, then it is fair to hold the manufacturer accountable for this behavior, which is endangering public safety.
OL: Are you in favor of the Freedom to Fish Act, a bill that would prevent agencies from closing waters to fishermen unless state or federal fisheries biologists find it to be necessary? Why or why not?
Bush: My administration has not taken a position on that particular bill, but I strongly support continued access for recreational fishers, and my administration will work with this Congress to protect this appropriate access. Recreational fishers support thousands of American jobs and generate millions of dollars that go directly back to protecting and conserving resources at the local level. We must also protect and maintain those resources for future generations.
Kerry: I support many of the concepts in the Freedom to Fish Act, but I think it is too restrictive in some respects. The decision to close parts of the ocean to fishing has economic and recreational implications and should not be limited only to the views of state and federal biologists. Recreational fishermen and the general public should have a say in these decisions as well.
In general, I do not support closing waters to fishermen unless such closures would lead to overall improvements in the health of the fishery and thus expand long-term opportunities for fishermen to practice their sport. It is clear that some stocks have been over-fished and need help. Closures are one tool that should be available to fishery managers. In my view, however, this tool should be used rarely, since it necessarily shuts out the public for some length of time. Closures also should be limited in size to the minimum area necessary to achieve the fishery management goal. These areas should be constantly monitored to determine if and when fishing access can be restored. The overall goal of closures should be to provide the best long-term experience possible for the fisherman.
OL: Do you believe that hunting is a viable and practical means of managing wildlife populations?
Bush: Yes. Hunting is one of several viable and practicable means of managing wildlife. For example, resident Canada goose populations have caused millions of dollars in damage to habitats, crops and vegetation. Many states have addressed these issues through special hunting seasons for various wildlife populations, and I support the rights of states to make the decisions that best meet their needs.
Kerry: Hunting is a very viable and practical means of controlling wildlife populations. It is used extensively by professional wildlife managers in state game-and-fish agencies to achieve ideal population levels and minimize human-wildlife conflicts. It is one of the main reasons why the decline in active hunters is so troubling.
OL: Do you hunt?
Bush: I do hunt and I enjoy it very much. In fact, I spent New Year’s Day hunting quail with my dad, some friends and cabinet members in southern Texas.
Kerry: Yes. I started hunting and shooting with my family when I was 12 years old. It taught me responsibility and respect for the outdoors. As President I will make conservation of the outdoors and preservation of hunters’ rights a priority so that another generation of Americans can pass on these values to their children and grandchildren.
OL: Do you fish?
Bush: My father passed on his love of fishing to me, and I have passed it along to my own daughters. We have a pond on my ranch in Crawford, and on an April fishing trip, I caught the biggest fish of the day—a 4-pound bass. I like to let the big ones go, and keep the smaller ones for eating.
Kerry: Yes. I have fished all my life. As with hunting, it is a great way for me to relax and enjoy the outdoors.
OL: Are you a gun owner? If so, what is your favorite gun?
Bush: Yes. My favorite gun is a Weatherby, Athena 20-gauge (over/under).
Kerry: My favorite gun is the M-16 that saved my life and that of my crew in Vietnam. I don’t own one of those now, but one of my reminders of my service is a Communist Chinese assault rifle.
OL: Are public lands too open or not open enough to energy development? Should some areas of the West be completely off-limits to development?
Bush: Federal lands and offshore areas supply about one-third of the resources needed for domestic oil and gas production. Most of the natural gas used in the United States is domestically produced. Therefore it is important that we balance the nation’s energy needs with protecting the environment. As part of my national energy policy, I am promoting dependable, affordable energy while maintaining environmental protections for sensitive areas.
As part of my commitment to protecting public lands, I made a promise to provide $4.9 billion over five years to reduce the longstanding maintenance backlog at our national parks. I have requested $3.9 billion to date, putting the federal government on track to fulfilling my commitment. This year, the National Park Service operations budget has more funds per employee, per acre and per visitor than at any time in history. I also recommended designation of a new, 1.4-million-acre wilderness area in the Chugach National Forest in Alaska. This is the first wilderness recommendation in more than a decade, and the largest single executive branch recommendation for wilderness on National Forest System lands in several decades.
Additionally, I am implementing the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. This legislation, which I signed into law in December 2003, is based on sound science and helps further my pledge to care for America’s forests and rangelands, reduce the risk of catastrophic fire to communities, help save the lives of firefighters and citizens, and protect threatened and endangered species.
Kerry: While we should develop natural gas and oil reserves in the United States, we need to do it in a way that does not put fish and wildlife in harm’s way. Today, roughly 90 percent of the federal lands in the West are available to energy development and the federal agencies in charge are not effectively protecting our fish and wildlife resources. The federal government currently is leasing federal lands and issuing drilling permits under resource management plans (RMPs) that are decades old. In many places hunters, anglers, ranchers and local businesses are upset at the way these lands are being managed.
Instead, before we lease more lands and permit more drilling, the RMPs should be revised so that we have up-to-date information about the habitat needs of fish and wildlife and determine which federal lands should be off-limits. Only then should we permit energy development in areas and under conditions that will not be harmful. When lands are developed for energy, we should require that companies monitor the impacts of their operations and restore the lands to their original state. When I am President, federal land management agencies will take seriously their multiple-use mandate and ensure that fish and wildlife resources are not sacrificed to irresponsible drilling.
OL: Do you feel that the Clean Water Act should maintain a policy of “no net loss†of wetlands? Are there other measures that need to be taken to clarify current confusion concerning what should or should not be protected? If so, what are they?
Bush: In 2002 I reaffirmed our national goal of “no net loss†of wetlands, and recent figures released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture show that, for the first time in history, America has reversed the annual net loss of wetlands on our farms.
So I am leading this nation toward a new wetlands goal. On Earth Day I announced an aggressive new policy for an overall increase of wetlands in America each year. My goal is to create, improve and protect at least 3 million acres of wetlands over the next five years in order to increase overall wetland acreage and quality. To meet this goal, I have called on Congress to pass my FY 2005 budget request, which includes $4.4 billion for conservation programs including funding for wetlands projects—an increase of $1.5 billion (53 percent) over FY 2001. The FY 2005 budget proposes to spend $349 million on our two key wetlands programs—the Wetlands Reserve program and the North American Wetlands Conservation Act grants program—an increase of more than 50 percent over FY 2001 for those two programs.
Kerry: For years, we have had a well-meaning policy of no net loss of wetlands. And yet, at the same time, we are losing tens of thousands of acres of wetlands in this country every year. This threatens water quality as well as the future of waterfowl hunting. Clearly, the policy has not proven to be effective and it’s time hunters and others who care about wetlands take greater strides to reverse this trend.
The Clean Water Act not only should be amended to establish clearer protection for so-called isolated wetlands, but should include meaningful programs to restore much of the acreage that we already have lost. Similarly, we should fully fund the North American Wetlands Conservation Act for wetlands protection and restoration. We also should expand the Conservation Security Program and Wetlands Reserve Program of the Farm Bill to provide greater incentives to farmers and ranchers, so that they conserve these resources without facing financial hardship.
As President, I will require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop and implement a comprehensive plan to reverse current trends and restore hundreds of thousands of acres of wetlands that have been lost over the last few decades. Among the elements of that plan will be the rewriting of the wetlands guidance that was issued last year to U.S. EPA and Corps of Engineers field staff that has made it harder to protect these resources.
OL: What would you do to endorse a bill that stipulated there could be no net loss of sportsmen’s access to public lands?
Bush: I strongly support policies that promote access for sportsmen. I am open to working with Congress to pass legislation that guarantees no net loss of access but at the same time ensures strong protections for our environment and natural resources.
Kerry: Maintaining access to places to hunt and fish is a critical challenge all of us face. Not only do I think that we should establish a federal policy of no net loss of sportsmen’s access to public lands, we should seek ways to expand access for sportsmen to both public and private lands. Among the ways that we should increase access are expanding and better funding the National Wildlife Refuge System, and enacting legislation, like the Open Fields bill that I have cosponsored in the U.S. Senate, which provides $50 million per year to state game-and-fish agencies to fund voluntary private-lands-access programs. A number of Midwestern states have such programs today, working with private landowners to open millions of acres to the hunting and fishing public. We should provide states with the resources to open tens of millions more acres for this purpose.
OL: What is the greatest day you ever had in the field?
Bush: My greatest day in the field was my last day in the field. This past year, my father and I hunted quail in Beeville, Tex. It was a great opportunity to spend some quality time with my dad and we stirred up several good covies.
Kerry: The greatest day I ever had in the field was in South Carolina hunting with my cousins; though last year bagging two pheasants with two shots on my first hunt in Iowa was also a good day.
Article URL:
http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/news/article/0,19912,696240,00.html
