I was on a call yesterday with one of my many working groups – the “MMPA Coalition” focused on the Marine Mammal Protection Act. This august assembly of environmental and conservation specialists includes lawyers, scientists, “policy wonks,” lobbyists, and communications wranglers, all focused on promoting and conserving the MMPA.
Marine Mammal veteran Naomi Rose – then with the Humane Society, reminded us that the first iteration of the MMPA Coalition assembled in 1992 when the Act was being reauthorized. The original MMPA hails back to December 1972 under the baton of the man who might be considered our most influential environmental president – Richard Nixon.
Our particular group mustered in 2016, when the last president had just become “President Elect” Donald J. Trump, because we all knew that the wrecking ball was coming. As evidenced by where we are right now, we were not wrong. And while the MMPA remained intact, a lot of the bolstering and infrastructure that held it in place has been deeply damaged. This includes the gashes inflicted on the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
Every so often these Acts come up for review and reauthorization. This is to make sure that they are performing their intentions well, and if not, how they might be adjusted to reflect the best available science, and the prevailing values of society. Perhaps it was because of this that the MMPA remained unscathed. Americans love our marine mammals, and even attempts to defund the Marine Mammal Commission by the last administration under the rubric of “fiscal conservatism” resulted in an increase in the Commission’s budget.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) didn’t fare so well in their recent revisions/reauthorizations, so there is a lot of repair work to be done. But in yesterday’s call, the suggestion of reauthorizing the MMPA came up. When this process occurs, everybody gets to play – even bad actors, which is what happened to the ESA and NEPA. But given the makeup of the current administration, and those in the queue to take leadership roles in the various agencies, the time is ripe.
So what might we want to add once we unpack the MMPA? Unlike the Endangered Species Act, which hinges on the classification of individual species, the MMPA was the first environmental protection bill hinged on habitat. But our understanding of habitat – even in the 1992 reauthorization, was pretty rudimentary. 28 years later we understand a lot more about working habitats, particularly with respect to the impacts and implications of noise. I would suggest more accurate exposure metrics representing these new understandings.
There are other implications as we employ new technologies – from wind farms and tidal energy harvesters, to seabed mining and offshore aquaculture. So while there is a lot of repair work needed to the damaged regulations, we may also have an opportunity to “build back better.”
But it is really a relief to know that while we’re now rolling up our sleeves, it’s not just to put out another dumpster fire…