Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, July 02, 2007
Rich Lowry :: Townhall.com Columnist
The eagle has landed
by Rich Lowry
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


For decades, the bald eagle's most favorable habitat seemed to be The Presidential Seal. Devastated by human encroachment and then the pesticide DDT, the bird itself was on a death spiral in the lower 48 states, even as it thrived as an arrow-and-olive-branch-clutching national symbol.

Now, the bald eagle is as strong in nature as it is on currency and in patriotic artwork. In 1963 in the lower 48, the number of eagles had been down to 400 nesting pairs (eagles mate for life). Today, there are more than 11,000 nesting pairs, and the bald eagle has been removed from the Endangered Species List in a star-spangled environmental success story.

Benjamin Franklin's objections to the eagle's designation as the national bird are famous. He castigated it as a bird of "bad moral character" for stealing prey from the osprey and retreating when attacked by the much smaller King Bird. No one has found Franklin's niggling personal attacks on the bald eagle particularly persuasive, not when matched up against its awesome physical characteristics.

Brown with a white head ("balde" is Old English for white -- hence the name) and a bright yellow beak, the bird has a wingspan of up to eight feet. Its nests have been known to weigh as much as two tons. When in normal flight, it reaches speeds of up to 60 mph, and it can top 100 mph when diving toward its prey. Its eyes are roughly six times more powerful than ours, and its penetrating gaze seems to say, "Don't tread on me."

If a country is going to anthropomorphize a bird to stand for its national qualities, it could do much worse than this majestic, fierce-eyed bird. When Charles Thomson, Secretary of the Continental Congress, made a spread-winged bald eagle supporting a shield the focus of the Great Seal, he said it symbolized "that the United States of America ought to rely on their own Virtue." Anyone who doesn't experience a little thrill when seeing the bird has lost his capacity for wonder, or has just seen too many eagles.

That was the case with settlers who worried that the bird threatened their livestock and also killed the bird for sport. There were initially as many as 500,000 eagles in North America. Robert Winkler writes for National Geographic, "As late as the mid-1800s, wintering eagles reportedly fished the waters off New York's Manhattan Island by the hundreds, sometimes devouring their catch in Central Park."

The Bald Eagle Protection Act of 1940 made it illegal to kill or abuse eagles. But post-WWII the eagles suffered from the pesticide DDT, which caused reproductive failure in the birds. A ban on DDT in 1972 was the predicate for the eagle's recovery in earnest.

It wasn't until 1978 that 70 percent of the bald eagle population in the lower 48 was covered by the Endangered Species Act, and by then the population was already increasing (the bird was never in danger of total extinction since it had always been thriving in Alaska and Canada). As Brian Seasholes of the Reason Foundation argues, the DDT ban was clearly more consequential than the Endangered Species Act, which environmentalists want to credit since the eagle is such good advertising for the act and its extensive land-use regulations.

The success of eagle recovery has much to do with its symbolic importance. States and private organizations were going to go all out for the eagle, no matter what the federal government did. This is why recovering species -- the eagle, the Yellowstone grizzly bear, the gray wolf -- tend to be what environmentalists call "charismatic megafauna." The snail darter and the delta smelt, no matter how much the federal government regulates land use, aren't going to have the same cache.

It's appropriate that the symbol of a great democracy has come back as a matter of popular demand and intelligent democratic action. The bald eagle has always been a source of pride. Its recovery should be too.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Rich Lowry is author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Rich Lowry's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

News Articles On This Topic
 

DDT and global warming
Previous comment posters are, of course, correct in pointing out that DDT did NOT contribute to the decline in bald eagle populations. They are also correct in their statements about the millions of lives that could be saved in Africa by killing malaria-carrying mosquitos with DDT. But I'd like to point out a few more facts about DDT.

Rachel Carson herself, in her book, "Silent Spring" (yes, the same book that brought about the ban on DDT) openly admitted the NECESSITY of using DDT to eradicate malaria.

In Africa today, even in nations where the government would LIKE to use DDT to alleviate their malaria problem, hunger is a still bigger problem than malaria. These nations are dependent upon developed nations for food aid. And these all-wise, all-knowing, all-generous donor nations attach STRINGS to the food aid. Now, generally, I don't have a problem with strings attached to food aid, especially if those strings are something like "your UN representative had better side with us". But one of these strings is "you have to restrict or ban DDT use in your country". And, of course, the underdeveloped nations have to accept these terms, dooming a million people to death by malaria, to save 10 million people from death by starvation. It's a pity that the "beneficient" donor nations won't allow them to save all 11 million people.

There's one other thing you need to know about DDT. Something that, to my knowledge, has never been pointed out before. Something great and wonderful about DDT, far outpacing even the millions, perhaps billions of lives that it has saved from malaria.

DDT CAN REVERSE GLOBAL WARMING!

Yes, that's right. Don't believe me? Look at the period between 1940 and 1975. Take a time-series graph of global mean temperatures from 1850 to 2005 (available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png) and focus on those three and a half decades. Notice that temperatures dropped rapidly in the 1940s. This coincides exactly with the introduction of DDT as an insecticide, and its adoption in agriculture and malaria-eradication programs. Note, also, that temperatures remained low throughout the 50s, 60s, and early 70s, while DDT was at its sustained peak usage around the world. Then look at 1975. This is the beginning of skyrocketing global mean temperatures, a trend that continued to this day. These skyrocketing temperatures began just two years after the US ban on DDT went into effect.

Is this merely a coincidence? Well, if one could not provide a theoretical link between DDT and temperatures, he might think that it WAS just a coincidence. But, if there's a theoretical link, one that could show a cause-and-effect relationship, one would have to conclude that maybe it's not a coincidence after all.

So, how could DDT affect global temperatures? By killing insects. Insects, it turns out, produce carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that global warming alarmists claim causes global warming. And, it also turns out that insects produce nearly TWICE AS MUCH carbon dioxide as fossil fuels, the current scapegoat for global warming. It stands to reason that, if a large percentage of the world's insect population dies, there will be less carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere, and therefore a lower greenhouse effect, and therefore lower temperatures.

That's the theory, anyway. But, as it turns out, that theory is confirmed by the empirical evidence. Increasing DDT usage (1940s) = decreasing temperatures. High DDT usage (1950s, 60s, early 70s) = low temperatures. Rapidly decreasing (to, essentially, zero) DDT usage (late 1970s through today) = rapidly increasing temperatures.

DDT! The SOLUTION for Global Warming!

Regards,
Trevor

Lowry out to lunch on DDT
He must have thought blaming the eagle population decline on DDT has a certain cachet. Or as he would have said: a certain cache. (Geez Lowry! A cache is a hiding place.)

Hey Harry, get a blog!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.