It would seem that most of Sarah Palin’s environmental record consists of anti-green movement (brown movement?) aims. First and foremost, she pushed to open the ANWR for drilling and the construction of a natural gas pipeline, with an elimination of the gas tax and $1,200 for each Alaskan to help pay their energy bills. She cites all of this under a desire to have a stable, active relationship with big oil companies.
Also she sued the interior department of the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species because of ‘economic impacts.’
Also, she shot and killed a moose on TV for political gain. Hunting in itself I have nothing against, but I do against ‘snuff films,’ as it was so deemed by Aaron Sorkin http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-sorkin/sarah-palin-killing-animals_b_793600.html
In my opinion as well as the opinion of many others, her administration was not environmentally friendly at all, which is especially tragic considering the uniqueness of the Alaskan wildlife and ecosystem in the United States.
As governor of Alaska, Palin did very little to address Alaska’s shrinking sea ice, despite having funds allocated by the state for the purpose. She sued the federal government in an effort to get polar bears off of the endangered species list. She expanded Alaska’s predator control program, even offering a $150 bounty for each wolf killed until the bounty was ruled illegal by the courts. She is notoriously pro oil and gas drilling, even in Alaska’s protected wildlife and fish rich regions.
All in all, I would say that she is not pro-environment.
That’s a big question, and I hope there will be plenty of answers to cover what I don’t. From a wildlife conservation perspective, I submit that Sarah Palin is not pro-environment. She supported drilling in Alaska, voted against an initiative to protect the waters that spawn the salmon harvested at Bristol Bay from mine pollution. She disagreed with listing polar bears and beluga whales on the endangered species list and has spent public money to oppose a ban on the shooting of wolves from helicopters (a sport which she helped in the creation of). Overall, statements she has made implies that her true stance on climate change is that there is nothing that government should do about it, if it is even a real problem.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC