Letters: State should back off mute swan plan
A mother swan and her eight cygnets are seen swimming on May 14, 2012 in the pond at the Charles T. Church Preserve, also known as Shu Swamp Preserve, in Mill Neck. Credit: Newsday/John Paraskevas
Newsday's editorial, "Before banishing the swans, show why it's necessary" [May 6] was right on the money. The state Department of Environmental Conservation has not shown one iota of proof that the mute swan is damaging our environment or is having a negative effect on other species.
My organization, the Friends of the Massapequa Preserve, has been battling along with others against the DEC's proposed actions to destroy or partially eliminate the swans from the natural world.
Frank C. McLoughlin, Massapequa Park
Your editorial validates everything that the Regal Swan Foundation and other noted international swan and wetland habitat specialists have been saying for years. Mute swans are not detrimental to the environment and are no more aggressive than any other wildlife protecting their young and habitat.
Rather, they are an indicator species alerting us to problems in the environment.
New York's Department of Environmental Conservation has ignored current research, misquoted research and cited research that wildlife officials in other states have now admitted never occurred. There has never been any environmental impact assessment by the DEC or any other state regarding mute swans.
Atlantic Flyway Commission members have stated publicly and in writing that there has never been a collaborative systemic count of mute swans in the United States, and the present numbers are inaccurate.
Yes, it is time the DEC conducted a true, non-biased environmental impact assessment before implementing any mute swan management plan or labeling them as invasive and aggressive.
Sheila Bolin, Orlando, Florida
Editor's note: The writer is the president of The Regal Swan Foundation, an advocate for swan conservation.
