A Letter from Sheila A. Bolin, 

CEO/President, The Regal Swan^® Foundation, Inc.

***

Sheila Bolin is the CEO/President and co/founder of The Regal Swan^® Foundation, Inc., based in Orlando, Florida. The RSF’s mission is providing humane treatment and veterinary care for swans worldwide through research, education, veterinary care, conservation and swan product development. Bolin serves on the RSF’s education/research/veterinary team, has co-authored two swan care and habitat related books, conducted numerous swan education workshops, co-published veterinary care and habitat related articles for numerous journals and magazines and has appeared on television, radio and other media for her work with swans. Since 2005, she has served as Ask The Swan Specialist for the Vancouver, British Columbia Canada website:  (www.stanley-park-swans.com)

Bolin has been named one of the top 39 conservationists in the world by the prestigious Indianapolis Prize for her work with the world’s species of swans. In 2014, Bolin spoke at the International Swan Symposium held in Easton, Maryland, February 3-6. This Symposium hosted some of the world’s leading swan experts.

In 2013, the Regal Swan Foundation, Inc., was named the recipient of the prestigious international John Muir Non-Profit for Conservation Award for their research work with swans.

In 2010, Bolin was nominated as “Scientist of The Month,” by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, IUCN, based in Gland, Switzerland, for her swan research work. Bolin also serves as a member of the Swan Specialists Group.

***

NY DEC’s Plan: 

Kill or Mutilate Wild Mute Swans

April 14, 2015

The NY DEC’s revised Mute Swan Management Plan is the most barbaric and inhumane program ever proposed under the guise of conservation.  Here is what the “new plan” proposes:
                     1.  Kills all but 800 Mute Swans in New York, primarily in upstate NY near Rochester, Syracuse, etc.
                      2. Mutilates 800 Mute Swans by having their flight portion of their wing cut-of/amputated so they cannot fly.  The NY DEC states that this procedure will be determined and conducted by a licensed veterinarian. 

This plan is exactly that, mutilation. Many will allude to a “clipping”.  A clipping is where the flight feathers are clipped and the bird will regrow the feathers in approximately 6 months.  This is not a permanent solution to keep the birds from flying and is not the procedure that the NY DEC will be using.

The NY DEC’s plan demands the amputation of the flight part of the wings to include, bones, tendons and muscles will be amputated/cut-off, thus maiming the swan forever and not allowing them to fly.  Pinioning is used in captive settings because the procedure is completed at 1-3 weeks of age and does not require anesthesia.  It is not acceptable in the wild setting especially for so many swans. Will the NY DEC conduct this mutilation without anesthesia or pain management which is required due to the procedure being difficult on older or flying birds? Some swans will not make it off the table. Yet, this will be another way to legitimately kill the swans under the NY DEC’s plan.

Once a portion of  the swans’ wings are amputated, the NY DEC will then place the swans in a captive setting so the only place you will ever see a Mute Swan is in a zoo, park or someone’s back yard, unless the swans find their way to a canned hunting farm.

Mutilation is defined as the crippling, maiming, or mangling to cause such a severe injury as to cause lasting damage and destruction of something beautiful. The killing and mutilation of these beautiful birds is reprehensible, especially, since they are the “International Symbol of World Peace!”  The NY DEC states that this procedure will be conducted under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian. We wonder if the NY Veterinary Medical Association, American Veterinary Medical Association or any licensed veterinarian who has sworn to “do no harm” would agree and participate in this unnecessary medical procedure to maim 800 healthy wild swans by the NY DEC.

What’s even more amazing is that two of the largest purported bird conservation groups in North America back this killing/mutilation program. According to the NY DEC, Audubon Society and Cornell University are supporting this Mute Swan management plan.  Imagine that, considering the Audubon Society has stated that this is the biggest fundraising time of the year for them and would like you to donate for their bird conservation efforts. 

There is something that the DEC DOES NOT want you to know. There is a third plan. Instead of killing and mutilating these beautiful birds, the NY DEC can leave the Mute Swans alone as they are not an invasive species, rather an indicator/sentinel species that alert us to problems in the environment. The NY DEC should have read their own report because they stated this fact in their plan. Furthermore, the NY DEC never conducted an Environmental Impact Study prior to proposing this plan. The NY DEC should be required to conduct such a study before touching one feather on a Mute Swan.  The NY DEC’s research is outdated, incomplete, used misquoted references and is completely disputed by new research by some of the foremost wetland habitat and swan specialists in the world.

The NY DEC’s own proposal shows that its purported research was never completed due to the NY DEC destroying the research by either removing or shooting the test subjects. What scientific research project shoots or removes the test subjects?  But, this is how the NY DEC conducted their so-called research. The Atlantic Flyway Council, of which the NY DEC is a member, had members state last year that NO collaborative systemic count of the Mute Swans has ever been conducted in the U.S.  Researchers also note that there has NEVER been an Environmental Impact Study on the Mute Swans in the U.S.  Therefore, how can the NY DEC state that they know how many swans are in NY and their impact on the environment without such a study. They can’t! Unfortunately, they believe that they are above the law, can commit cruelty against these beautiful birds and dictate to a licensed veterinarian that the choice is to kill or mutilate.

You can stop this plan in its tracks.  

Tell the DEC you will not be part of this killing and mutilation program and they must conduct an environmental impact assessment before harming another swan.

Comments on the revised draft mute swan plan may be submitted in writing through April 24, 2015 to NYSDEC Bureau of Wildlife, Swan Management Plan, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-4754 or by email to wildlife@dec.ny.gov

Please write and please sign this Petition. YOU can stop this despicable plan.

https://www.change.org/p/new-york-state-department-of-environmental-conservation-stop-new-york-state-s-mute-swan-management-plan

Sheila A. Bolin, CEO/President, The Regal Swan^® Foundation, Inc.
http://www.theregalswan.com/home.html

RELATED VIDEOS :  

IMPORTANT LINKS ON THE NY DEC PLAN TO KILL MUTE SWANS

Most Recent Online Petition:

- https://www.change.org/p/new-york-state-department-of-environmental-conservation-stop-new-york-state-s-mute-swan-management-plan

DEC Revised Kill Plan (March 2015 -- objection due 4/24/15):

- http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/muteswanmgmtpln2015.pdf

Original DEC Report:

- http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/muteswanreport.pdf

DEC Reponses to Complaints to Original Report:

- http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/pubcomsmuteswan2015.pdf

Legislative Efforts to Stop the DEC

- http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A03675&term=2015&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Votes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y

- https://www.facebook.com/notes/assemblyman-steven-cymbrowitz/assemblyman-cymbrowitz-blasts-decs-revised-mute-swan-management-plan/942709922419383

A Few Good Articles, etc.:

- http://shelterislandreporter.timesreview.com/2015/05/19/suffolk-closeup-stop-the-swan-slaughter/

- http://data.newsday.com/projects/opinion/matt-davies-political-cartoons/?fb_ref=Default#!/item/3849/swans-problem

- http://www.newsday.com/opinion/editorial/before-banishing-swans-document-harm-they-do-1.10389444

- http://www.13wham.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/dec-wants-reduce-swan-population-21874.shtml

- http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/opinion/editorials/2015/04/14/must-adopt-mute-swans-save/25783801/

- http://carlsafina.org/2014/03/05/killing-swans-is-a-bad-idea/

- http://assembly.state.ny.us/member_files/004/20150424/index.pdf


- https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=814427495302508

- http://www.goosewatchnyc.com/#!mute-swan-plan/cnwg

- http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2015/04/09/state-wants-eradicate-upstates-mute-swans/25518867/

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loyzZ6zMAL0&feature=youtu.be

- http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/09/upstate-new-york-mute-swans/25548607/?utm_source=USA+Today

- http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/opinion/letters/2015/04/04/letters-editor/25296961/

- http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/opinion/speaking-up-for-the-mute-swan.html?_r=1

- http://www.syracuse.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/02/mute_swan_op_ed.html

- http://www.newsday.com/opinion/letters/letter-no-reliable-study-of-mute-swans-1.10088933

- http://www.legislativegazette.com/Articles-Top-Stories-c-2015-02-09-90711.113122-Another-attempt-to-save-the-mute-swans.html---

- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karl-grossman/murdering-swans_b_5012741.html

- http://www.dailyfreeman.com/opinion/20150330/letter-upstate-should-speak-up-for-mute-swans

- http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/queens-swans-under-fire-american-5303772

- http://www.wnypapers.com/news/article/current/2014/06/23/116592/mark-daul-mute-swans-are-considered-invasive-waterfowl#sthash.AwIB8YWN.uxfs

- CBS Sunday Morning Video Clip: https://screen.yahoo.com/popular/swan-song-summer-161153130-cbs.html

- http://www.savemuteswans.org/stopthenewyorkslaughter.html


Our Links:
- https://twitter.com/SaveOurSwans

- http://saveourswansny.blogspot.com/2015/03/thankyou-so-much-for-taking-interest-in.html

- https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009296380326

SUMMARY INFORMATION

I. Key Facts

·         Even though mute swans have been in NYS since the 1800s, DEC considers these animals “non-native invasive species” (similar to zebra mussel and ash borer beetle, Asian carp).  They fail to provide scientific data to show how their effects over the last 150 years has impacted the environment. 

·         DEC’s revised plan shows that there are 2,200 swans in NYS (2,000 Downstate and 200 Upstate) as of 2012. (DEC March 2015, page 1-2)

·         DEC indicates that there were about 200 birds Upstate, showing no increase over a 15 year period (DEC March 2015, page 1-2)

·         DEC 2013 Report indicates 193 mute swans in 2002 on Lake Ontario and 169 in 2011 or a 12% decrease.  (December 2013, page 5)

·         According to the DEC 2013 Report, there are only 17 pairs of nesting swans within Monroe County per DEC.  (DEC-December 2013, page 27).  However, they are concerned about the impact on aquatic and vegetative wildlife of a lake that covers 7,320 square miles.

·         DEC’s own data shows that their control procedures of mute swans have decreased over the past 5 years.  For example, DEC’s management of swan nests and eggs decreased significantly over the past 5 years.  For example, in 2008 DEC had to manage 89 nests and only 52 nests in 2012, a decrease of 41%. Similarly, the DEC had to manage 635 eggs in 2009, however there were only 301 eggs that DEC managed in 2012, a decrease of 53%.  (December 2013, Page 31)

·         DEC claims that it is afraid mute swans will “spread throughout New York State.” (March 2015 Report, Page 8), yet their own report states that it “had no reports of these birds [swans on Lake Ontario] moving south (e.g., to any of the Finger Lakes), even during harsh winters.  Swans banded on Long Island were nearly as sedentary as those banded on Lake Ontario. Only four (4%) of 102 birds banded on Long Island moved >50 km, and nearly all movements followed shorelines or water bodies.” (December 2013, Page 18). 

·         If mute swans ever do become a problem, they are easy to find and control (they are large white birds that tend to congregate along shorelines), unlike other non-native species that actually are problematic such as zebra mussels and ash borer beetles, or Asian carpe.

·         DEC’s March 2015 revised plan intends to slaughter all upstate swans (including all on Lake Ontario), while permitting only 800 to survive downstate (after public protest), but not permitting those swans to reproduce, thereby ensuring the complete eradication of mute swans.  (DEC March 2015, page 5)

·         DEC’s revised plan suggests that residents will be able to still enjoy the beauty of mute swans if they are willing to travel to downstate locations.  (Long Island, NYC, 4 counties of Hudson Valley) where DEC allows (for now) mute swans.  (March 2015 Plan – page 5)

·         DEC would use lethal means for upstate swans (March 2015 Plan – page 11).  It would consider non-lethal means at its discretion only where it deems “practical and timely” to DEC’s objectives and only if outside animal organizations fund them.  (March 2015, page 6)

·         The DEC’s Revised Plan will “permit waterfowl hunters to take mute swans in some circumstances.” (March 2015, p 12)

·         DEC states it would rather promote populations of trumpeter swans (March 2015, page 8), but do not explain how there would be any difference in the behavioral issues: “The potential impacts of trumpeter swans are uncertain, so DEC has not initiated any management to promote or control this species.” (March 2015, Page 2).

·         Trumpeter swans, though native to North America, are not “native” to New York State and only recently began to appear here within the last 20 years (as opposed to the 150 plus year residency of the mute swans).: “[Trumpeter swans] which are native to North America, have also begun nesting, but their numbers have grown to only about 50 birds in New York since their first appearance in the mid-1990s.” (March 2015, Page 2).

·         Other non-native species, such as the honeybee, have had a positive impact on the environment.

·         The pheasant (introduced in the 1890s) is also a “non-native” species. However, according to its own website, the DEC has an annual operating budget of $750,000 designated toward the breeding of approximately 30,000 pheasants specifically for hunting and game purposes. http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/49071.html  

·         DEC’s revised plan insult those who wish to protect, conserve and enjoy the mute swan and describe those as “unaware.”  DEC’s revised plan requires permitted swans to be of the same gender so that they cannot reproduce (March 2015, page 9), but fail to account for how cruel this approach is since most swans mate for life and often when one dies the other will stop eating and die shortly thereafter, nor does it account for the recreational enjoyment provided to the people of New York State who do not hunt.

II. Lack of Scientific Data to Support Conclusions

A.    Claimed “Aggressive” Behavior - DEC plan cites concern over aggressive behavior with the duck population, but provide very little to no evidence. 

·         For example, in DEC’s December 2013 report (page 25) they indicate that their observations showed that only 14% of mallards and 0% of wood ducks were treated aggressively by mute swan at nesting time.  Furthermore, their concern is inconsistent with current DEC regulations which allow hunters to capture 6 ducks per day.  The DEC provides no data on the decrease in duck population, or any other animal, caused by mute swans.  There was not one single of instance cited of a wood duck or a mallard duck being driven out of the studied body of water.

·         DEC is concerned about the mute swan’s impact on the black terns.  However, they admit that their results were inconclusive because there was still no usage by black terns when the swans were removed from the area of study. “Thus it remains uncertain whether swans have contributed to the decline of black terns in New York, but further investigation is warranted.” (December 2013, Page 27-28)  

·         The DEC admits that mute swans are not always aggressive towards other birds within their nesting territory, and some breeding pairs may allow other water fowl to nest within a few meters of an active nest.”  (December 2013, page 25)

·         DEC chart (page 26) in the December 2013 shows that all of the encounters with wood ducks were all passive. However, zero acts of aggression were noted by DEC.  However, they only viewed 3 encounters which does not properly support their claim that swans are aggressive toward ducks.  In fact, the level of aggressive behavior was zero according to their report. If they are truly measuring the effect of aggressive behavior on ducks, an appropriate scientific sample would be to observe more encounters.  By not including all of the encounters, the data is skewed and not scientifically accurate.

·         DEC reports that swans are so abundant however their sample size encounters with mute swan is only 4 in total with other mute swans.  Based on this low sample size, they conclude that 75% of swans are aggressive with other mute swans.

·         DEC admits that 42% (less than half) of the observations DEC made were where the swans were aggressive. 75 percent of those were against Canadian geese, however they fail to show the impact of the aggressive nature on the Canadian geese. (December 2013, Page 26)

·         On the one hand DEC claims that it is concerned about the aggressive behavior of swans toward Canadian geese, but in the same breath DEC states that when people have purposely tried to use swans to decrease the geese population, those attempts were not effective.  (December 2013, Page 24)

·         Low sampling sizes are not based on scientific results.  For example, the Report only sited two swan encounters with egrets.  The classified both encounters as aggressive and labeled this data as 100%.   Furthermore, the data is from 2005 and 2006 suggesting they did not observe any current observations of this aggression.

·         DEC cites that the swan’s aggressive behavior “can render some land or water inaccessible for outdoor recreation during the nesting season.”  This statement is unsupported and misleading given that motorized vehicles would over power a swan and DEC fails to identify a single reported instance. (March 2015, page 4).

·         DEC cites to one alleged isolated drowning incident in another state where a person supposedly fell out of an overturned kayak while trying to use swans to drive Canadian geese from a pond on a residential condo property (without wearing a life jacket).  (March 2015, page 4)

·         DEC cautions residents about the dangers of the mute swan as aggressive toward people, but admit that they only received less than a dozen complaints regarding the swans.  (DEC 2013, Page 28).

·         DEC defines mute swans as “aggressive” instead of defensive.  However, this is misleading because most animals will act defensively when protecting their nests and young.

B.     Claimed “Fecal Contamination” – DEC cites swan fecal matter of contaminating the water, but does not provide any scientific data regarding the effects of pollution from run-off or other contributing factors.

·         They cite a study in Maryland about Tundra Swans and compare that with the fecal matter.  The DEC study is flawed because they are comparing the Tundra Swan to the Mute Swan, but then admit that they do not know if they have the same fecal coliform matter.

·         With respect to fecal coliform content, DEC indicates that “there was no clear correlation between individual sample results and number of swans at the sample location.”  (December 2013 page 29)  There were no studies done on Lake Ontario by DEC or other agencies to support their concern.

·         Their concern for shell fishing is not relevant to Lake Ontario, so again no consideration or analysis of different geographical populations.

C.    Claimed Impact on Subaquatic Vegetation - DEC’s also cite to effects on vegetation but scientific studies are flawed:

·         The limited number of swans on Lake Ontario (less than 169 in total), they did a study of one isolated sub-pocket of congregated molting juvenile swans, but provided no data on the total number of swans on that particular area or the surrounding areas or the geographic size supposedly affected by vegetation consumption.  Nor was there any indication, that other forging water fowl in that area may have been present.  There is limited scientific value.  Obviously, depending on the size of the area and the large number of swans were contained, you would see vegetation impacts.  But this does not take into consideration, the size of the entire lake.

·         They admit in their report of nesting pairs of swans are isolated in nature.  They admit that the effect of nesting pairs would be minimal on vegetation.  When conducting their studies the DEC states that it “purposely avoided those locations of territorial swans.”  DEC admits “long-term studies would be needed to measure the full impact of mute swan forging.”  (2013 DEC Report – page 23)

Information from Article by Hugh Raffles, Professor of Anthropology

(Doctorate from the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/opinion/speaking-up-for-the-mute-swan.html?_r=0

·         In 2004, US Congress, under pressure from an alliance of waterfowl hunters and conservation organizations, specifically to withdraw protection from mute swans and other nonnative species. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/opinion/speaking-up-for-the-mute-swan.html?_r=0

·         If the birds have an appetite for subaquatic vegetation, it may have local effects, but as they compose about half of 1 percent of New York’s more than 400,000 waterfowl, the impact on the state’s ecosystems is minor. And if, as the state claims but has difficulty demonstrating, mute swans really displace New York’s native birds, there should be a debate about the criteria used to value one species over another.

·         The state’s management plan is based on a D.E.C. study that produced some markedly inconclusive science. The threat from New York’s swans appears largely speculative: The study’s authors base their assumptions on programs to control growing numbers of mute swans in Michigan and the Chesapeake Bay, yet as the report itself shows, the birds’ populations in New York State are relatively small and currently either steady or in decline.

·         As more and more research is demonstrating, “nonnative” is an ideological grab bag of a category whose members are varied in their impacts and diverse in their contributions.

·         The real environmental problems faced by New York State are created not by birds, but by people. In the nearly 150 years that the mute swan has been among us, it has witnessed a radical decline in the extent of the state’s wildlife habitat and in the quality of its water and soil. The loss of wetlands has slowed and even reversed since the low point of the 1970s, but splintering habitat, sea-level rise, legislative loopholes, untreated sewage discharge and contaminated runoff from agriculture, and adjacent development continue to threaten these vital ecosystems.

·         Because of their limited diet, mute swans are a sentinel species, concentrating contaminants in their livers and revealing the presence of chemical toxicities in fresh water. Rather than eliminating swans, we should pay attention to their struggle to survive and what it can tell us about the state of our state.

UPDATE: 6-9-15:

MUTE SWAN BILL JUST PASSED NY ASSEMBLY by a vote of 86-5!!! (Already passed NY Senate by a vote of 60-1).

Contact Governor Cuomo and encourage him to sign the mute swan bill! S01555/A03675!

Click here to send a message to Governor Cuomo

The DEC needs to provide proof!!!

Bill Information

Hats off to the NY Assembly and the NY Senate for passing this bill by an overwhelming combined vote of 146 to 6.

This is the “Justification” portion of the Bill:

“Wildlife experts, rehabilitators and environmentalists do not unanimously agree that exterminating the mute swan population is justified. In addition, there is debate amongst such experts about whether the planned eradication of the mute swan population is even minimally beneficial to the eco-system or to our environment. Therefore, it is incumbent on the Department of Environmental Conservation to illustrate the necessity of eradicating this non-native species by demonstrating the actual damage to the environment or other species caused by mute swans.”

Among other things, the bill requires the DEC to “(1) fully document the scientific basis for future population projections; and (2) fully document the scientific basis for current and projected environmental damage.”

The DEC does not even have an accurate count of the number of mute swans in upstate New York. There have been significant die-offs over the last two years because of the harsh winters. This quote comes directly from the DEC:

"You may recall we have had two very cold winters since then with extensive ice cover. Mute swans are not migratory and require access to submerged aquatic vegetation. When ice covers the shallow waters, the swans cannot access the plants they need for food (they can only reach down about 4 feet). We have documented swans starving in the bays each of the past two winters, so I suspect any lack of numbers this spring is due to winter losses caused by nature."

The DEC's own reports show that mute swan numbers have been dropping on Lake Ontario, even before the last two harsh winters. Its 2013 Report indicates 193 mute swans on Lake Ontario in 2002 and only 169 in 2011, or a 12% decrease over a 9 year period. (2013 DEC Report, page 5).

While the DEC estimates a mere “200” mute swans in ALL of Upstate New York (50,000 plus square miles). This is only a guess by the DEC, however, and is likely much lower than that.

In any event, mute swans have been in New York for 150 years. Less than 200 in all upstate New York in that time period is hardly a crisis. There is no need to do something so drastic or rush to do so. There is simply no justification for the complete extermination of ALL upstate mute swans. There is no reason why reasonable management is not an option.

It is also interesting the DEC proposes permitting 800 mute swans in downstate/New York City area (only 4,000 square miles), but will not allow ANY in the 50,000 square miles of upstate New York. The DEC plan is the very definition of arbitrary and capricious. The DEC plan reeks of politics, not science.

The bill passed by the Senate and the Assembly is eminently reasonable. Governor Cuomo should sign the bill. Management should be a function of actual potential harm. We at least need to know what harm we are talking about, if any, to guide policy. The DEC is using a sledge hammer to swat a fly. It’s time to enact this bill. Governor Cuomo needs to follow the will of the people, and hit the reset button on what kind of management plan makes the most sense for everyone involved.

*********************************************************************************

A LETTER FROM 

(SOS) SAVE OUR SWANS NY 

URGENT!!!! 

Please read below and take action!  Get the facts and decide for yourself.  Sign this  ONLINE PETITION.   

Thank you so much for taking an interest in our organization, SOS – Save Our Swans.  

I am a student trying to raise awareness about the crisis with the mute swans.  My family and friends are helping me.  We just learned about this situation recently and were outraged to hear that the New York State DEC plans on killing all mute swans in Upstate New York. 

We have enjoyed seeing the swans on Lake Ontario near Rochester, New York, for the past 10 years.  We would often kayak near them and have never observed any aggressive behavior toward us, only enjoyed their beauty.  I could not believe what I was hearing.  We had no idea! Why would the DEC want to kill these beautiful animals?  Just a few years ago CBS Sunday Morning showcased the beauty of Rochester's mute swans to the world!

My family, friends, and I have been looking into this a lot over the last few weeks.  We are trying to understand where the DEC is coming from and why they want to do this.  The more we read and research, the more upset we got.  We have read in depth the DEC’s original 2013 plan, its responses to the complaints to the original plan, its Revised Plan (March 2015), and numerous news articles.  

We learned that the DEC originally wanted to kill every single mute swan in New York State.  There was a great deal of public outcry about this, especially from the New York City area.  There are about 2,000 mute swans Downstate and only about 200 in all of Upstate. 

Last year, there were bills in the New York Senate and Assembly which were passed, but were vetoed by Governor Cuomo because the DEC promised to go back to the drawing board and issue a new plan.  

Their new plan came out earlier this month and proposes to kill ALL 200 Upstate mute swans, reduce the Downstate population to 800 (killing 1,200), and sterilize the rest so they cannot reproduce.  The DEC said it would consider non-lethal methods of killing only where “practical and timely” and only if paid for by others.  

Thus, the DEC’s ultimate goal of eliminating all mute swans remains the same, except possibly in a few isolated parks where the towns must agree to clip the wings of the swans and make sure they do not reproduce.  

A new bill has been introduced again in the Assembly by Assemblyman Steven Cymbrowitz demanding public hearings and scientific evidence from the DEC.  Without public support, there is no guarantee that this bill will pass.  Find out whether your local politician voted for the bill last year HERE.  Demand answers from them and insist that they support the new bill and stand up to the DEC!         

We know that the number of mute swans Upstate has not increased in 15 years and that the number on Lake Ontario has actually decreased.  We cannot understand what the hurry is and why it is necessary to kill all 200 Upstate swans.  Why not reasonable management? 

So this is what we are trying to accomplish:

·       Raise Awareness: Not too many people even know about the DEC plans.  For example, on March 21, 2015, we were at a local mall and obtained 314 signatures in just 2 hours!  Not one person we spoke to knew what DEC’s plans were, almost everyone was just as outraged as we are.  We think the people should at least know about what is going on and have a chance to voice their opinion about the plan.     

·          Demand the DEC Produce Scientific Proof Before They Do Something So Drastic: Regardless of the fact that there are only a small number of mute swans in Upstate New York, the DEC’s plan to kill these defenseless animals is based on flawed data.  For example, DEC is concerned about vegetative and aquatic life if the mute swan population were to expand to their projected amounts.  The DEC reports are not conclusive and admit that further study is needed.  We think further study should be done too.   Without proof of harm why do something so drastic???

DEC documentation does not provide scientific evidence demonstrating the impacts of how a few swans could possibly impact 7,320 square miles of Lake Ontario.  In fact, according to a recent article in the NY Times by Hugh Raffles, Professor of Anthropology (with a doctorate from the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies) states that a review of DEC’s study has “produced some markedly inconclusive science" and that "the threat from New York’s swans appears largely speculative.”  He questions the DEC’s concern for the swan’s appetite for sub-aquatic vegetation because mute swans compose about half of 1 percent of New York’s more than 400,000 waterfowl and the impact on New York State ecosystems would be minor.  

·          Mobilize New Yorkers to Take Action:  Citizens have until April 24, 2015 to submit a response to DEC’s revised plan.  New Yorkers can be a “Good Swan-a-maritan” by helping in the following ways:

1.      Voicing opposition in an ONLINE PETITION at Change.org (and directing friends and family to help).

2.      Starting a petition opposing DEC’s plan at various schools, colleges, and/or workplaces.  Completed petitions can be scanned and emailed to sossaveourswansny@gmail.com

3.      Visit us and like us on Facebook at “SOS Save Our Swans” (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009296380326)

4.      Follow us on Twitter – “@SaveOurSwans” (https://twitter.com/SaveOurSwans)

By being a voice for the Mute Swan, you are raising awareness for these graceful and majestic gifts of nature that have contributed to our picturesque state for over 150 years.

PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD!!!!                                                                                  

    Here is some more information:

1. SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS about the DEC reports;  

2. Key points from Professor Raffles’ article;

3. Some IMPORTANT LINKS. 

4. A Letter from Sheila A. Bolin, CEO/President, The Regal Swan® Foundation, Inc.

                                                                                    Our sincere appreciation,

                                                                                    S.O.S. – Save Our Swans