SRES-211-119
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2831; text: CR S2843)
Sponsored by Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
What it does
This resolution designates May 10, 2025, as "World Migratory Bird Day." It encourages Americans to celebrate and support migratory bird conservation through education, stewardship, community engagement, and birdwatching. The resolution has no binding legal effect and does not appropriate funds, create programs, or impose any requirements.
Who benefits
Conservation organizations and wildlife advocacy groups that gain a platform for public outreach. Birdwatching and outdoor recreation businesses that may see increased public interest. Wildlife refuges, parks, zoos, and aquariums that host related events. Educators and community organizations engaged in environmental awareness efforts. Indirectly, the roughly 100 million Americans who participate in bird-related recreation.
Who is hurt
No group is directly harmed by this resolution. As a purely symbolic, non-binding measure, it imposes no costs, restrictions, or obligations on any individual, business, or government entity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that symbolic resolutions serve a meaningful public education function by drawing national attention to documented ecological trends — including a net loss of 3 billion birds in North America over the past 50 years — and to the $279 billion in annual economic output generated by bird-related recreation. They contend that congressional recognition amplifies awareness campaigns already underway at wildlife refuges, parks, and community organizations across the country.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that commemorative resolutions consume limited congressional floor time without producing any enforceable policy outcome, and that the ecological concerns cited in the resolution's preamble — habitat loss, light pollution, urban expansion — would be better addressed through substantive legislation such as funding for the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or wetlands conservation programs. They contend that symbolic gestures can substitute for, rather than catalyze, meaningful legislative action.