th comments
Kylie Wrath said: "Whether or not leather is a product or by-product is irrelevant: there are tons of people who buy it regardless. I think the fact that this company..." [read]

thespyofcharles said: "hmm... perhaps i shall reconsider my excessive gift packaging gag i was planning... or maybe do it out of old boxes that would otherwise simply hav..." [read]

Louise White said: "I have a 2002 Prius with 143,000 miles on it. Recently I started checking on my trade in value for a new Prius. Every sales person told me that I..." [read]

Lori said: "Regardless of whether or not this "soup" exists, the fact is that we need to all be aware and responsible for how we treat this planet. We have to..." [read]

Max P said: "Lunar soil (regolith) contains Helium-3, a non-radioactive isotope of Helium which is very rare on Earth. The significance of He-3 is that it can b..." [read]

US Proposes to List the Polar Bear as an Endangered Species

by Jeff McIntire-Strasburg, St. Louis, MO on 12.28.06
Business & Politics

polarbears.JPG

In July, commenter Frank M. noted "One of the most affecting Global Warming images I've seen was a documentary on the subject that showed an emaciated polar bear struggling to survive among the crumbling ice."

Today, we find out that our readers and documentary film makers aren't the only ones taking a close look at the plight of the polar bear: according to the Washington Post, the Department of the Interior planned to submit a proposal today for listing the iconic animal as an endangered species. Such proposals are fairly routine, but this has special significance: it would "...[put] the U.S. government on record as saying that global warming could drive one of the world's most recognizable animals out of existence":

Identifying polar bears as threatened with extinction could have an enormous political and practical impact. As the world's largest bear and as an object of children's affection as well as Christmastime Coca-Cola commercials, the polar bear occupies an important place in the American psyche. Because scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide from power-plant and vehicle emissions is helping drive climate change worldwide, putting polar bears on the endangered species list raises the legal question of whether the government would be required to compel U.S. industries to curb their carbon dioxide output. (my emphasis)

"We've reviewed all the available data that leads us to believe the sea ice the polar bear depends on has been receding," said the Interior official, who added that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials have concluded that polar bears could be endangered within 45 years. "Obviously, the sea ice is melting because the temperatures are warmer."

Today's submissions of the proposal resulted not only from scientific evidence of the bear's precarious state, but also from a legal settlement with the Center for Biological Diversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace. The organizations claim the US government has dragged its feet in addressing the status of polar bears, and a lawyer for NRDC declared victory not only for the embattled bear, but for the broader recognition of the climate crisis as a reality.

The US Fish & Wildlife Service has listed the proposed listing on the website of its Alaskan division, and notes that it anticipates publication of the proposal in the Federal Register on January 11, 2007. At that point, the 90-day public comment period will begin. We'll check back on this, and let you know when you may submit comments on the proposal. ::Washington Post, US Department of the Interior, and the US Fish & Wildlife Service - Alaska

Photo credit: Jonathan Hayward -- Associated Press

UPDATE: Do your part to help out polar bears and other species threatened by climate change: enter Treehugger and Seventh Generation's Convenient Truths contest.

Comments (6)

This is fantastic news, as it dumps federal beaurocracy onto projects...about how they must mitigate global warming, hopefully.

Though I fear the polar bear is already a goner...we just haven't accepted that fact yet.

jump to top JS says:

Good report Jeff. Let's hope that this week's decision doesn't get lost in bureaucracy over the next weeks (months?). The polar bear's fight is not over, but it's a good start. Some may find this article of interest.

Do we really think that looking after the polar bears now will buy their loyalty when the next ice age comes?

Soon as the world of man becomes frozen they'll be in our houses eating our children.

jump to top RJ Allan says:

This item received widespread media coverage in the UK, where many commentators have hoped that the environmental NGOs' erstwhile victory will provide the entree for concerted US government action on climate change. From this side of the Atlantic, it seems curious that the fate of the polar bear (rather than, say, the fate of US coastal residents, who will be vulnerable to climate disruption) should have provided the grounds for a potential shift in US policy - but hats off to NRDC, Greenpeace and the Center for Biological Diversity for their achievement and good luck in following it through. For a British perspective, see Climate Counts.

jump to top Mairi Dupar says:

What I would like to inquire is how many polar bears are left in the world which we know of?

jump to top John says:

nice pic

jump to top Anonymous says:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

th ads
th top picks
th ads