Why has the decision on whether or not to place the polar bear as endangered once again been delayed?

Question

Why has the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delayed (again!) the decision whether or not to place the polar bear as endangered?

When will the final decision be made? After the sell-off of leases for oil and gas drilling is complete? Or after January 20 of next year? Or never?

There has already been plenty of scientific research by the Department of the Interior on polar bear habitats: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/special/polar_bears/default.asp

Answer 1

The Secretary of the Interior is the one to make the decision not " Bush". From what I read the White house is pushing him to have a answer. "Yes" you still can hunt them. To be realistic, none of us will really know what goes on behind closed doors. So let the wild speculation run rampant. If one was to worry, I would address the elemental food chain, not the polar bears.  "Do I really have to provide links for common knowledge?"

Edit : (Tuba), sorry about using your analogy: of closed doors, didn't see it in time.

Answer 2

Because we have more polar bears than we know what to do with. It is hard to vote them endangered when we have so many.

Answer 3

Why don't you ask someone living in Canada or Alaska--- polar bears are NOT endangered.

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba551/

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/200...

It's all about stopping oil drilling!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2...

All based on computer projections "if the ice all melts!" Not on population changes

http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/f...

Just look at how "pretty" they are -- they deserve protection!

http://timworstall.com/2007/12/11/polar-...

Answer 4

The Hijacking of the Endangered Species Act: Barrasso

By Senator John Barrasso, Wyoming

U.S. Senator John Barrasso , R-Wyo., took aim at attempts to list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) during an Environment and Public Works Committee hearing. “This is a hijacking of the Endangered Species Act for political purposes,” Barrasso said. “It is not just about the polar bear.”

Some claim that global warming is leading to the demise of polar bears. If the polar bear is listed as threatened, anything thought to contribute to global warming could be shut down - even in Wyoming . “We are all concerned about protecting the environment,” Barrasso said. “If the polar bear is listed, the ESA will become a climate change law.” “The consequences of listing the polar bear as a threatened species, and linking it to climate change, would be utterly devastating. There would be no area of the economy left untouched.”

“Virtually every human activity that involves the release of carbon into the atmosphere would be regulated by the federal government. Cities could be sued for not restricting vehicles within the city limits.

An environmental group, the Center for Biodiversity has stated that “the polar bear listing could mean that all U.S. industries emitting large quantities of greenhouse gasses - and requiring a federal permit to do so - will come under the purview of the Endangered Species Act.” “When I see special interest groups using the polar bear as an excuse to shut down traditional energy sources, I am more than skeptical about their real concern for the bear,” Barrasso concluded. Bill Horn, former Assistant Secretary of Interior for Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, agreed that under this proposal, Wyoming could be sued for allowing too many vehicles to travel to Jackson Hole or Yellowstone"

As for Dana's contention that they are hurting another expert disagrees:

Fears that two-thirds of the world's polar bears will die off in the next 50 years are overblown, says Mitchell ­Taylor, the Government of Nunavut's director of wildlife research.

"I think it's naïve and presumptuous," Taylor said of the report, released by U.S. Geological Survey on Friday, which warns that many of the world's polar bears will die as sea ice vanishes due to a warming climate.

"As the sea ice goes, so go the polar bears," said Steve Amstrup, who led the study.

But Taylor says that's not the case. He points to Davis Strait, one of the southern-most roaming grounds of polar bears. According to the USGS, Davis Strait ought to be among the first places where polar bears will starve due to shrinking seasonal sea ice, which scientists say will deprive the bears of a vital platform to hunt seals.

Yet "Davis Strait is crawling with polar bears," Taylor said. "It's not safe to camp there. They're fat. The mothers have cubs. The cubs are in good shape."

Answer 5

why should a species be put on the endangered species list when it is not endangered? polar bear populations have increased since the 1950's from something like 6000 to over 25000.

Answer 6

Just another case of the oil industry's interests being given priority over all else by the Bush Administration.  It's the same reason we're not going to take any action to address climate change and US greenhouse gas emissions reductions until after Bush is out of office.

For those claiming that polar bears are doing fine, their populations have increased since the 1950s because of restrictions on polar bear hunting.  Linked below is an interview with Dr. Nick Lunn of the Canadian Wildlife Service who's an expert on polar bear populations.

"The population in the Western Hudson Bay region has declined 22% in 17 years, to less than 1000 bears.

The condition of adult bears has steadily been decreasing, with the average weight of females declining toward a threshold at which the chances of it bearing viable cubs becomes doubtful. As Nick explained, that threshold may be reached, if the trends continue as they have, as soon as 2012.

The principal cause for the deteriorating condition of this population of bears is the early break-up of sea ice. Bears have to go further and work harder to find their principal source of food, the ring seal, and thus the female gives birth to her cubs more emaciated and less able to nurture her cubs. More cubs are not surviving to adulthood. The overall threat to the population is that current generations of bear will not be replaced."

"Of the thirteen populations of polar bear in the world, only two are considered as thriving, as many as five may currently be stable, and the rest are either threatened, in decline, or there is simply not enough data to make a reliable assessment."

Answer 7

When will the final decision be made?

i assume the oil thing will get rushed through before bush leaves office, so not before then.

Answer 8

President Bush has made enforcement of the endangered species act next to impossible.  He has thrown up hurdle after hurdle to block the enforcement of the law, just as he has with the clean air act and the clean water act.  He says he needs "more time to study" the issue, as if he knew anything about it!  As always, he is proceeding against the advice of the scientists, and taking care of his low brow PAC's.  I think this time when he says "more time" it means until he is out of Washington.  He reversed himself last year about Global Warming after all the people who had wanted him to fight corrective action changed their minds.  Unfortunately, no one speaks for the bears behind the closed doors of dirty politicians.

Answer 9

Mostly the oil leases, I think.  Bush has had no problems acknowledging the reality of man made global warming, but taking action is something else again.

It won't be never.  All 3 candidates acknowledge the necessity to do something about AGW.

Answer 10

I don't think this current administrations wants to do anything that might endanger the potential profits from the fossil fuel industry, including the future tapping the arctic. The # one motive being greed of course.

Now that unprecedented boating access due to the heavy volumes of melted ice, huge amounts of oil under the arctic is in jeopardy of being exploited fueling global warming even more rapidly than it already has.

When will man learn? If even the poles are melting does it make sense to drill for oil up there are well?  

Let's get off our oil addiction and start using sustainable alternative forms of energy in stead such as solar, wind, wave, geothermal, limited bio-fuel from algae, switchgrass, and jatropha (not corn its a big scam and bad for food prices).

Unfortunately on a governmental level real change probably will not take place before Bush has left.

Answer 11

It is sickening to me how the Endangered Species Act has been subverted by the left to push its anti-development, anti-captitalist agenda.  The law of unintended consequences for every feel good legislation is always abused by the ambulance chasing left.  Oil and gas drilling won't harm the Polar Bear and your implication that it might shows your bias.   Polar Bear populations are doing fine.  The only danger they face are from "What ifs?"  from leftist.  

What happened to the good old days when wackos were labelled as such and appropriately ignored.  Nobody wants Polar Bears to go extinct but to allow the left to sneak its agenda under the Endangered Species Act would be foolish and obviouisly harmful to our national economy and security.  They constantly whine about running out of oil.  We aren't running out of oil.  We are running out of back bones opposing the left.

I come back a little later and find one reasonable answer (Richard) and lots of down arrows (what a surprise! (not)) from Dana and Tubba, presumable.  Churchill got it right, when he said that those that aren't liberal when they are young have no heart and those that aren't conservative when they are older have no brain, to paraphrase.  I will stick with my brain with the understanding that it takes a brain to be compassionate and provide reasonable directions for our future.