Polar bear added to endangered species list

[BillyGoat]

Can't polar bears be legally hunted in some countries even if you are not an Inuit?

Polar bear added to endangered species list
Polar bear populations on the decline
Alexander Kutskiy / Business Wire

"The science is absolutely clear that polar bear needs protection under the Endangered Species Act," said Andrew Wetzler, director of the endangered species program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The animal, whose habitat has been shrinking with the melting of arctic sea ice, is the first to be designated as threatened with extinction mainly because of global warming.

By Kenneth R. Weiss, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:15 PM PDT, May 14, 2008

The Bush administration today designated the polar bear as threatened with extinction, making the big arctic bear, whose fate clings to shrinking sea ice, the first creature added to the endangered species list primarily because of global warming.

The designation invokes federal protections under the Endangered Species Act, the nation's most powerful environmental law that requires designation of critical habitat to be protected as well as forming a strategy to assist the bear population's recovery.

The decision came only after a U.S. District Court in Oakland forced the Bush administration's hand by imposing a May 15 deadline for the decision that was supposed to have been completed by Jan. 9.

It was the first time in more than two years that the Interior Department extended protections to another species under the Endangered Species Act -- the longest hiatus of new listings by the department since President Richard Nixon signed the law in 1973.

Pressure has been mounting from inside and outside the government. Various congressional committees have held hearings to nudge the administration to protect the bear and complained about delays on the decision. Meanwhile, the government marched ahead on Feb. 6 to open offshore oil fields to exploratory drilling in prime polar bear habitat.

The court's deadline evolved from a lawsuit seeking a court order to force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to comply with the legal deadline for the decision and another suit challenging the offshore leases. And then the Interior Department's inspector general opened an investigation into allegations that the decision had been detained by "inappropriate political influence."

The yearlong clock began ticking when Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne on Dec. 27, 2006, announced that there was sufficient scientific evidence of the bear's melting habitat to officially propose that the polar bear join the list of species threatened with extinction.

The proposal did not include designating critical habitat. Nor did it include a scientific analysis of the causes of climate change, which Kempthorne said was beyond the scope of scientific review under the Endangered Species Act. He directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work with the public and the scientific community to broaden understanding of what is happening to the species.

Since then, the arctic sea ice last summer retreated to record levels -- a retreat that about half of the climate modelers did not think would happen until 2050.

In September, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey released a comprehensive nine-volume analysis of the science and reached a dire forecast: Two-thirds of the bear's habitat would disappear by 2050.

Polar bears are experts at hunting ringed seals and other prey on sea ice. But they are so unsuccessful on land, they spend their summers fasting, losing more than 2 pounds a day.

This forced fast is an average of three weeks longer than it was 30 years ago, according to studies in Canada's western Hudson Bay. This gives the bears less time to hunt and build up fat reserves they need to make it until they can resume hunting with reformation of the ice in the fall.

As bears have become thinner, the reproductive rates of female bears has declined. The survival rates of cubs have fallen, too. Overall, the western Hudson Bay population has dropped by 22% since 1987.

These bears in the Hudson Bay are among the best studied populations. Scientists don't know if similar trends exist elsewhere in the Arctic, which is a vast and forbidding place to conduct field world. Surveys have shown other problems, including bears swimming and drowning in open waters left by ever-increasing gaps in the sea ice and cannibalism among hungry bears.

Overall, scientists believe the global population of 20,000 to 25,000 bears remains robust. But virtually all polar bear experts predict rapid population declines in the Arctic, which is warming faster than anywhere else in the word, and changing too rapidly for the bears to adapt and find another source of food.

A group of Canadian scientists last month declared the polar bear as a "species of concern," but stopped short of saying it was "threatened" with extinction -- a designation that could have restricted hunting by Canada's Inuit people.

Canada has about two-thirds of the world's polar bear population. Interior Secretary Kempthorne joined Canada's environmental minister last week to sign an agreement that the two governments would form an intergovernmental group with tribal government to consider "the best available scientific information and aboriginal traditional knowledge."

The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, which operates in Canada's far north, recently proposed reducing the quota of polar bears hunted in Baffin Bay, a proposal opposed by Inuit trappers and hunters saying their traditional knowledge reveals there are too many bears in the area.

Meanwhile, in the United States, conservation groups in recent months have urged the Interior Department to give the polar bear a higher designation, one of "endangered with extinction," rather than mere "threatened."

 

[Dangerous Dave]

Figured as such.
What about it you guys in Alaska and Canada? Are populations really down by 22% as of 1987? I don't know- I don't live up there. Or is this the 'estimated decline' according to a 'proposed theroy' and not an actual head count? Is the pack ice really receeding, or are younger, immature bears being pushed onto the tundra from overpopulation- as it has been suggested? When all else fails: blame it on humans.
About the drilling/exploration panic/ban? Another scare tatic to advance the ideal of a global economy?

 

[Moosie]

Dang.. I was gunna go hunt one this year

 

[Oak]

Figured as such.
What about it you guys in Alaska and Canada? Are populations really down by 22% as of 1987? I don't know- I don't live up there. Or is this the 'estimated decline' according to a 'proposed theroy' and not an actual head count? Is the pack ice really receeding, or are younger, immature bears being pushed onto the tundra from overpopulation- as it has been suggested? When all else fails: blame it on humans.
About the drilling/exploration panic/ban? Another scare tatic to advance the ideal of a global economy?

Is Elkchsr your speechwriter?

DD, you can easily check the facts if you are really interested. Or you can continue to spread your conspiracy theory.

 

[Dinkshooter]

So I am lazy and am not gonna research/read.

Just the good ol USA is counting them as endangered? What ...............we have about a 1/16 of the total Polar bear Territory?

Why not Canada?

With a few beers in me, and looking at caribou racks at the Galbraith Lake air strip last August. I could over hear a outfiitter(One who had a Native G/f) and others talking about all the polar bears the Native AKs killed. THey were chuckling. Maybe those villages are just taking to many. Being Natives I doubt anyone is gonna say so. I wished now I had paid better attention to the conversation.

 

[Dinkshooter]

Ok so I did go back and read. I'll shut up now. Except for the Native talk.

 

[1_pointer]

In a similar article I read, last week I think, one polar bear researcher was claiming that the population was at or nearing a some sort of high point even with the decline of habitat...

Since then, the arctic sea ice last summer retreated to record levels -- a retreat that about half of the climate modelers did not think would happen until 2050.

In September, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey released a comprehensive nine-volume analysis of the science and reached a dire forecast: Two-thirds of the bear's habitat would disappear by 2050.

These two sentences are why I am very skeptical of predictive models and even more the use of them for management!

 

[Dangerous Dave]

Oak, at least you challenge me to think things over from time to time. Like most of us, I don't know much about Polar bears, so I prefer to defer to those who do. Still, I make it a habit NOT to read/research biased, predisposed, applied theories concerning any species' preservation. The biggest out and out lies I've ever read are in the newspapers or on the net. This is why I asked if any locals way up north had any input. I'd believe them before I'd believe anything.

 

[Oak]

DD, it is always best to read the data yourself and make your own conclusions. Here is the USGS data referenced in the original article.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/special/polar_bears/

 

[BillyGoat]

Artic Sees Massive Gain in Ice Coverage

"Earlier this year, concerns over global warming led the US to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal's numbers were increasing."

1_pointer, why are you so skeptical of predictive models?

 

[1_pointer]

Models, schmodels, I've seen too many of them not work in too many cases. Funny that you bring that up as the news last night was saying how much ice pack Greenland has lost... Methinks some folks WANT there to be a problem.