Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.

In the News

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

P is for Procrastination

Polar bear listing decision delayed, again

Posted at 8:22 AM on 18 Apr 2008

Polar bear.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has announced that it needs 10 more weeks to decide whether to list polar bears as a threatened or endangered species. The agency's self-imposed deadline is now June 30; the original deadline was Jan. 9. The USFWS says it needs time to review the legal and policy implications of a listing, but litigious greens suspect the delay may have something to do with the feds' selloff of drilling leases in polar-bear habitat. Says Kassie Siegel of the Center for Biological Diversity, "These are not questions for attorneys. They're questions for scientists."

source:  Associated Press

< Previous | Next >


Comments: (18 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

US Fish & Wildlife, not EPA!

EPA does not list federal species.  The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service does.  (Or the National Marine Fisheries Service, in the case of marine species).

In basketball, this is known as ...

"playing out the clock".  

Hmmm.  Do you think FWS and the White House (which is where this is really being held-up right now) might be able to delay this decision, again, until, oh, next Jan 20th?  (Or Nov 4, at least?)

oops!

Thanks, GonzoDon. Fixed.

www.grist.org
Threatening Species


Instead of threatened species, how about recognizing "threatening" species?

The polar bear is the ultimate omnivore.

His rapaciousness is responsible for many, many seal killings each year.   Left to its own devices, the polar bear would harm almost any environment and other species.

I am glad the polar bear is contained...and even gladder if the numbers of this horrible beast get reduced.


Threatening Back

Interesting, jabailo.  The other day, I heard the polar bear saying the same thing about you.

polar bear as icon

(I usually rather enjoy John Bailo's perversities.  This time, no.)

Why the Feds feel that they need still more time, is plainly suspicious.

As wonderful as polar bears themselves are, it should be understood that they are just one member of several complex Arctic or sub-Arctic ecosystems.  When we work to save polar bears, we are in fact working to save a great number of other animals, mammals, birds and fish.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Polar bear - threatened species?

So what? Does it help to declare the polar bear a threatened species? No. Not at all. We will continue business as normal. The polar bear will die out, like many other animals and fish. Climate change will disrupt our societies. But even then we will not understand that we are the cause with our exuberant numbers and per capita consumption. Then it'll be our turn to die out. No food, no cars, no cell phones, no coke, no nothing. End of story.

e r i c a u c i e l @ y a h o o . c o . u k
Well said

Well said Gonzo.I heard the same thing from a polar bear.
 You are on the mark ericauciel.Mother earth will cleanse herself of our infestation and then go on.

Why not ask why!?
Of Bears and Men

While it is perfectly true that if I ever see a polar bear in the wild, I would MUCH prefer that it be several hundred yards away from me and on the other side of an impassable river or ravine, I can't say that I'd be sorry to see them disappear.

The major flaw in the argument that wild creatures are destructive monsters that will eventually wipe out one or more prey species is that wild animals don't ever kill more prey than they can consume. There are a few exceptions with animals that bury or store food for a short while, but the fact remains that they are intending to consume that organism in the near future. In short, wild creatures are NOT like humans in that we kill other creatures "for fun."

I also find jabailo mostly interesting (if paranoid), but I'm afraid I run into his point of view slightly more often than I can stand among my students and I've been growing less and less patient with it.

As an example of a similar argument, some of my students think that if we stop eating meat, cows will overrun our planet. Ahh well... we educate where and when we can, I guess.

If you continue to do what you've always done you'll continue to get what you've always got. - Yogi Berra

Cows, overrunning anything?

E.g., crouching in overhanging limbs, waiting to pounce?  Terrifying!

One wonders if the students who think that sort of thought then come to my class and say that when asked the question, How many gods exist?, it is possible to answer all options simultaneously, without inconsistency: (a.) zero; (b.) one; (c.) more than one.  "It's up to what you think!"

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Overrunning Cows

Actually, cows ARE overrunning the planet BECAUSE people eat beef.  The western grasslands of the U.S. have been turned into deserts because of the cattle industry, to name just one of its numerous significant harms.

Let all Bears live in peace

I fear that the Polar Bear may be going the way of the Grizzly.  Or even of the wolf.  I live in Montana where we have seen a great decline in the Grizzly population.  Some believe it is rebounding.  I personaly have not seen this happening.
We re-introduced the wolves back into our state, because we had killed them all off to begin with.  Now we are de-listing them, so we can once again kill them off.
Will we do this to the Polar Bear?  A Polar Bear is just a white Grizzly, and since the Grizzly is protected, why not the Polar Bear.
Maybe we need to re-think about what we are leaving for our children and grandchildren...A baron land.  When all the animals have disappeard, what will will destroy then?

The Law

Good point, Wolverine, about cattle, a favorite flavor in Animal Lover's Montana, where I once briefly lived, and did not ingratiate myself with the neighbors by insisting on remaining vegetarian.

Animal Lover,
do you know the elegant little book by Rick Bass, "The Nine Mile Wolves," about the reintroduction of wolves around 1990 in the northwestern corner of Montana?  I highly recommend it.

Polar bears are rather different from grizzlies in some important respects.  But you are right, AL, that they both deserve to be protected.

The issue of "The Law" would seem to have to do with minimizing the legal responsibilities of petroleum companies, hoping to drill in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas; and perhaps other businesses too, such as shipping companies hoping to exploit the newly opened Northwest Passage.

Ideally, other animals beside the polar bear, such as several seal species now being studied, should be listed as endangered.  All Arctic and sub-Arctic animals are in trouble; and the quicker and more forcefully that is recognized, the sooner some good conservation work in the whole region can be implemented.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Ranchers need wolves

Wolves keep cattle bunched together and moving. They also keep the cattle out of the riparian thicket. With an abundant riparian thicket beavers thrive and build dams, which trap sediment, that builds meadows, that cows graze on.

Those beaver dams also keep the water table up which also results in grass watered by seeps and springs where the water table surfaces.

The moving cattle in other areas don't have time to stay in any one area to graze the grass so low they pull the roots so the grass recovers faster. With the root mass less disturbed the grass thrives providing more overall grazing.

I doubt if the biomass of cattle in the US is anything close to what the bison, elk, antelope and prairie dogs massed before the re-introduction of horses. The removal of wolves and bears from the equation disrupted the overall balance and destroyed the grasslands.

Heck even in Texas before they fenced the land and killed the wolves cattle were something you collected rather than herding or breeding. They bred just fine on their own from cattle released by the Spanish. With the wolves there.

The wolves share is a lot smaller than what we have to pay to fence streams and move cattle around without them. I bet wolves are cheaper than cowboys too.

Put the Carbon Back

Oy!

I'm so tired of having to repeat the truth to counter cattle industry lies.  While Pangolin is quite correct that removing top predators causes major ecological harm, the idea that cattle merely replaced bison is completely false.

First, bison did not generally exist from the Rocky Mountains west, and the herds that did were small.  Western grasses did NOT evolve with grazing animals and cannot take the pressure of them, mainly due to their root systems.  Elk and deer, which did evolve in the West, are browsers, not grazers, and don't put anywhere near as much pressure on grasses.

Second, cattle are not only non-native, they are huge, heavy, unnatural animals bred by humans.  Any animal with those characteristics will wreak havoc on any ecosystem, as cattle have done in the West.

For more detail and to see all of the numerous and massive harms cattle have done to the West, read "Sacred Cows at the Public Trough" by Denzel and Nancy Ferguson and/or "Welfare Ranching" by George Wuerthner.

No grazers?

Are you saying there were no grass grazers west of the Rockies? How do we know that they just didn't turn into lunch when the first wave of people came down from the Bering Land Bridge?

It seems odd that such a large ecological niche would be left vacant.

Put the Carbon Back

Browsers v. Grazers

Elk and deer are browsers, which means that they mostly feed on high growing plants.  They also graze, but not as much as grazers, which primarily eat grasses.  That, added to the wolves, coyotes, bears, and mountain lions keeping ungulates moving, and the absence of fences so that ungulates could move freely, put a lot less pressure on the grasses.

Native grasses in the West have horizontal root systems.  Cattle and domesticated sheep, another non-native unnatural animal, pull out those roots when they graze.  Grasses in the east have vertical root systems, which allows them to be grazed by these animals and still grow back.

The western grasslands have been turned into deserts by cattle and sheep grazing (sheep are more individually harmful to western grasses, but there are far more cattle).  It's not just the cattle per se, it's also removal of the top predators, fencing, replacement of native grasses with non-native ones, etc.  But even if the top predators were left intact, the cattle weren't fenced, and no non-native grasses had been introduced, the cattle would still have caused massive ecological damage because they're not native and greatly upset the natural balance of western ecosystems.

West of the Rockies

The terrain of the Rio Grande, Colorado and San Juan valleys is of course rather different from those of the Missouri and other rivers flowing to the east.

In the frequently zoomorphic art of Early Puebloans, including wall painting and petroglyphs, and the rich pottery tradition of the Mimbres in the Gila valley, images of bighorn sheep are frequent, and also pronghorn.

In California, the Pleistocene fauna of the La Brea Tar Pits includes a horse, a tapir, a camel, a llama, a pronghorn, and a peccary, as well as the more sensational mammoth and mastodon.  The behavior of the horse, it is suggested, was similar to that of African zebras:

http://www.tarpits.org/education/guide/flora/index.html

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?


ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Jobs Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcasts
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra® | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks