MyOpolisHelp Build Greenopolis |
A Polar Catch-22
Submitted by Liv Greene on Wed, 08/06/2008 - 11:51am.
When it comes to the polar bear, it's darned if you do and darned if you don't for the Bush White House. Back in March, a group of environmental activism organizations, led by Greenpeace and the NRDC, sued the Bush administration for failing to act regarding the situation of the polar bear. They pushed for the bear to be listed as an endangered species, and demanded a decision from the White House. In response to this continued pressure, the polar bear was officially listed as an endangered species in May. They received the full protection of the Endangered Species Act except for one legal detail. The Bush administration declared that carbon emissions could not be considered a "threat" to the species. This week the White House learned that you can't please everyone (probably not the first time they have learned this). On Monday, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin announced that her state is suing the White House to overturn their decision on the polar bear. Alaskans feel that this legislation unfairly hinders their ability to pursue oil exploration and drilling. The lawsuit also asserts that the US Fish and Wildlife Service inadequately assessed the polar bear's current population size and future outlook. No political decision is without its opponents, and it seems that the White House will not be able to please everyone with this hot issue. In the coming weeks and months, we will see if they stand by their decision to protect the polar bear, or if they will reverse their decision to promote domestic drilling. (3 votes) »
Bookmark This Page |
Featured Thought LeaderMymother-in-law didn’t realize that she was a missionary for reuse. Shesimply carried on practices she’d started during the Depression.Someof her frugal habits struck me as a bit strange back when I was anewlywed, but now ... Green Tips
Speaking of GreenLatest PostTo the lady in the green prius... Yes I drive a large SUV. No I am not a hypocrite. My "big stupid truck that is killing us all" is far more efficient for me than your little green hybrid. What? Sh... Latest Forum TopicHave you ever thought about where your trash and recycling goes after you set it to the curb or bring it to the dumpster or bring it to the big green or blue bins?! I have! I've been researching it all and figured out that my recycling isn't going... Latest PollPlastics 0% (0 votes) Aluminum 0% (0 votes) Glass 0% (0 votes) Electronics/ other 0% (0 votes) All of the above 100% (4 votes) Total votes: 4 |
That bear is too cute to be
That bear is too cute to be on the endangered species list!
Wrong Lens
There is a fundamental problem with this post. Decisions made under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) are not supposed to be political decisions. They have to be--under the law--based on the best available science. The best available science says that the bears are declining at a rapid rate and that human generated emissions are in part responsible for their current state of affairs. The ESA obligates the federal government to take action to protect the bears and remove threats. Now if the solutions to removing those threats prove to be too burdensome economically there can be modification. But this process starts with science and should be driven by the best science has to offer. These are principles too often forgotten by this administration.
Bob Ferris
Executive Director
Yestermorrow Design/Build School