Alaska fights to reverse polar bear listing


ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell says he has the best interest of polar bears at heart, but he doesn’t intend to let the federal government’s expanded protection for bears get in the way of the state’s continued prosperity.

Like his predecessor, Sarah Palin, the governor is suing the federal government to overturn the listing of the iconic symbol of the Arctic as a threatened species, a move made last year that he believes could threaten Alaska’s lifeblood: petroleum development.

“Currently some are attempting to improperly use the Endangered Species Act to shut down resource development,” Parnell says. “I’m not going to let this happen on my watch.”

Hey Parnell! Leave my polar bears alone! :frowning:
They’re suffering far to much already as a result of “resource development.”

They’re trying to cover themselves and deny the fact that they are leading to the rapid decrease of this species.

Alaska’s a pretty large state. Isn’t there plenty of room for polar bears and resource development? How much land do the polar bears need? :shrug:

They who?

The federal study that predicted the decrease in polar bear population cited climate change as the cause, I hope you’re not implying that Palin and Parnell are responsible for that!

I am, partly, in fact. They are somewhat responsible for allowing the dumping of waste, furthering of oil development and overall environmental incompetence.

Drilling and dumping is the cause of global warming now? That’s odd, I thought the scientific community generally agreed that the cause was CO2 emissions. :hmmm:

Dumping does not cause climate change, but it’s far from good, either. Drilling leads to C0-2 emissions.

Yet physical counts of the animals show their numbers have grown for nearly 25 years. Perhaps you care to share your “facts”?

Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.

You may find this enlightening:
The polar bear is not in danger because of numbers. It goes beyond that. We are causing their habitat to vanish, and without their habitat, they will die.

You might find this article interesting.

They have adapted before, they will do so again. The environment has been known to change before, I am not sure why so many environmentalist think that we should all bend over backwards for a species that has been known to adapt to its environment. As Christians we should be good stewards, but not at the expense of putting animals before humans.

Bend over backwards? Considering the percentage of species that are endagered and already extinct on this planet, it would be a stretch to say we have ever bent over backwards to any animal species. Global warming and habitat destruction will lead to the Artic vanishing faster than you can say “Drill baby drill!” To assume that all species will simply adapt to whatever we humans throw at them is just a bit on the naive side.

And the effects will go beyond them, too. Our children and their children will have to live with the horrors our thirst for oil has brought. I.E. war, drastic climate change.

Wait, don’t tell me you buy the ‘we really went into Iraq for the oil’ bit? :rolleyes:

Don’t change the subject.

oil companies, like all large companies, only care about the bottom line–money. i use to think they were morally neutral. but i now have a more intimate knowledge of how they cut corners and lie to regulators to make more money. it’s a good thing we have the freedom to ask difficult questions like how are you going to clean up a significant oil spill with multi-year ice that can move 100 km in 24hrs. we need strong regulation to protect the public.

in alaska, we have a natural gas shortage yet the companies offer no assistance. they make billions of dollars of profit in this state yearly. we may have rolling blackouts because we lack the storage for the increased demand for natural gas. they claim that it’s not profitable enough for them to drill for more gas in the cook inlet. it’s pathetic. we have more natural resources than any other state yet we have blackouts on the coldest day of the winter. sounds like a third world country.

they need to prove that they can clean up an oil spill under difficult conditions of the arctic. ironically, the arctic is less sensitive to oil spills than the gulf of mexico. this is because extreme northern latitudes have much less biological diversity. the cold and ice covered waters may in fact contain an oil spill more effectively than tempreate waters.

it’s clear that lobbyist run our country. we have the best government money can buy. we wasted 500 million on a gas pipeline dream that has no economic viability but we are subject to rolling blackouts during the bitter cold winter.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit