Some say that polar bears are going to disappear in 50 years, but Alaskan officials insist their populations are recovering. What’s the real story?
There is no doubt that polar bears are in serious trouble. Already on the ropes due to other human threats, their numbers are falling faster than ever as a result of retreating ice due to global warming. The nonprofit International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which added the polar bear to its “Red List” of the world’s most imperiled wildlife back in 2006, predicts a 30 percent decline in population for the great white rulers of the Arctic within three generations (about 45 years).
The nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity presents an even more pessimistic forecast. If current warming trends continue, they say, two-thirds of all polar bears—including all of Alaska’s polar bears—will be extinct by 2050. Both organizations agree that the species as a whole will likely be wiped out completely within 100 years unless humans can get global warming in check.
The erroneous notion that Alaska wildlife officials don’t believe the polar bear is in trouble was put forth by Alaska governor Sarah Palin when she initiated a suit against the federal government in hopes of overturning its decision to include the polar bear under the umbrella of endangered species protection.
“I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time,” Palin wrote in a January 2008 New York Times Op Ed piece. “My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts.”
The real story is that affording the polar bear endangered species protection would bring further regulations capping greenhouse gas emissions, a threat to Alaska’s main economic driver: oil revenues.
Alaska professor Rick Steiner uncovered the misinformation in Palin’s claims when he found evidence that the state’s top wildlife officials agreed with federal findings that polar bears are headed toward extinction: “So, here you have the state’s marine mammal experts, three or four of them, very reputable scientists, agreeing with the federal proposed rule to list polar bears and with the USGS [United States Geological Survey] studies showing that polar bears are in serious trouble,” said Steiner. Read the entire article.
Consider this alternative view about global warming.
Lover of God, nature, wildlife, birds, gardening, photography, travel, simple living, health, pets and seeking a peaceful, healing lifestyle. Life has many hurts and sorrows but within "the [divine] nature in us" we CAN overcome.
2 comments:
Publishing quotes from nonprofit groups does not equate to a scientific study of polar bear population. Granted, the oil industry has much to gain by down-playing the issue but to deny that the environmental groups gain funding and grants for their agenda is dishonest. They have as much at stake to claim population decline as the energy industry does when they claim "no impact". There are in fact several studies showing a polar bear population that is quite healthy, just relocating. Now, there's a point for discussion. Is this relocation a temporary response to natural warming and cooling trends or is the artic ice truly disappearing. Again, both sides have studies and pictures to support their view.
Quote a study or something, please. Give us some numbers. Writing on this topic for emotional appeal surely brings in funding but it does't advance knowledge. There are enough ignorant spiritual people in the world. Don't help that population expand.
The article refers to studies and research science. As to funding and grants ... yes, non-profits gain contributions for study ... but then doesn't the scientific world do the same? It's certainly not rare for any study to have biased participants and all to often we find that whoever is doing the funding gets the results they want on the final documents.
There will always be differing of opinion on such issues and since this website is all in favor of saving wildlife and promoting more sustainable lifestyles, the article fits fine with content, so I make no apologies, but always appreciate input.
Post a Comment