PRINT
EMAIL
COMMENT
DEL.ICIO.US
DIGG
OUR PREMIUM CONTENT
The Kiplinger Agriculture Letter
The Kiplinger California Letter
Kiplinger's Biofuels Market Alert
Kiplinger's Retirement Report
SUBSCRIBER HELP
CURRENT LETTER
Big-Bank Woes
Begin to Spread
PREVIOUS ISSUES
Does putting polar bears on the threatened species list signal a new approach to global warming? No. The Bush administration, which listed the bears reluctantly, is adamant on this point: It does not interpret the move as a duty to mitigate emissions of greenhouse gases commonly blamed for the diminished polar bear population.
In fact, the move by the U.S. Department of the Interior spells business as usual -- for now -- for oil exploration in the Arctic, with no new protections for bears. Note that the administration delayed its decision several months until its hand was forced by the courts -- selling gas and oil leases in the Chukchi Sea off the northwest coast of Alaska in the meantime, to the dismay of environmental groups.
"Listing the polar bear as threatened can reduce avoidable losses of polar bears," Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said in announcing the decision. "But it should not open the door to use of the Endangered Species Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, power plants, and other sources."
The debate and court battles are sure to get even more heated. On the one hand, environmentalists will launch new lawsuits, using the bears' listing as another tool to force emissions curbs on utilities and factories and limit energy exploration in the Arctic. On the other, some business interests say they'll sue the government, claiming that the move isn't needed because the overall population of polar bears remains vibrant.
Regardless of which side one is on, it's clear that with the sea ice crucial to their survival melting across the Arctic, polar bears have become poster children for global warming, despite debate over actual polar bear population levels.
But with this White House having gone as far as it will go, it will be left to the courts, Congress or the next administration to change climate policy.
Kassie Siegel, climate program director for the Center for Biological Diversity and one of the leaders in the fight to get the bears listed, hails the decision to list the bears as a big step forward. But she says that the administration's efforts to limit the effects of the listing are illegal and will ultimately be unsuccessful.
The most direct impact on the polar bear listing will be felt by the sport hunting industry. Although exemptions for Alaskan natives remain, Americans will no longer be able to hunt bears in Canada and bring home trophies. Northern Canadian communities will take a hit from losing the business. Sportsmen argue that preventing the hunting in Canada actually harms conservation and that dollars generated by regulated sport hunting benefit bear populations.
For weekly updates on topics to improve your business decisionmaking, click here.
E-Mail Article
Print Article
Reprint Article
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
