A group of three environmental groups has launched a frivolous and money draining lawsuit against the United States Government about the missing of deadlines to place the Polar Bear (Ursus Martimus) on the endangered species list. The plaintiffs; the National Resources Defence Council, the Center for Biological Diversity and Greenpeace. The basis for the claim that polar bears are endangered supported by their own "scientific research" and a 2004 report of a possible drowned polar bear during a "fly over" in the Beaufort Sea. Now this lawsuit is about the delay in a ruling from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, not the rejection of the petition but that fact that they have not made a ruling one way or the other. It is sort of a pre-lawsuit lawsuit, because if the petition is rejected that real challenge will come shortly after that. It is nice to know that charitable donations for these organizations, including grants from the government are being used so responsibly as to sue that same government, with the only winners being the lawyers who are taking up this legal action.
Polar Bear Populations
At issue is not even the current polar bear population, as all scientific studies of the current population by actual researchers in the field, show their numbers to be stable and growing on average. "Globally, less than one-third of the 19 known or recognized polar bear populations are declining, more than one-third are increasing or stable, while the remaining third have insufficient data available to estimate population trends and their status has not been assessed. Two of these polar bear populations occur within U.S. jurisdiction." Source: Polar Bears: Proposed Listing Under the Endangered Species Act. So the polar bear population is not a risk, they are at best what I would call a species of interest, meaning they should be watched for any sudden changes. The Polar Bear is also protected under an International five nation treaty called the Polar Bear Agreement that was enacted in 1976, so they have a measure of protection now.
Further Statements
"Today it is estimated that there are 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears worldwide." - Source: US Fish and Wildlife
"In fact, polar bear populations along the Davis Strait are healthy and their numbers increasing, an ongoing study is indicating." - Source - Northern News
"At present, the polar bear is one of the best managed of the large arctic mammals. If all the arctic nations continue to abide by the terms and intent of the Polar Bear Agreement, the future of this magnificent species should be secure." - Source - Hinterland
Basis for the Petition
Yet if you read any of the "science" coming out of the environmental groups, you would swear there are only seven bears left on the planet. Lets take a look at the bases for their claims. First on polar bears drowning; I could not find any reports past the sidebar note that a bear was seen dead in the water during a "fly over" in 2004, nothing since there was no proof of cause of death, here is the original report.
"in September 2004, when the polar ice cap had retreated a record 160 miles north of the northern coast of Alaska, researchers counted 10 polar bears swimming as far as 60 miles offshore. Polar bears can swim long distances but have evolved to mainly swim between sheets of ice, scientists say.
The researchers returned to the vicinity a few days after a fierce storm and found four dead bears floating in the water. "Extrapolation of survey data suggests that on the order of 40 bears may have been swimming and that many of those probably drowned as a result of rough seas caused by high winds," the researchers say in a report set to be released today."
Since this story I could not find any new reports of polar bear drownings, I would love anyone who has real evidence of this since 2005 to post a link in the comments section. So the deaths were most likely caused by a storm in the Arctic, not by global warming, distance to the ice pack or any other climate change reason. Note the line I bolded in the above statement, why would a bear who never had to swim before have evolved with this capability, and swimming between land and ice is somehow different from swimming between ice packs? They extrapolated that 40 bears drowned based on what, say four dead, saw ten swimming? Alternate Hypothesis: How about some hunters aerial shot the bears from another "fly over", this option is just as valid as the theory extrapolated from the observations and used in the above report.
Since they cannot win on the population facts and they know it, they head for the ice. The next statement is taken from the press release for the environmental groups about the law suit.
"Global warming is worsening, with impacts in the Arctic outpacing predictions. September 2007 shattered all previous records for sea ice loss when the Arctic ice cap shrank to a record one million square miles – an equivalent of six times the size of California – below the average summer sea-ice extent of the past several decades, reaching levels not predicted to occur until mid-century. "
Just for the record, the Arctic Ice cap was at it smallest at 4.3 Million Square Kilometres(or 1.66 Million Square Miles) while still the lowest recorded extent it is considerably more than the press release claims above. Source: NSIDC This is a normal tactic in this type of environmental press release, they use exaggeration to lend urgency to their causes, just like in the assessments of environmental impacts they produce at a very healthy rate from their "scientists" who are actually only researchers and not practicing science.
The Real Story
They want this ruling to draw attention to climate change impacts, that do not exist now, but may in the future. So first the petition is baseless and now they want to make a legal statement of resolve on this passionate but non-factual concern over something that invokes emotional responses. Now this is not new in the environmental lobby, it is the standard operating procedure for these organizations who seem to think every species is endangered as a general rule, but white fluffy polar bear cubs make excellent fund raising posters so they are of special concern.
"some critics suggest that the current proposal to list polar bears as threatened is premature, with this species being used as a “poster child” for the evils of climate change by the popular press in recognition of polar bears’ charismatic appeal" Source: Polar Bears: Proposed Listing Under the Endangered Species Act. I would be in that group of critics.
Next the Fish and Wildlife Service is struggling to investigate a backlog of some 16,000 petitions for species protection, filed by the same environmental groups who are now suing them for being too swamped to address them all. I think taxpayer's money could be much better spent actually enforcing the laws than investigating every claim of the knee-jerk environmental movement.
I ask you given the real data regarding Ursus Martimus, do you think that US taxpayers should have to pay for and endure the petty grandstanding of environment groups trying to protect their fund-raising "poster child" and get on the television news?