It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do polar bears need U.S. protection?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Do polar bears need U.S. protection?


www.csmonitor.com

Do polar bears, which have become the poster child for the potential ravages of future global warming, need special protection from Uncle Sam now?

That's the question under consideration at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which is poised to recommend whether the icon of the Arctic should be officially designated as a threatened species – even though the bear's numbers currently are not in precipitous decline.

The judiciousness of protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), in anticipation that its frozen habitat will be thawing as a consequence of climate change, is a matter of hot debate.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.csmonitor.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Polar Bears Face New Toxic Threat: Flame Retardants




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
The US Fish and Wildlife Service has until Jan 9th to decide whether to list the polar bear as an endangered species. The polar bear is currently not experiencing significant decline especially in Alaska however in western Hudson Bay, Canada their populations have decreased 25% since 1980. The need to place them on the portected list is based on projections for habitat loss (feeding and denning areas) according to climate change models.

I recall posting recently scientific articles guestioning the validity and reliability of the GW models. I think USF&WS is on "thin ice" on this one if they place the species on the endangered list! Because: The species is not currently in significant decline in Alaska, the economic hardships will be significant esp. to native Alaskans and the GW models are unreliable.

Your thoughts?

www.csmonitor.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
My thoughts are I don't know enough about the date to really know if the future predictions for global warming are accurate or not.
I can say that I think the shrinking habitat, and global climate change is happening.
I can say I think the polar bear will be in trouble if it is not already.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
I concur with redgolem, although I think they should be protected… the polar bears habitat is withering away, weather we are responsible for it or its natural…



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Here you go...

Ottawa National Post

Fox

Interesting takes on the GW man-made myth and the polar Bear Scare Tactic..

Semper



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I think the United States Government should y'know, just go away everywhere. Not mad. Just away. They do enough "good" globally without saving the Polar Bears. Please stay out of Canada we don't want your brand of "freedom". You really aren't all that welcome.

It must totally suck to be a citizen of the United States which is only a PART of America. The really screwed up part. I'd be embarassed. Amongst young people here you are loathed as a nation. But since MSM tells you what to think en mass (with exceptions) you'd not likely be aware of that. In school it isn't even funny anymore. You are an embarassingly bad joke. Your textbooks lie about history. The teachers don't even try and hide it. They can't. "America's history is glorious", get bent.

I do however like many Americans as individuals. I have met a few that I do think have a clue. They live here now. What's with all the religious nutbars you have? Send Canada a real ambassador not some Southern dork. pray before you fart AH friend of Bush. or better yet, keep him, roll up your consulate and CIA thugs and just piss off. Everywhere.

Save the Polar Bears in Alaska on your side of the border. Manifest Destiny in the guise of "green." Just go away.

Mira

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Mira_of_lurk0more]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Yes, I would very much say they do need a bit of metal to settle the kettle, but only if its full of oil ; )



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 




My thoughts are I don't know enough about the date to really know if the future predictions for global warming are accurate or not.

Hi Red, It certainly looks that way and if you read the articles posted by semper the declining numbers in Canada are in question ie. they're increasing not decreasing.

Now why would that be? Increasing temperatures, increasing sunshine (this is also true) leads to increased food in the food chain and MORE BEARS. Makes sense to me.

Another reason I haven't mentioned is that if the do declare Polar Bears protected, what are they going to do about it? Stop the ice from melting so they have more habitat?

My guess is that F&W will pass and study it another year...


apc

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   
No species needs human protection. Over 99% of the species to evolve on this planet are extinct. No Act in Congress will change that. If the bears can't adapt to a changing world, they die. Evolution. Simple.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by apc
 


I was thinking that. It may be dangerous to protect something that is naturally suppose to die. It could offset the natural balance. But then again, if we are the cause of extinction, then we aught to do something. This includes mankind's destruction of natural habitat and excessive polluting.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Nyorai
 

State and federal game protection agencies in reality can't do much to control game animal populations. That is ever so evident here in Alaska where preditor and prey populations swing wildly from one to the other. Presently bears and preditors are winning out as evidenced by large wolf and bear populations in most areas and few hooved animals. Fish and game laws seem to have little effect.

What the Fish and Wildlife agency will do (if they take action) is to increase fines and penalties for interfering with the bears whether by hunting (now only natives or innuit hunt) or disturbing their dens. They could make dens off limits also but then who would disturb a den out on the arctic ocean anyway?? Also the sale of products from Polar bears would be illegal. Products include skulls, claws, pelts and gall bladders (which are sold in oriental countries as an aphrodesiac).


Off topic: Congratulations mods on you new assortment of characters in the Post Reply department. Anything to distinguish and elevate the quality or our posts, right!



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Another Alaskan :w: Oops, I meant to say


I've spoken with Slope Workers lately who tell me the Polar Bears are so out of control they have to work under the watch of an armed guard to be safe.

For those not familiar - A Slope Worker is someone who works on the Slope for the Oil Companies. Polar Bears are not cute little animals like Knut. They will kill anything that moves. In their environment if it is a living animal it is food and that includes us.

I rank this up there with the faked videos of the ANWR area and when they imported Native Americans from the lower 48 to pretend to be Native Alaskans opposed to ANWR. Most of those in the lower 48 don't know how badly they have been lied too.

I've also noticed no mention of the record Salmon Runs in rivers formerly predicted to become endangered.

Part of science has got to be to admit when they or wrong or have been mislead by Politics. As long as Politics is a factor we have to take anything they say with a grain of salt. Its all about fear. Fear is a powerful way to control us and too many fall for their fear tactics and let it impact their lives. Not to mention keeping us at each others throats over these issues needlessly.



posted on Jan, 7 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 

Hi Blaine,

And hi back
from Alaska!

You're right, lower 48 people just don't know what is happening up here, have been brainwashed by politicos or are just not Alaska educated!

I have a few polar bear horror stories to tell, one involving a government worker in a shack out on the ice. While he was trying to retrieve his shotgun from a locked cabinet (government regulations) a polar bear broke into the building and proceded to eat his face. Fortunately the man's friend arrived armed. When I met the one eyed victim it was years later but he told me yet another great Alaskan story!

Up on the Slope the slope workers never just open the door and walk outside, they must go out into a cage and scan the area for bear and only then go outside if no bear are present!



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join