Polar bears have become the universal symbol of global warming, not so much because they're cute or cuddly (they're actually ferocious and not opposed to cannibalism), but because it is eminently clear that climate change is killing them. Polar bears depend on solid sea ice for survival; it's where they do their hunting. But when the ice begins to melt — as it has in recent years, thanks largely to warming — the bears can starve and die.A 2007 study by the U.S. Geological Survey found that two-thirds of the polar bears on the planet could disappear by mid-century if Arctic ice keeps melting. So when the Bush Administration bowed to pressure from environmental groups last year and finally listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) — admitting that melting sea ice was the reason — it was considered a rare green coup. Since the ESA mandates the government protect endangered species from hazards, listing the polar bear as threatened by global warming would appear to require Washington to control carbon emissions. Some green groups even thought the ESA could be used to fight new coal plants and other big emitters of greenhouse gases, on the grounds that they would accelerate warming and harm the polar bear. (See Germany's latest polar bear celebrity.)But there was a catch. While declaring the polar bear threatened by global warming, the Bush Interior Department added a rule that limited the use of the ESA to curb greenhouse gas emissions. In other words, even though science says that global warming is directly hurting polar bears and man-made carbon emissions are the chief cause of global warming, Washington wouldn't be allowed to use the ESA to do anything about it.President Barack Obama had promised to review those last-minute Bush Administration changes to the ESA. And green groups were hopeful that the new Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, would restore full protections for the polar bear. But they came away disappointed on May 8, when Salazar announced that he would keep the Bush rule in place, claiming that the ESA wasn't meant to be used to cap carbon emissions. "When the ESA was passed, it was not contemplated it would be a tool to address the issue of climate change," he said. "It seems to me that using the Endangered Species Act as a way to get to that global warming framework is not the right way to go." (See pictures of the effects of global warming.)Though he coupled his announcement with a call for comprehensive climate legislation, Salazar essentially made the same argument that his predecessors had: that the ESA was meant to deal with local threats to species, not global ones. It would be impossible, for example, to directly link the increase in carbon emissions caused by a new coal plant to the polar bears' melting habitat. But environmental groups, several of which had fought in the courts for years to force the Bush Administration to list the polar bear, found Salazar's logic faulty. "From a scientific standpoint they're wrong," says John Kostyack, senior counsel at the National Wildlife Federation. "By doing this, the Obama Administration is missing a chance to tell the American people what global warming is doing their wildlife."Environmental groups were already less than enthusiastic about Salazar heading the Interior Department. A Democratic senator from Colorado, Salazar was a rancher more attuned to the idea of using nature rather than protecting it, and he angered greens early by removing the Western gray wolf from the endangered species list. As the head of Interior, he'll be making decisions on whether to open up new land to oil and gas development, and the polar bear ruling has some environmentalists worried. "This does raise a red flag," says Noah Greenwald, program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, which is fighting the polar bear ruling in court. "You worry this means he is not going to be a friend of the environment and the Endangered Species Act."It's a little early to judge Salazar's tenure at the Interior Department, and the Secretary may have a point — the ESA wasn't designed to counter a threat as global as global warming. The best way to deal with carbon emissions is to pass national legislation that would create a cap-and-trade program, rather than trying to stretch the ESA to fit a purpose its drafters couldn't have foreseen. But the ongoing battle over the polar bear is a reminder that wildlife will be the first victims of global warming — and that saving them won't be easy.
Read more…
Posted by Marcia Divack on October 6, 2008 at 5:48pm
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Conservationists have taken the first detailed look at the world's mammals in more than a decade, and the news isn't good."Our results paint a bleak picture of the global status of mammals worldwide," the team led by Jan Schipper of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature in Gland, Switzerland, concluded."We estimate that one in four species is threatened with extinction and that the population of one in two is declining," the researchers said in a report to be published Friday in the journal Science. The findings were being released Monday at the IUCN meeting in Barcelona, Spain."I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview."How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report."Within our lifetime, hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."The new report updates the IUCN's Red List of Threatened Species, which overall includes 44,838 species, of which 16,928 are threatened with extinction. Of these, 3,246 are in the highest-category of threat, critically endangered, 4,770 are endangered and 8,912 are vulnerable to extinction. The IUCN estimated that 76 mammal species have gone extinct since 1500. See which mammals made the list »While the new report estimated that one in four mammals is threatened with extinction, the actual numbers listed were 1,141 out of 5,487 species. That comes out to 20.8 percent, closer to one in five.However, the researchers noted that there were several hundred species about which they don't have enough data to classify. They believe that the lack of information about those animals indicates that they exist in such small numbers that many could be endangered, raising the total to 25 percent or higher, Smith explained.Among the mammals particularly in danger are primates, used for bush meat in parts of Africa and facing major loss of habitat in Southeast Asia, Smith noted.The report also notes unusually high threats to tapirs, hippos, bears, pigs and hogs, while among the less threatened are moles, opossums and free-tailed bats.In general, larger mammals were found to be more threatened than smaller ones. Larger species tend to have lower population densities, grow more slowly and have larger home ranges.For land species, habitat loss is a major threat across the tropics, including deforestation in the Americas, Africa and Asia. Hunting is having devastating effects in Asia, but African and South American species are also affected.For marine mammals, the major threat is accidental death, especially fisheries by-catch and vessel strike.Climate change is also affecting sea ice-dependent species such as polar bears and harp seals.Even though most of the world has been explored, new mammal species continue to be discovered. This year's species total of 5,487 is up 19 percent since 1992.Many newly discovered species are among those that are not well documented, living in regions in need of future research such as tropical forests in West Africa and Borneo. Marine mammals are not as well studied as land mammals and are more difficult to survey.While it raises concerns, the new analysis isn't all bad news. It found about five percent of currently threatened mammals showing signs of recovery.The black-footed ferret moved from extinct in the wild to endangered after a successful reintroduction by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in eight Western states from 1991 to 2008. Also, wild horses moved from extinct in the wild in 1996 to critically endangered this year after successful reintroductions started in Mongolia in the early 1990s.In addition to raising concern about mammals, new additions to the IUCN Red List include:-- Indian tarantulas, sought by collectors and threatened by the international pet trade.-- The Rameshwaram parachute spider has been listed as critically endangered due to habitat loss.-- The squaretail coral grouper from the coral reefs of the Indo-Pacific has been listed as vulnerable because it has become a luxury food.-- In Costa Rica, Holdridge's toad moved from critically endangered to extinct, as it has not been seen since 1986, despite intensive surveys.-- La Palma giant lizard, found on the Canary Island of La Palma and thought to have become extinct in the last 500 years, was rediscovered last year and is now listed as critically endangered.IUCN also said it is issuing a Sampled Red List Index, developed in collaboration with the Zoological Society of London. The index takes a random sample of species from a taxonomic group to calculate the trends in extinction risk within that group. It can be used to calculate trends much like an exit poll from a voting station.The IUCN describes itself as the world global environmental network. It is made up of more than 1,000 government and nongovernment organizations and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries.The research for the report took five years and involved more than 1,700 scientists around the world.
Read more…
Posted by Marcia Divack on September 17, 2008 at 11:30pm
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The majestic grizzly bear, once king of the Western wilderness but threatened with extinction for a third of a century, has roared back in Montana.The finding, from a $4.8 million, five-year study of grizzly bear DNA criticized by Republican presidential candidate John McCain as pork barrel spending, could help ease restrictions on oil and gas drilling, logging and other development.Researchers with the U.S. Geological Survey announced Tuesday that there are approximately 765 bears in northwestern Montana. That's the largest population of grizzly bears documented there in more than 30 years, and a sign that the species could be at long last rebounding.The first-ever scientific census shattered earlier estimates that said there were at least 250-350 bears roaming the area. More recent data placed the minimum population at around 563 bears."There has never been any baseline information on population size," said Katherine Kendall, the lead researcher, who said the results speak for themselves. "There has been huge investments of time and money to recover (the grizzly bear) but they don't know whether their actions have been successful."McCain, in stump speeches and in an advertisement earlier this year, erroneously said the study cost $3 million, adding "I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money."The study was backed by Montana ranchers, farmers and Republican leaders as a step toward taking the species off the endangered species list. Since 1975, the bear has been threatened in the lower 48 states, a status that bars hunting and restricts any kind of development that could diminish the bear's population."If it is going to remove it from the list, it is money well spent," said former Montana Gov. Judy Martz, a Republican, McCain supporter, and backer of the research. When asked about McCain's stance, Martz said "unless you live among these issues it is pretty hard to understand what is going on."Former Sen. Conrad Burns, the chairman of McCain's campaign in Montana, helped secure the funding. It was paid in part through add-ons to the U.S. Geological Survey budget, and a $1.1 million earmark for the Forest Service in 2004.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is in charge of regulating endangered species, is currently reviewing the bears' status in Montana as part of a five-year review required by the Endangered Species Act. The study's results will help biologists determine whether the bear still needs federal protection, a conclusion due out early next year.Chris Servheen, the Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator for the service said the study "was an investment in the recovery of an icon of the American West, which is the grizzly bear.""All the things people have been doing are making a difference," he said of the findings. "This gives us some feedback that the bears are doing really well."The second paragraph concerns me. I find it astounding that after all the years of work to restore the bears and ensure their well-being, we'll rush right out and set about destroying their habitat all over again. It is both very sad and extremely ludicrous.Read more…
"We can solve the climate crisis" organization http://www.wecansolveit.org/ has collected a total of 136,000 signatures to place polar bears on the Endangered Species List in just one week!!! I signed it and I got this e-mail minute ago:"Earlier this week, the Secretary of the Interior placed the polar bear on the Endangered Species List as a threatened species. More than 136,000 We members like you helped make that happen by signing our petition asking the Secretary to take action on this issue. What's even more amazing is that all this happened in just a week.The listing is clearly a step in the right direction. Much more needs to be done -- to save the polar bear and solve the climate crisis. Much more. But when these positive steps do occur, we should acknowledge the work that we've done together. And we should set our sights on more and bigger successes.So...again, thank you!Sincerely,Cathy ZoiCEOwww.wecansolveit.org"
Read more…
