Polar bear added to endangered species list

[Fraggle145]

Not sure how much it will help them... hopefully the listing will have results.



Polar bear added to endangered species list

The animal, whose habitat has been shrinking with the melting of arctic sea ice, is the first to be designated as threatened with extinction mainly because of global warming.
By Kenneth R. Weiss, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:15 PM PDT, May 14, 2008

The Bush administration today designated the polar bear as threatened with extinction, making the big arctic bear, whose fate clings to shrinking sea ice, the first creature added to the endangered species list primarily because of global warming.

The designation invokes federal protections under the Endangered Species Act, the nation's most powerful environmental law that requires designation of critical habitat to be protected as well as forming a strategy to assist the bear population's recovery.

The decision came only after a U.S. District Court in Oakland forced the Bush administration's hand by imposing a May 15 deadline for the decision that was supposed to have been completed by Jan. 9.

It was the first time in more than two years that the Interior Department extended protections to another species under the Endangered Species Act -- the longest hiatus of new listings by the department since President Richard Nixon signed the law in 1973.

Pressure has been mounting from inside and outside the government. Various congressional committees have held hearings to nudge the administration to protect the bear and complained about delays on the decision. Meanwhile, the government marched ahead on Feb. 6 to open offshore oil fields to exploratory drilling in prime polar bear habitat.

The court's deadline evolved from a lawsuit seeking a court order to force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to comply with the legal deadline for the decision and another suit challenging the offshore leases. And then the Interior Department's inspector general opened an investigation into allegations that the decision had been detained by "inappropriate political influence."

The yearlong clock began ticking when Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne on Dec. 27, 2006, announced that there was sufficient scientific evidence of the bear's melting habitat to officially propose that the polar bear join the list of species threatened with extinction.

The proposal did not include designating critical habitat. Nor did it include a scientific analysis of the causes of climate change, which Kempthorne said was beyond the scope of scientific review under the Endangered Species Act. He directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work with the public and the scientific community to broaden understanding of what is happening to the species.

Since then, the arctic sea ice last summer retreated to record levels -- a retreat that about half of the climate modelers did not think would happen until 2050.

In September, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey released a comprehensive nine-volume analysis of the science and reached a dire forecast: Two-thirds of the bear's habitat would disappear by 2050.

Polar bears are experts at hunting ringed seals and other prey on sea ice. But they are so unsuccessful on land, they spend their summers fasting, losing more than 2 pounds a day.

This forced fast is an average of three weeks longer than it was 30 years ago, according to studies in Canada's western Hudson Bay. This gives the bears less time to hunt and build up fat reserves they need to make it until they can resume hunting with reformation of the ice in the fall.

As bears have become thinner, the reproductive rates of female bears has declined. The survival rates of cubs have fallen, too. Overall, the western Hudson Bay population has dropped by 22% since 1987.

These bears in the Hudson Bay are among the best studied populations. Scientists don't know if similar trends exist elsewhere in the Arctic, which is a vast and forbidding place to conduct field world. Surveys have shown other problems, including bears swimming and drowning in open waters left by ever-increasing gaps in the sea ice and cannibalism among hungry bears.

Overall, scientists believe the global population of 20,000 to 25,000 bears remains robust. But virtually all polar bear experts predict rapid population declines in the Arctic, which is warming faster than anywhere else in the word, and changing too rapidly for the bears to adapt and find another source of food.

A group of Canadian scientists last month declared the polar bear as a "species of concern," but stopped short of saying it was "threatened" with extinction -- a designation that could have restricted hunting by Canada's Inuit people.

Canada has about two-thirds of the world's polar bear population. Interior Secretary Kempthorne joined Canada's environmental minister last week to sign an agreement that the two governments would form an intergovernmental group with tribal government to consider "the best available scientific information and aboriginal traditional knowledge."

The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, which operates in Canada's far north, recently proposed reducing the quota of polar bears hunted in Baffin Bay, a proposal opposed by Inuit trappers and hunters saying their traditional knowledge reveals there are too many bears in the area.

Meanwhile, in the United States, conservation groups in recent months have urged the Interior Department to give the polar bear a higher designation, one of "endangered with extinction," rather than mere "threatened."

[email protected]

[Sooner_Havok]

So, no Polar Bear Steaks?

[soonerboomer93]

definitely another item that will prevent drilling in ANWAR

oh, and FYI
the polar bears would be much more affected by drilling there then the Caribou even would be.

[Sooner_Havok]

Eh, the planet can take one more for the team. right?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

probably developed Diabetes drinking all those Cokes

[StoopTroup]

Al Gore looks like a shaved Polar Bear IMO.

[Chuck Bao]

The seals are probably not broken up about it.

[shaun4411]

mmm, polar bear steak.

[kbsooner21]

probably developed Diabetes drinking all those Cokes

LMFAO! :D

[NormanPride]

ManBearPig takes out its wrath against its genetic cousins to the north, PolarBearPig.

[Sooner_Havok]

Polar Bears are fine

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/funny-pictures-polar-bear-poops-mini.jpg

see:D

[BigRedJed]

It was really interesting to watch the polar bear segment in the Planet Earth mini-series. They talked about this quite a bit, and actually tracked a bear that probably didn't make it, due to the drowning situation mentioned above. What I found most fascinating was the fact that they commonly swim dozens of miles out to sea, out of the sight of land, to find floating sea ice and prey.

But based on what they said, the biggest problem is that the bears are really solitary and territorial, and claim huge swaths of land. They get really hacked if another bear comes into their area, so if you're one of the bears in an area most affected by melting, you're screwed. If they would just learn to play nice with each other, it wouldn't be a problem. So really, they're doing it to themselves.

[hurricane'bone]

http://www.webwombat.com.au/entertainment/movies/images/supertroop1.JPG

[Sooner_Havok]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/funny-pictures-global-warming-polar-bear.jpg

[r5TPsooner]

definitely another item that will prevent drilling in ANWAR

oh, and FYI
the polar bears would be much more affected by drilling there then the Caribou even would be.

I really don't give a **** about Polar bears since they don't drive me to work or fly me across the country. As a matter of fact, if they went extinct tomorrow I wouldn't care nor would I really notice their absence.

I call it "Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection."

I know it's harsh but it's reality IMO.

PS, I could care a less about the Caribou either. Drill Alaska baby!:texan: :D

[tommieharris91]

I care a little more about caribou than polar bears, but that's because caribou are tasty!!

[Jerk]

Why? Their population went from 8,000 - 10,000 in 1965 to 20,000 - 40,000 today.

http://www.ypte.org.uk/docs/factsheets/animal_facts/polar_bear.html

I think SB93 has answered the question correctly, though. All based on a theory driven by a political agenda.


eta- ok, now I have read a little more and see the difference between 'threatened' and 'endangered.' I think they got it right, then, based on their own definitions.

[Rhino]

0vAYCMXD58M

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Those white demons are still fair game in Canada and Siberia, which is about what, 95% of their range. (AK is a big place, but nothing compared to Russia and Canada combined)

[Frozen Sooner]

It's ANWR, people, not ANWAR.

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, not a president of Egypt.

[Okla-homey]

FWIW, I would merely like to point out, people who profess belief in the theories of evolution and natural selection while dismissing intelligent design theories as silly superstition should be intellectually foreclosed from lamenting a species' demise.

If changes to these animals' habitat are in fact driving them to extinction...then "too bad, so sad" because they should have "evolved" sufficiently to deal with the changes. Either "evolve", or, join the ranks of the woolly mammoth, giant sloth and saber-toothed tiger. ;)

[Sooner_Bob]

:pop:

[Fraggle145]

FWIW, I would merely like to point out, people who profess belief in the theories of evolution and natural selection while dismissing intelligent design theories as silly superstition should be intellectually foreclosed from lamenting a species' demise.

No we should not. Intelligent Design is a crock of ****. It is religion posing as science with no testable data whatsoever.


If changes to these animals' habitat are in fact driving them to extinction...then "too bad, so sad" because they should have "evolved" sufficiently to deal with the changes. Either "evolve", or, join the ranks of the woolly mammoth, giant sloth and saber-toothed tiger. ;)


We could treat it that way... just saying oh well. But that is going to make for a pretty bland existence. Not to mention that we, humans, depend on the earth's ecosystems to function with one another. Without the biosphere's functioning humans would be driven to extinction.

However we have the advantage of having culture (which is also subject to similar rules to Evolution and Natural Selection) which can adapt much faster because it is selected on much more harshly and "reproduces" much faster. Therefore it is much more expectable that we should adapt our culture and our species evolution to one that would not stop ecosystems and the biosphere from functioning lest they start to select against us.

"too bad, so sad" I guess we should have "evolved" sufficiently to deal with the changes. :rolleyes:

Either way the bacteria were here long before us and they will be here long after us.

This is because bacteria are capable of evolving faster than an animal of larger size and longer reproduction time/time to sexual maturity. Hence when we are the ones changing the selective pressure at a rate at which animals cant keep up, then maybe we should take some responsibility.

[Okla-homey]

No we should not. Intelligent Design is a crock of ****. It is religion posing as science with no testable data whatsoever.




We could treat it that way... just saying oh well. But that is going to make for a pretty bland existence. Not to mention that we, humans, depend on the earth's ecosystems to function with one another. Without the biosphere's functioning humans would be driven to extinction.

However we have the advantage of having culture (which is also subject to similar rules to Evolution and Natural Selection) which can adapt much faster because it is selected on much more harshly and "reproduces" much faster. Therefore it is much more expectable that we should adapt our culture and our species evolution to one that would not stop ecosystems and the biosphere from functioning lest they start to select against us.

"too bad, so sad" I guess we should have "evolved" sufficiently to deal with the changes. :rolleyes:

Either way the bacteria were here long before us and they will be here long after us.

This is because bacteria are capable of evolving faster than an animal of larger size and longer reproduction time/time to sexual maturity. Hence when we are the ones changing the selective pressure at a rate at which animals cant keep up, then maybe we should take some responsibility.

I got it. But bear (pardon the pun) with me. To me, as a person who sincerely believes in the Creator -- in part because I don't see any logic in the notion "there was nothing, then there was a 'big bang,' then there was something," there is a morally superior argument to help Mr. Polar Bear.

To wit, because God in His infinite wisdom created polar bears in order to help insure ecological balance in the Arctic, and because they make our world more interesting, we should work hard to ensure they don't become extinct.

See, we both want the same thing.

I just happen to believe the fact God created polar bears out of nothing, we as stewards of His creation should try to keep things tidy and all His creatures healthy and vibrant. To me at least, that's a more compelling argument.

And, for the record, I'm not convinced climate change is anthroprogenic.

[Harry Beanbag]

And, for the record, I'm not convinced climate change is anthroprogenic.


Blasphemy. You must be one of those uneducated republican hicks that doesn't have the mental capacity to bow down to the socialized scientific political machine.

[SoonerBorn68]

No we should not. Intelligent Design is a crock of ****. It is religion posing as science with no testable data whatsoever.

...says the poster who Peem'd me saying he wasn't arrogant or elitist.

[Harry Beanbag]

...says the poster who Peem'd me saying he wasn't arrogant or elitist.


But he was a National Merit Scholar, there's not too many of those around here...

[SoonerBorn68]

Really? I thought Norman was over flowing with NMS--at least that's what Boren says on the commercials.

;)

[Okla-homey]

But he was a National Merit Scholar, there's not too many of those around here...

pffft. I am a 1965 graduate of Mrs. Hale's Montessori Kindergarten in Ardmore OK, and that dear woman taught me all I need to know about this kind of stuff.

[Okla-homey]

Really? I thought Norman was over flowing with NMS--at least that's what Boren says on the commercials.

;)

highest percentage among publics. TU has the state record per capita.

[olevetonahill]

So let me get this right in my mind .
#1 we need to take care of the Polar bears , cause they cant ?
# 2 Let them dead beats that wont work Take Care of them selves ?
#3 We need to Provide Health Insurance for all !
#4 Let them Bastages Get a better Job .

This shat cracks Me up
Its Called Survival of the fittest for a reason folks !

[r5TPsooner]

So let me get this right in my mind .
#1 we need to take care of the Polar bears , cause they cant ?
# 2 Let them dead beats that wont work Take Care of them selves ?
#3 We need to Provide Health Insurance for all !
#4 Let them Bastages Get a better Job .

This shat cracks Me up
Its Called Survival of the fittest for a reason folks !

Obviously not in America. Too many bleeding heart liberals.

[85Sooner]

definitely another item that will prevent drilling in ANWAR

oh, and FYI
the polar bears would be much more affected by drilling there then the Caribou even would be.

ding ding ding we have a WINNER!

[soonerhubs]

Dale Gribble never spoke wiser words. ;)
"That's code for UN commissars telling Americans what the temperature's going to be in our outdoors. I say let the world warm up. Let's see what Boutros Boutros Ghali Ghali has to say about that. We'll grow oranges in Alaska!"

[Fraggle145]

...says the poster who Peem'd me saying he wasn't arrogant or elitist.

Saying that intelligent design is a crock of **** is not arrogance or elitism. If you want to be religious and believe in a creator that is fine, but it is faith not science. You need hard data for it to be science. Intelligent Design is an attempt to bring religion into science, which I dont like because I dont think that the two of them are compatible when trying to test theory as one is based on faith the other is based on the data that we are able to obtain.

[Fraggle145]

I got it. But bear (pardon the pun) with me. To me, as a person who sincerely believes in the Creator -- in part because I don't see any logic in the notion "there was nothing, then there was a 'big bang,' then there was something," there is a morally superior argument to help Mr. Polar Bear.

To wit, because God in His infinite wisdom created polar bears in order to help insure ecological balance in the Arctic, and because they make our world more interesting, we should work hard to ensure they don't become extinct.

See, we both want the same thing.

I just happen to believe the fact God created polar bears out of nothing, we as stewards of His creation should try to keep things tidy and all His creatures healthy and vibrant. To me at least, that's a more compelling argument.

And, for the record, I'm not convinced climate change is anthroprogenic.

And I am totally fine with all of that. I just didnt like the idea that people who accept the theories of Evolution and Natural Selection should just have to accept the death of species unless we believe in intelligent design also. No matter how we get there I am glad that we want the same thing.

[Sooner_Havok]

And I am totally fine with all of that. I just didnt like the idea that people who accept the theories of Evolution and Natural Selection should just have to accept the death of species unless we believe in intelligent design also. No matter how we get there I am glad that we want the same thing.

0vAYCMXD58M

Is this what we all want?:D

[M]

Hmmm. I seem to remember seeing a polar bear in the OKC area not too long ago. ;)

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g258/DixieChickMissy/polar2.jpg

[Viking Kitten]

That's why the poor things are endangered. Somebody keeps getting them drunk.

[Sooner_Havok]

That's why the poor things are endangered. Somebody keeps getting them drunk.

OleVet

[olevetonahill]

Not Me I aint sharing with No Fur bags !
Now I ask You All . Will the Earth Be a better Place With the Whitey Bears , Or worse ?
Aint Animals Died Out Even Befor we Decided that WE were Responsible ?
Shat Happens , Species Die out every Day . Get over it !

[Okla-homey]

Saying that intelligent design is a crock of **** is not arrogance or elitism. If you want to be religious and believe in a creator that is fine, but it is faith not science. You need hard data for it to be science. Intelligent Design is an attempt to bring religion into science, which I dont like because I dont think that the two of them are compatible when trying to test theory as one is based on faith the other is based on the data that we are able to obtain.

F'ster,

Here's what you need to understand...and I only share this because I know you are a good person and wouldn't intentionally hurt people's feelers.

When you say "intelligent design is a crock of ****" it implies those of us who beleive that God played, and continues to play, a role in His creation are luddites for believing same.

At the end of the day, they're both "theories" if you will because the presence of God can't be disproven, anymore than my literalist brethern and sisteren can disprove the theory of "natural selection." Thus, let's just agree to disagree without lowering the level of discourse to saying one theory or the other is a crock.

Now, whether one theory or the other is irrational or not, is for each person to decide. My money's on Jehovah for the reasons I've already stated. Call it a burning in my breast that tells me He exists and is in charge. I am as certain of it as anything in my life I have ever observed. That, and the fact His Son rose from the dead. That's pretty compelling evidence He was plugged into something amazingly powerful.

Moreover, your side is yet to demonstrate even a scintilla of evidence that any contemporary distinct species evolved from any other in the 150 years since Charles Darwin advanced the theory. It just seems to me that by now, some evidence would have turned up if the natural selection theory was worthy of displacing intelligent design theory. For now, I contend they are equally valid.

[StoopTroup]

Save the Whales!

Hey funky Momma...save the whales!

ndaXQeRPO0g

[Jerk]

When you say "intelligent design is a crock of ****" it implies those of us who beleive that God played, and continues to play, a role in His creation are luddites for believing same.


Funny you say that. Paul said the exact same thing in the Book of Romans, a little less than 2000 years ago. Coincidence?

[Fraggle145]

F'ster,

Here's what you need to understand...and I only share this because I know you are a good person and wouldn't intentionally hurt people's feelers.

When you say "intelligent design is a crock of ****" it implies those of us who beleive that God played, and continues to play, a role in His creation are luddites for believing same.

At the end of the day, they're both "theories" if you will because the presence of God can't be disproven, anymore than my literalist brethern and sisteren can disprove the theory of "natural selection." Thus, let's just agree to disagree without lowering the level of discourse to saying one theory or the other is a crock.

Now, whether one theory or the other is irrational or not, is for each person to decide. My money's on Jehovah for the reasons I've already stated. Call it a burning in my breast that tells me He exists and is in charge. I am as certain of it as anything in my life I have ever observed. That, and the fact His Son rose from the dead. That's pretty compelling evidence He was plugged into something amazingly powerful.

Moreover, your side is yet to demonstrate even a scintilla of evidence that any contemporary distinct species evolved from any other in the 150 years since Charles Darwin advanced the theory. It just seems to me that by now, some evidence would have turned up if the natural selection theory was worthy of displacing intelligent design theory. For now, I contend they are equally valid.

Okay, I understand your argument and I didnt mean for it to come off that way. I just have a problem calling "Intelligent Design" science. Believing in creation is just fine. Posing it as science is not, since like I said before it does not generate any data and argues from the perspective of irreducible complexity. For something to be an acceptable scientific theory/hypothesis it has to be testable. The theory of evolution like i have said before is testable and has been tested since its inception and has yet to be disproven. Scientists test it just about anytime we look for explanations in the natural world involving organisms. And like I have said before I dont believe in evolution I accept evolution until it is disproven. Unfortunately, intelligent design is not testable... If it were believe me I would try to test it.

Also many scientists have generated a lot of proof that distinct species have arrived from another one. For example diatoms, bacteria, galapagos finches, etc... and these actually have been shown to change from one species into another one. The diatom exhibit is currently on display at the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History here in Norman. The bacteria experiments are famous as they document the evolution of new species that is incompatible with its "parent species" in lab cultures. Similar examples are notable with human selection on the environment including domestic dogs, crops, and livestock ... how could all of those different forms take place without human selection pressures.

Another problem with this whole thing is that the idea of "species" is really just part of an artificial system of classification so that humans can try to wrap their minds around how things came about.

However, just to clarify my overall point here, when i made the statement "ID is a crock," I did not mean to offend anyone with the viewpoint that a creator made and designed us, which is fine with me, but presenting this viewpoint as science and not faith is not okay with me. I guess what I should of said is that "ID is not science" and left it at that.

[Jerk]

Hey, fraggle.

What happened to the horned lizards (aka "horny toads")

When I was a kid growing up in Edmond in the 1980's, I saw them everywhere.

I haven't seen one in years.

[Fraggle145]

Hey, fraggle.

What happened to the horned lizards (aka "horny toads")

When I was a kid growing up in Edmond in the 1980's, I saw them everywhere.

I haven't seen one in years.

Probably domestic cats.... That is totally just a guess.

It could also be the invasion of foreign ant species like the fire ant, or it could be negative effects of ant pesticide.

Human development typically spells bad news for most indigenous species in an area... there is just simply less places to live for them.

[SoonerBorn68]

Hey, fraggle.

What happened to the horned lizards (aka "horny toads")

When I was a kid growing up in Edmond in the 1980's, I saw them everywhere.

I haven't seen one in years.


Probably domestic cats.... That is totally just a guess.

It could also be the invasion of foreign ant species like the fire ant, or it could be negative effects of ant pesticide.

Human development typically spells bad news for most indigenous species in an area... there is just simply less places to live for them.



Cyclical Climate Changes.... That is a total guess.

It could also be the invasion of a foreign species like humans, or it could be the negative effects of Al Gore.

Human development typically spells bad news for most indigenous species in an area... there is just simply less places to live for them.

[SoonerBorn68]

I would quote your response to me, what Homey said, and then what you replied back but there's no need. Homey pwned you.

[StoopTroup]

I would quote your response to me, what Homey said, and then what you replied back but there's no need. Homey pwned you.

BTW...

I sold my SKS and the guy I sold it to bought a bunch of AK Banana clips for it. Now..I have been told that with a little milling you can make them work but I hate altering guns as sometimes it ruins them and other times it might make the gun a tad illegal. :D

Anyway...I went by a local Gun Haberdashery the other day and thay have a real AK and my buddy said he'd give me the clips he has if I want them. They are selling clips for $59 each which seems a little steep but make my want of said gun become a small drool in the corner of my mouth. They also have a Bushmaster for $899. I am looking for a nice Remington 870 for home defense. They make a stock that will let you put ammo in it for quick access and with a another clip mounted on the receiver which will hold six more...well you could throw a nice party with it if someone came looking for one. Also...they make an aluminum slide handle that will take a blinder light on it. Fun fun fun.

I have created a new shopping list for the next gun show here in Tulsey.

I'm not ready for shooting seals quite yet...but I'm working on it. ;)

[Frozen Sooner]

Laughable.

One guy talked about how it hurt his feelings to call ID a "crock," and the guy with an actual scientific background in Biology apologized for unintentionally hurting his feelings while explaining why ID is not a scientific theory of any sort, why evolution by natural selection is and the science guy got "pwnd?"