Backdoor Kyoto - The Polar Bear Express
MichaelW on Mar 06 2007 at 4:26 pm | Filed under: Domestic Politics, Economics, Environment, Law, MichaelW's Page
If the U.S won’t go to the mountain, environmentalists fully intend to bring the mountain to the U.S., with the full aid and assistance of President Bush. In this case, the mountain will be shunted by polar bears.
For the past year or so, the Bush administration has been looking at placing polar bears on the endangered species list:
The Bush Administration yesterday [February 9, 2006] kicked off a process to determine whether polar bears should be added to the United States endangered species list because their habitat is melting.
The action is “a significant acknowledgement of what global warming is doing to the Arctic ice,” said Kassie Siegel, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity in Joshua Tree, California.
During the closing days of December 2006, the Bush Administration quietly listed the polar bear as endangered, allowing 90 days for public comment (my emphasis):
The Bush administration has decided to propose listing the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, putting the U.S. government on record as saying that global warming could drive one of the world’s most recognizable animals out of existence.
The administration’s proposal — which was described by an Interior Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity — stems from the fact that rising temperatures in the Arctic are shrinking the sea ice that polar bears need for hunting. The official insisted on anonymity because the department will submit the proposal today [December 26, 2006] for publication in the Federal Register, after which it will be subject to public comment for 90 days.
What difference does it make if polar bears are deemed endangered? It essentially means that the U.S government will be required to take any and all actions necessary to prevent the species from further languishing in potential extinction, including actions that ensure no loss of the polar bears’ habitat, the Arctic.
Because scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide from power-plant and vehicle emissions is helping drive climate change worldwide, putting polar bears on the endangered species list raises the legal question of whether the government would be required to compel U.S. industries to curb their carbon dioxide output.
“We’ve reviewed all the available data that leads us to believe the sea ice the polar bear depends on has been receding,” said the Interior official, who added that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials have concluded that polar bears could be endangered within 45 years. “Obviously, the sea ice is melting because the temperatures are warmer.”
Yes, you read that right. The U.S. government may soon be empowered to place strict emissions controls on U.S. industries and citizens because of the possibility that polar bears may become endangered in 45 years! In other words, economic output will have to come to a halt in order to protect a rather vicious predator (warning: graphic images) that may, possibly, in the next half-century or so, become endangered.
Even more incredibly, there is no true scientific evidence to suggest that Anthropogenic Global WarmingTM (”AGW”) has anything to do with it. (See, e.g., McQ’s piece on the latest heretic.) Is the climate getting warmer in some places? Yes, without a doubt. Is sea-ice shrinking in some areas? Absolutely (although it is getting thicker in others). Is man the primary, secondary, or even tertiary cause of such changes? Well, we really don’t know!
But that won’t stop the AGWTM crowd in its crusade to bring the U.S. to bear. Despite the fact that, even if CO2 emissions from power plants, cars and the like are causing the polar bears’ habitat to shrink, and even if the polar bears are so incredibly unadaptive that they will not be able to survive some sea-ice shrinking over the next century, and even if the U.S. were to grind its CO2 emissions to a halt, none of this will do a dang thing about China, India and other developing countries continuing to increase their emissions.
Nor should it. How ever cute and cuddly one may find polar bears, Chinese, Indian and, dare I say it, American lives should be more important than our ursine friends at the North Pole. And you can be sure that, whether the U.S. thinks that or not, the Chinese, Indians, et al. surely will.
Of course, reason may yet prevail in this battle. Hearings were held in Congress yesterday on whether the polar bear belongs on the endangered list (emphasis added):
Environmental activists, hunters and oil industry representatives spoke at a public hearing Monday night on whether the U.S. government should list polar bears as a threatened species.
Some speakers said scientific evidence supports the listing and urged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to adopt protections so polar bears would be present for future generations.
[...]
But others said listing the polar bear as threatened could hurt the hunting industry, whose revenue helps local economies.
“They are not endangered,” said Patterk Netser, an environmental minister for the Nunavut Territory of Canada. “They are not threatened at the moment. We have an abundance of them in our area.”
“The scientific underpinnings of the proposal are woefully inadequate,” said Richard Krause, senior director of regulatory relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation. “Rather than basing the proposal on direct scientific observations, the Service bases its proposal on speculative predictions and assumptions that may or may not be valid.”
I say that “hopefully” reason will prevail, but I have grave doubts about that when considering just what immense power is up for grabs here:
If the polar bear were listed as a threatened species, all federal agencies would have to ensure that anything they authorize that might affect polar bears will not jeopardize their survival or the sea ice where they live. That could include oil and gas exploration, commercial shipping or even releases of toxic contaminants or climate-affecting pollution.
Environmentalists hope that invoking the Endangered Species Act protections might eventually lead the government to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and other heat-trapping “greenhouse” gases blamed for warming the atmosphere.
“The Interior Department has pretty much explicitly said that they don’t think they have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emission, but we know that the Endangered Species Act goes well beyond these walls, that it’s taken into account by other agencies,” said Kert Davies, research director for Greenpeace.
The enviro’s fully expect to have the keys to the kingdom handed to them if the polar bear is listed. They are expert at using the EPA regulations as a means of litigating the government into compliance with their wishes, or in the very least preventing any further development that uses government funds such as highways, bridges, military bases, etc. If they emerge victorious from this battle, Kyoto will have found a new home in Washington, D.C.
Technorati Tags: Global Warming, climate change, polar bears, endangered species list, EPA, Kyoto
Sphere: Related Content
And really, has the Endangered Species Act ever actually, saved animals? All it does is take land away from people because they might have some bird or rodent living nearby them. Though large business like walmart are able to use their lawyers and lobbying to get around this, ordinary people are not.
Actually, Chris, nobody gets around these regs. The only thing that one can do is to have a very full investigation of property you intend to buy and develop before committing to its purchase.
I used to represent timber companies that harvested from National Parks, including salvage timber that is responsible for much of the wild fires out West. The enviros use the EPA to shut these operations down on a routine basis, sometimes just because there may be (not that there definitely is) an animal, plant or bug that an endangered species sometimes eats (a \”feeder species\”), or one that sometimes is found in the same area as an endangered species (an \”indicator species\”).
Enviros also use the onerous EPA regulations to prevent construction of all sorts from ever taking place, sometimes delaying the building of a new bridge (across the Potomac River perhaps) for more than decade. In these cases, by the time the litigation over the construction has ended, the plans are no longer up-to-date, and entirely new ones have to be drawn up, which of course triggers the requirement for new environmental impact studies, etc.
I\’m not exaggerating when I say that the enviros are expert in this game. It is one that was rigged in their favor after all.
Quite right Michael, and it seems you have some experience in this regard. I was going off of the episode of Penn and Teller’s Bullsh@#t on this law. They had a poor handicapped girl that had saved up and bought some land to build a house on or something, but was prevented from building or living there because of some endangered species. However, the walmart down the road got permission though some legal process or loophole. I imagine they were lucky to do so from what you’ve described.
They also point out that the endangered species act can claim virtually no successes.
[...] Further to my previous post about polar bears being used to backdoor Kyoto regulations, please see this Jonathan Alder post that reveals just how effectively NEPA is employed in derailing seemingly harmless activities with very little effort: Yesterday the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California overturned the USDA’s 2005 decision to deregulate “Roundup Ready” alfalfa, barred new sales of seed, and barred any additional planting of already-bought seeds effective March 30. According to the court, the Agriculture Department had failed to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS) as required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). [...]