WASHINGTON, Aug. 28, 2008
Industry Groups Sue Over Polar Bear Rule
Suit Claims Interior Dept.'s Rule On Bears Unfairly Singles Out Businesses In Alaska
-
Photo
(AP/J. Hayward, The Canadian Press)
-
Interactive
Global Warming
The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
Groups representing the oil and gas, mining, and manufacturing industries asked a federal judge Wednesday to ensure that laws designed to protect the bear, which was recently designated a threatened species, are not used to block projects that release heat-trapping gases in the state.
The American Petroleum Institute was joined by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Mining Association, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Iron and Steel Institute in the lawsuit, which explicitly challenges three words - except in Alaska - that appear in a 62-page rule issued in May.
That's when the polar bear became the first species with a population that the government has classified as threatened by global warming. The bear depends on sea ice, which is expected to melt as temperatures climb, for survival.
The Bush administration made clear that it did not want the polar bear's status to become a tool of environmentalists seeking to regulate the gases blamed for global warming.
On the day it announced the polar bear as a threatened species, which bars harm to the bear or its habitat, the administration also issued a special rule limiting the types of projects that could be evaluated.
To further block attempts to use endangered species law to control greenhouse gas emissions, it exempted projects in all states but Alaska from undergoing reviews.
The groups say the three words - which they refer to as The Alaska Gap - are unlawful and run counter to the administration's belief that it is impossible to link emissions from a single project to the increasing temperatures that threaten the polar bear.
"Anchorage has no more effect on climate change or polar ice than does an emission in Ankara," the suit reads.
The lawsuit filed Thursday is the latest to target the polar bear. Environmentalists and the state of Alaska have also sued the Interior Department over the polar bear's protection.
In the meantime, energy companies have paid billions for the right to explore for oil and natural gas in polar bear habitat.
The Interior Department would not comment on the lawsuit.
Brendan Cummings, the oceans program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, which is challenging the rule in court on the grounds that it is illegal, said Thursday that the lawsuit brought by industry is another attempt to "make the polar bear's protections more meaningless than they already are."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from U.S.
-
Video
Sotomayor on Cusp of History
-
Video
Fla. Murder Mystery
-
Video
'Thanks USA'
Who in the hell could beat these guys?
The new Democratic Majority and President will have some work to do, to Overturn All of Bush''s crapp.
Shame Shame Shame
We don''t have Polar Bears here in Oregon...
Oh is that why they target Alaska??
If you idiots can''t handle life cycles....gawd how immature and childish of you...I give up
You present two arguments that have problems, the first, Industries have cried for years that failure to get their way would result in lost jobs, we gave them their way, and the jobs were lost anyway. I call that the "knife to the throat of the working class" threat, the automakers were masters of it.
Second, since we don''t create all of the CO2, reducing our emissions will not result in extinction. Before the industrial revolution, and on back through history, we had far less man made pollutants and toxic substances in the air, plant life did just fine.
It is our accelerated contribution that is disturbing the balance, and it is that disturbance that is causing species to die off.
Posted by babooph at 07:27 AM : Aug 29, 2008
______________
Hey, now there is a fair and reasonable solution, but we also need to apply the same rule to the polar bears in AZ, NM, CA, and HI. Fortunately we don''t have no polar bears in TX.
Posted by MommaKat64 at 03:17 AM : Aug 29, 2008
________________
Not to worry about this one. The way the deforestation of South America''s Amazon jungle has occurred there aren''t enough plants left to consume all the CO2 already.
"BTW, when you get rid of the CO2, all vegetation will die out. No body is thinking about the consequences of this cr^pola."
Are you insinuating that man made co2 is essential for vegetation prosperity?
Vegetation thrived much better before man started to exploit the earth.
"Don''''t polar bears kill baby seals? They grab them and bite them and tear their guts out; right in front of their mommas. I ask you. Is that GREEN?"
The bear does not dig minerals from the earth and make guns to kill the seal. It does not haul the carcass away in a fossil fuel powered truck or boat.
I''d say the Polar Bear is very GREEN.
"I read an article last week about a group out counting whales. during their trip they spotted 9 polarbears swimming upto 50 miles from any ice flows.They do not know what happened to the bears,but don''''t hold out much hope as the optimum distance for a healthy bear to swim is about 15miles."
Polar bears can swim up to sixty miles without resting. Unlike humans, they can rest in water.
I''d require every community to install solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, etc, power (depending on geography) to supply electricity to the homes. All would be tied into a grid and would operate as a non-profit organization. We could soon power our cars from this system too. It would take a while to implement, but it would work and be better for the earth and its inhabitants.
As it stands now, most of the wealthy are in businesses that require little innovation. Like: energy, insurance, usury, etc...
My plan would take control of the energy away from the wealthy and force them to be creative if they want to make money.
Power to the people.
"okay,well I guess my info. was incorrect and stand corrected. But it still is a sign that things are not right. they shouldn''''t have to swim that far and I am sure that distance taxes their stores of fat."
I''m with you 100 percent. I just like accurate data.
Posted by cbsfan73
If bears were meant to spend so much of their time swimming in the ocean don''t you think they''d have evolved flippers by now?
Humans can swim the English Channel, but that doesn''t mean that''s what they do all the time.
"If bears were meant to spend so much of their time swimming in the ocean don''''t you think they''''d have evolved flippers by now?"
Maybe they are evolving because their feet are indeed designed for swimming (There are tiny webs between their toes.).
But their feet are also designed for walking on snow and ice.
If you want to help Polar Bears, the best things you can do are to advocate green energy and population control.
"The earth, polar bears and us are in danger and you guys are wondering why the polar bear doesn''''t evolve."
The national parks are trying very hard to induce evolution on bears by creating cowardly bears that will accommodate humans. This is not natural.
"This administration has played a crucial role in global warming and has shown that as long as Corporate policy overrules practical politics, another step toward extinction is taken."
Well, it''s a lot like drilling a tiny hole in your boat every day.
"Just saw Mcain''''s running mate. Drilling in Alaska would start about 30seconds after the inaugeration."
This is a political strategy designed to capture Hillary votes. I guess he assumes that women are dumb and will throw their vote towards a candidate embellishing a woman rather than throw it towards logic.
"I am a woman and I know about PMS, heaven help us and keep her away from the red button!!!!!!lol seriously though, it is a bad thing for the environment,in my humble opinion."
I have nothing against women in politics. But I believe that one should not vote simply because of race or gender.
Lets make cbsfan king. What the hey, he gotta do better "those two guys" (draft dodgers).
-
by timfitz42
August 31, 2008 10:04 AM PDT
- Before I even make this comment (because I know I''ll get hassled over it) let me first say I am an environmentally conscious person.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 37 CommentsPolar bears are not optimally suited for survival on a long term basis, their extinction is inevitable even without human interference. Within 300 years or so they would no longer be around due to natural warmings and coolings of the planet. We''re just accelerating it to 50 years.
However, human beings are unique in that we can manipulate our environment (badly for the most part). We''ve saved species on the brink of extinction before. What I''m getting at is that we may not be able to save them, but shame on us if we fast-track their demise or don''t at least try to save them.