Lawsuit after Lawsuit: Confusion Continues Over Polar Bear

“Unfortunately, [The Interior Department] seems profoundly confused about whether to actually protect polar bear critical habitat or sacrifice it to oil companies,” said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska Director of the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) in a recent press release.

And so is everyone else, especially up here in Alaska.

Whether it's the Resource Development Council claiming that the polar bears are actually growing in numbers, the CBD and Greenpeace claiming that their habitat is actively being destroyed, or the oil and gas companies claiming that development will not harm the plethora of endangered and threatened species that live in the Arctic at all—no one can seem to agree about the reality of climate change in the Arctic. All eyes turn instead to the Department of the Interior to sort out the mess. Lawsuit after lawsuit, everyone believes they have the answer, and no one is willing to compromise.

Besides the fact that this is delaying much-needed legislation, it seems some advocacy groups are losing sight of the reality of the situation, and are worried more about suing and less about the animals and the real dangers of a warming climate. This week alone, a group of scientists documented an epic 9 day swim of a polar bear in search of food, illustrating the critical and rapid effects of climate change.

Last month, the Interior Department designated more than 187,000 square miles in and near the Beaufort sea as polar bear critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act.  Alaska's pro-Oil Governor, Sean Parnell fired back, directing his Attorney General to sue because the habitat designation supposedly puts economic activity and jobs on the line. Native Alaskans in nearby Barrow, Alaska, who over the last 40 years have made the majority of their income from oil and gas development, are claiming that this designation will have no effect on the polar bears, and may sue as well to allow them to continue to profit off the degradation of their land. In a recent post by Martin Matheny on the Animals blog, he discussed how the CBD has filed suit again, this time claiming not only should the critical habitat exist, but that the government is already failing in it's responsibilities to protect the bear.

The severity and significance of climate change is being diluted by propaganda and confusion generated around the actual number of species and ice forecasts. While organizations continue to sue, we can make our voices heard and let the government know that this isn't a question of economics, it's a matter of preserving our environment for generations to come. Whether it's the Ringed Seal, or the Polar Bear, the preservation of species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) represents our collective support of the environment and our concern for the future.

Have a story tip? E-mail us at environmenttips@change.org. Please also follow Change.org's Environment page on Facebook,  Twitter or RSS.

Photo by:  USFWS Endangered Species on Flickr