The FWS decision is truly disturbing on many levels. But perhaps the most troublesome aspect of the decision is that it was not based on current polar bear populations.
Here is a clip from a press release issued by Safari Club International:
Currently, polar bear population numbers are at or near all-time highs. Most populations in Canada are either stable or increasing. The FWS is relying on speculative computer modeling and limited professional judgment to conclude nonetheless that the polar bear will be threatened with extinction 45 years in the future.
You read that right. Current polar bear numbers would lead to a slam dunk decision that the bears were neither endangered nor threatened. However, based on a global warming computer model that shows the bears will be threatened 45 years from now, the FWS saw fit to put the power of the federal government behind a computer model which has come under increasing attack as seriously flawed. It is these very models that show mankind threatened as well in 45 years (the same models that led Ted Turner to predict human cannibalism in the near future).
This action is alarming. The federal government has abandoned fact for a “crystal ball” that divines the future. The fact that the last 10 years have shown a distinctive cooling period was totally ignored, as it was not part of the model. The fact that polar bear populations have rebounded over the last 20 years to the point to where they currently are not in any danger was ignored. Even for the sake of argument, assuming the models are accurate, the polar bear will still be threatened with extinction in 45 years regardless of any action taken in protecting them now as a threatened species.
There is a clear absence of any due process in the action of the FWS. A federal agency has completely abandoned any Constitutional standards in favor of modern day alchemy.
The reliance by the federal government of what can be kindly described as the epitome of junk science is astounding in its abject stupidity. Perhaps we need to replace the Supreme Court with the Psychic Friends Network.
And speaking of catering to the stupid, I just saw Charlie “not in my backyard” Crist on the news. Yep. We’re going to tax carbon, prevent drilling, and lower gas prices.
One more Republican on the “never to vote for” list.
We are living in a time when our government is proceeding with sweeping agendas that have nothing to do with morality, justice, the constitution, or the interest of the American people. They have divided us, and now they are proceeding with the “conquer” phase.
Question is, do we sit idly by and take it? Or, do we wrest control of this government from the people who currently hold power, by whatever means necessary? Those are the only two choices. They have broken the political process, so that avenue is no longer valid.
The framers placed in the constitution a safeguard against just such a government as we now are subject to. It is called the Second Amendment. Will Americans see the gravity of the situation, and rightly organize to use this God-given right to be free from tyranny? Or will we follow like sheep into the Socialist abyss that is quickly opening up before us?
We are living in a time when our government is proceeding with sweeping agendas that have nothing to do with morality, justice, the constitution, or the interest of the American people. They have divided us, and now they are proceeding with the “conquer” phase.
Question is, do we sit idly by and take it? Or, do we wrest control of this government from the people who currently hold power, by whatever means necessary? Those are the only two choices. They have broken the political process, so that avenue is no longer valid.
The framers placed in the constitution a safeguard against just such a government as we now are subject to. It is called the Second Amendment. Will Americans see the gravity of the situation, and rightly organize to use this God-given right to be free from tyranny? Or will we follow like sheep into the Socialist abyss that is quickly opening up before us?
Uh oh! Lock up the guns. IDP, you’re losing it. Once the damned government started to support road and canal building, (or was it manufacturing, first?) under George Washington, it was just a hop, skip, and a jump to here.
Are you going to move to Montana and join a militia?
William P. Horn, former Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish, Wildlife and Parks in 1985-1988 (responsible for the Endangered Species Act [ESA] program) and experience serving on the Board of Environmental Sciences and Toxicology of the National Academy of Sciences, testified on 2 April 2008 (emphasis added):
“It would be a mistake to list the presently healthy and sustainable polar bear populations as a threatened species under the ESA. Such action will produce a variety of adverse consequences including (1) creating an ESA listing precedent that opens Pandora’s Box in the form of other unwarranted listings that will diminish resources available for bona fide wildlife conservation and recovery efforts, (2) setting the stage for new rounds of litigation and judicial activism to turn the ESA into a regulatory monster of unprecedented proportions, and (3) harming existing successful polar bear conservation and management programs…A decision to list a presently healthy species – exhibiting no present trajectory toward endangerment − based on large scale hemispheric models forecasting problems 50 years in the future is a radical departure from the language of the ESA. It pushes the decision horizon far into the genuinely unseeable future, is predicated on uncertain intervening events where it is difficult if not impossible to tie those events directly to specific on-the-ground situations, and will likely precipitate the subsequent listing of an array of otherwise healthy species which might also be forecast to face problems a half century or more from now. By stretching the ESA and encompassing under its umbrella an unknown number of such species, finite monetary and staff resources will be further divided and resources diminished and diverted from conservation and recovery of species facing bona fide imminent threats and where FWS is actually capable of conserving such species. That is bad conservation strategy and bad policy.”
Horn also cautioned that listing polar bears under ESA will open the door to massive litigation.
“The predicate of the listing is that greenhouse gas emissions are triggering melting of the Arctic Sea ice habitat upon which the polar bears depend. Yet ESA provides – and Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS} possesses − no authority or expertise to regulate such emissions on a national, hemispheric, or global basis. Clearly, FWS cannot tell the governments of China or India to stop building new coal fired power plants. A polar bear listing will also trigger a sequence of events in which FWS is compelled to expand the scope of its regulatory activities into realms (e.g., air emissions) where it cannot be effective as a matter of fact or law. The agency will be pressed well beyond its expertise and resources to become the uberregulator of our nation’s greenhouse gas emitting electrical and transportation systems. That will detract from focus on areas and species where FWS can be effective and conserve genuinely at-risk species.”
This travesty, both of science and common sense, must surely go to the courts for reconcilliation. The selection of the ESA and the FWS to be the point Act and Agency to be the Crusaders in the false religion of climate change is abominable.
The Fish and Wildlife Service normally responds to wildlife endangerment by assessing the problem (the wolves are over-hunted), come up with a solution (move the wolves away from the hunters) and, when populations are restored, move ‘em back and forbid hunting them. What shall FWS do with growing populations of polar bears? Move them to Antartica in the summer so they can eat endangered penguins then move them back?
Canada and the indigenous natives of the northern regions will be heard from, big time.
This ridiculous insertion of polar bears into the FWS mitigation process is nonsense and pure environmental politics.
All this is and ever will be is a simple lever to use.
In the long run those poor defenseless polar bears which have been on this earth for quite a while without legislation will end up being some very very very expensive pets.
Question is, do we sit idly by and take it? Or, do we wrest control of this government from the people who currently hold power, by whatever means necessary? Those are the only two choices. They have broken the political process, so that avenue is no longer valid.
The framers placed in the constitution a safeguard against just such a government as we now are subject to. It is called the Second Amendment. Will Americans see the gravity of the situation, and rightly organize to use this God-given right to be free from tyranny?
Once again, why does the right wing get a free pass on hating their country and advocating treason? If you’re talking about the second amendment, you’re talking about guns, and if you’re talking about guns, you’re talking about using them. So now apparently you think Americans should start shooting each other and whoever is the most efficient at killing gets to run the government?
If a left winger proposed anything like that, you all would explode in stuttering rage. But it’s IDP, a good old boy from the right wing.
Is it because the rest of you actually share his treasonous thoughts? Or is it because everybody knows the right wing hates democracy, and so they’re not surprised?
Question is, do we sit idly by and take it? Or, do we wrest control of this government from the people who currently hold power, by whatever means necessary? Those are the only two choices. They have broken the political process, so that avenue is no longer valid.
The framers placed in the constitution a safeguard against just such a government as we now are subject to. It is called the Second Amendment. Will Americans see the gravity of the situation, and rightly organize to use this God-given right to be free from tyranny?
Once again, why does the right wing get a free pass on hating their country and advocating treason? If you’re talking about the second amendment, you’re talking about guns, and if you’re talking about guns, you’re talking about using them. So now apparently you think Americans should start shooting each other and whoever is the most efficient at killing gets to run the government?
If a left winger proposed anything like that, you all would explode in stuttering rage. But it’s IDP, a good old boy from the right wing.
Is it because the rest of you actually share his treasonous thoughts? Or is it because everybody knows the right wing hates democracy, and so they’re not surprised?
Everybody knows? Everybody? I speak for myself when I say that direct democracy is dangerous, and I am fortunate to live in a Constitutional Republic instead. When the rules are followed. Which they increasingly are not.
Edited to add: As in, “SAN FRANCISCO - In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation’s biggest state to tie the knot.
Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban.” See the thread in this folder.
I do not object to what IDP writes because I believe such a conflict here is inevitable. Historically, governments ultimately tighten the noose around the neck until fight or submit are the only options.
Just a thought, vlad: THIS IS EXACTLY WHY THE HELL THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS THERE IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
Just a thought, vlad: THIS IS EXACTLY WHY THE HELL THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS THERE IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
And here I thought it was in order to assure a well-regulated militia. I missed it when Madison and Mason revised it:
In order that citizens may rise in armed insurrection when polar bears are declared endangered species, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
We are living in a time when our government is proceeding with sweeping agendas that have nothing to do with morality, justice, the constitution, or the interest of the American people. They have divided us, and now they are proceeding with the “conquer” phase.
Question is, do we sit idly by and take it? Or, do we wrest control of this government from the people who currently hold power, by whatever means necessary? Those are the only two choices. They have broken the political process, so that avenue is no longer valid.
The framers placed in the constitution a safeguard against just such a government as we now are subject to. It is called the Second Amendment. Will Americans see the gravity of the situation, and rightly organize to use this God-given right to be free from tyranny? Or will we follow like sheep into the Socialist abyss that is quickly opening up before us?
Uh oh! Lock up the guns. IDP, you’re losing it. Once the damned government started to support road and canal building, (or was it manufacturing, first?) under George Washington, it was just a hop, skip, and a jump to here.
Are you going to move to Montana and join a militia?
I’m asking a simple question Dwight.
This country is being purposefully moved off its foundation. Soon, I believe it will be irreparable. We have been purposefully divided, and the conquer phase is underway.
Tens if not hundreds of millions of Americans from both ideological bents believe that our government no longer represents the interest of the American people. It certainly no longer represents the Constitution, or the vision of the framers.
Since our politicians from both parties have utterly ruined the political process, there are two choices citizens have in dealing with a government that does not represent the interest of the people. Sit idly by while America is undermined by our politicians until it is too late, and the America we love is transformed into something “other”, or stand and fight, and force politicians, through forced removal from office if necessary, to address the interests of the American people.
I’m asking, will we wait like sheep, or will we rise up, and say “No”?
Vlad: So now apparently you think Americans should start shooting each other and whoever is the most efficient at killing gets to run the government?
Not quite, but you’re following the right tangent Vlad. I’m not saying we should start shooting each other. I’m wondering if, or when, we will. I’m wondering what it will take, or if Americans even have the stomach to step up and protect by whatever means necessary the legacy of our brilliant founders.
there are two choices citizens have in dealing with a government that does not represent the interest of the people.
There’s a third choice, a much easier one. Since you hate America so much, why don’t you move to Saudi Arabia, or Burma, where the people in charge think more like you?
