Focus On Fur: protecting endangered or threatened animals on land

Proactive conservation groups come in a wide variety of flavors, focusing on a singular issue or many, working in conjunction with other groups or going it alone. Whatever the strategy, the goal is to achieve results that are meaningful and lasting.

In the past, I have cited the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) as an organization that has chosen the legal approach to advancing the cause of conservation and protection of endangered species. Working with other legal groups like Earthjustice or conservation groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, and others, CBD adheres to a strategy of utilizing the courts to get federal agencies to follow through with laws or regulations already in place or to consider issues that are in line with the agencies charter or mandate.

While this blog gravitates mostly towards issues regarding the ocean, occasionally I like to turn attention to those creatures that reside on dry land. Focusing on fur, here are a few developments announced by the Center for Biological Diversity that caught my attention. Two represent ongoing challenges - of which public support can have an impact - and two are victories that can be savored but require continued diligence if they are to persevere. The Center is not the only the group involved in pushing ahead on these issues; CBD will mention working in conjunction "with others" and I often wish they would list those others groups - all deserve their due credit.

And you can make a difference to - by petition support or financial contribution, if possible.

Wolves' Fate at Stake in Congress -- Take Action
The Center for Biological Diversity and 47 other groups yesterday wrote to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, urging her to oppose legislation that would permanently end federal protections for endangered gray wolves, leaving them open to slaughter. Later in the day wolves caught a slight break when the Senate voted down a House Republican spending bill that, among other anti-environment measures, included a provision to strip wolves of federal protections.

But that doesn't mean wolves are out of the woods. Members of Congress have shown a disturbingly keen interest in stripping Endangered Species Act protections for wolves throughout Montana and Idaho and parts of Utah, Oregon and Washington. If approved, such legislation will bar protection for northern Rockies wolves as "endangered" even if their numbers plummet toward zero. Both Montana and Idaho have long been chomping at the bit to raze wolf populations.

Congress has never taken a step like this before -- and endangered species protection must be determined according to science, as current law prescribes, not through a rider hidden in a gigantic funding bill. In fact, such legislation puts the very Endangered Species Act at risk and sets a terrible precedent for other species hovering on the brink of extinction.

Take action with us now by telling your senators to stop any congressional effort to strip protections from gray wolves.

Read more in E & E News.

Big Oil Sues Over Polar Bear Habitat Protections
Big Oil has filed the first lawsuit challenging the biggest "critical habitat" designation ever made -- and won by the Center for Biological Diversity and allies. Specifically, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association -- representing 15 oil and gas companies, including BP, Exxon and Chevron -- last week sued the federal government for protecting 120 million acres for Alaska's polar bears. The oil companies say that polar bears are too "abundant" to deserve the protected area, and that setting aside the land will be too expensive because it may get in the way of oil and gas development. Other entities, including the state of Alaska, are also expected to challenge the designation.

The Center has been working since 2001 to save the polar bear from the dire threats the species faces -- including oil and gas development. We're the group that originally wrote the petition earning the bear its status under the Endangered Species Act; we're still fighting to earn it the full "endangered" protection it desperately needs. We won't let any critical-habitat challenge succeed. Stay tuned for a polar bear update soon.

Read more in the UK's Daily Mail.

Wolf Massacre Halted in Alaska -- Thank You
Wolves on Alaska's Unimak Island won't have to face the prospect of getting gunned down by aerial shooters -- and you deserve some of the credit. After Center for Biological Diversity supporters sent in nearly 34,000 comments, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this Monday announced it won't let Alaska aerial gunners kill gray wolves on the island as part of a misguided attempt to stop the decline of caribou. (There's little evidence that wolves are at fault.) The Alaska Department of Fish and Game was planning to shoot wolves from helicopters on the Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge. Aerial killing is as inhumane as it is unnecessary, especially during the pup-rearing season. Thanks so much for saving wolves young and old from devastating deaths.

Get more from the Alaska Public Radio Network.

Protection Restored for Tongass National Forest
In another big Alaska victory, a judge has ended a lawsuit brought by the Center and allies by vetoing a decision that exempted the majestic Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule, passed in 2001, is meant to protect pristine public forests from destructive activities like road building and resource extraction. But to boost the timber industry, the Bush administration decided the rule wouldn't apply to the Tongass, leaving the 17-million-acre forest wide open to exploitation.

"This is a victory for the wolves, bears, deer, goshawks and other unique species that rely on the untouched old-growth forest of the Tongass for their survival," said the Center's Alaska Director Rebecca Noblin. "The Tongass never should have been exempted from the roadless rule, and this court decision provides valuable respite for old-growth-dependent species that have been hammered by unsustainable logging practices in the Tongass."

Read about the Tongass victory in the Los Angeles Times.

Polar Bears: good news and bad news in the U.S.

Following up on my December 19th posting regarding polar bears, here's an example of one-step forward, two steps back.

Gaining Ground, Literally
The step forward has to do with the designation in late November of 187,000 sq.miles of northern Alaska wilderness as a "critical habitat" for polar bears. As part of a mandated response to having the polar bear listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated the area - although it had to be prodded into action by a lawsuit from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) which has been after the Fish and Wildlife Service to fully implement protections, like the critical habitat, required by the Endangered Species Act.

The critical habitat designation mandates that any federal agency that would wish to open up any of the land for economic activity (as in granting permits for gas and oil exploration, which several oil companies were planning on doing), they would have to first consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service regarding adverse impact against the polar bears.

“This critical habitat designation enables us to work with federal partners to ensure their actions within its boundaries do not harm polar bear populations,” said Tom Strickland, Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks in a Fish and Wildlife Service news release. “Nevertheless, the greatest threat to the polar bear is the melting of its sea ice habitat caused by human-induced climate change. We will continue to work toward comprehensive strategies for the long-term survival of this iconic species.”

Read about the polar bears' "critical habitat" in BBC News.

Losing Ground
In response to the critical habitat designation, the governor of Alaska has announce his intention to have the state file suit against the federal government. As reported by the Washington Post, Governor Sean Parnell contends the critical habitat designation will delay jobs and increase costs - or even kill - resource development projects that are important to Alaska.

"Once again, we are faced with federal overreach that threatens our collective prosperity," Gov. Parnell said. "We don't intend to let this stand."

A recent newsletter from the CBD reported, "The Center is already in court defending the polar bear against the state's previous suit to have it removed from Endangered Species Act protection, arguing instead that protection should be upgraded. Scientists estimate there's a greater than 80 percent chance that polar bears in Alaska will be extinct by mid-century under current greenhouse gas emissions trends."

"They [the Alaska state government] have opposed every Endangered Species Act listing to date," said CBD attorney Brendan Cummings.

Read more about Alaska's threat of legal action in the Washington Post.

Losing More Ground
The Center for Biological Diversity will be kept busy with the additional setback announced this past Wednesday by the U.S. Department of the Interior. The department filed arguments in court to support its decision to list the polar bear as threatened, as opposed to endangered under the Endangered Species Act - endangered being a designation that many conservation groups have pushed for because it requires the government to address the source of the endangerment (global warming).

Also, the department is maintaining a Bush-era decision to exempt greenhouse gases from regulation under the Endangered Species Act, thereby eliminating from consideration all scientific studies and data that point to climate change as being one of the primary threats to polar bear ice-based habitat.

The CBD plans to counter the department of the Interior's arguments in court in February. CBD attorney Kassie Siegal said, "[The department's action] puts a gloss on a horribly flawed Bush-era decision that is anti-science and serves to greatly undermine the protection of not just the polar bear but all of America's imperiled wildlife."

There are some environmentalists and legal experts that feel that the Endangered Species Act is not the best vehicle for pressing forward with the greenhouse gas issue, that it would best be served in Congress than in the courts. But given the current state of partisan politics and the influence of gas and oil lobbyists, that probably won't be happening any time soon, so groups like the Center for Biological Diversity continue with legal action.

Read more about the Dept. of Interior decision in the Los Angeles Times.

Arctic Climate Change: subtle changes can have deadly impact

Scientists who have been studying the effects of climate change on Arctic sea ice, predict that, with its seasonal contraction and expansion, we can expect ice-free summers by the end of the century if not sooner. Disconcerting images of starving polar bears and proposed plans for extensive shipping through the Northwest Passage have been of major concern to environmentalists. However, researchers are studying a myriad of subtle effects that, collectively, could have a pronounced and deadly effect on the region and beyond.

Disrupted geography from melting ice that affects hunting/searching patterns is one of the leading concerns. A study recently published in Biological Conservation estimated that in the Western Hudson Bay area, there is a 3-6% starvation rate for polar bears when there is a 120-day summer fasting period. But it is estimated that with an increase to a 180-day fasting period due to increased loss of summer sea ice, the starvation rate climbs dramatically to 28-48%.

Also, the report cited female reproductivity declining in a non-linear fashion (IE: a dramatic drop) when food searching efficiency decreases faster than sea ice habitats. In other words, it doesn't not take much in the way of a changing habitat to produce a major population crash.

Another effect of climate change and the influx of warmer waters into the Arctic is a greater exposure to parasites. A study in Polar Biology looked at the increasing prevalence of Taxoplasma gondii, a potentially deadly parasite, in polar bears and seals in Norway. It is not clear whether the parasite is being transmitted by warm water invertebrates, migratory birds, or human interactions - but climate changes can bring any or all of these potential carriers into play.

Finally, researchers from several universities and NOAA reported, in the latest issue of Nature, the possibility that several marine mammal species could become extinct over time due to interbreeding brought on by climate change. Many marine mammals are unique to the Arctic because they are geographically isolated. These isolated species have adapted to life in an ice environment. With the loss of that ice, there can be an intermingling of related species moving up from the south. But, according to the researchers, this intermingling can produce hybrids that, over time, are unable to cope with the changing environment. In essence, it's not a mixing of the best qualities but that of qualities that will actually weaken their long-term chances for survival.

As stated in a Newswise release, "In later generations, the process begins to have more negative effects as genomes mix and any genes associated with environment-adapted traits are recombined. Genes related to any trait that once allowed the animal to thrive in a specific habitat can be diluted, leaving the animal less well suited to surviving and reproducing there."

As evidence, in 2006, hunters killed a polar bear with brown patches on its fur. DNA testing revealed it was a polar/grizzly bear hybrid. Such a hybrid, borne from polar and grizzly bear contact during the summer months, may have a very poor chance of survival in the Arctic winter months.

We like simple explanations to the challenges we face, but climate change has very complex and far-reaching implications. However, the more we learn about the impacts of climate change, the better we realize that it is a challenge we must address. That much is simple to comprehend.

Polar Bear Webcasts: live broadcasts and a new NOAA Arctic report this month

One of the great learning tools is engagement and, unfortunately, conservation issues are sometimes hampered by the inability of people to truly feel engaged or appreciate what may be happening in a distant part of the world, say the Arctic for instance.

The issue of polar bears and what is threatening their existence due to warming Arctic temperatures, will be brought to light in a series of live webcasts being staged by Polar Bears International. Called Tundra Connections, the 30 scheduled webcasts started on October 28th and will run to the end of November. Viewers will be able to log on and ask, in real time, questions of the research scientists and conservationists that are monitoring the polar bear migration in Churchill, Manitoba, Canada.

There will be a wide range of people involved: zoologists and other experts on polar bears, climatologists to discuss the impact of climate change on the Arctic, even legal advisers from the Center of Biological Diversity. Check out the Tundra Connections website for broadcast dates.

Speaking of the Arctic, NOAA has released its Arctic Report Card 2010 and it still shows that grades are slipping in the areas of sea ice, long-term climate change, and weather pattern disruption. While the Arctic still experiences warm/cold cyclical temperature patterns that can temporarily alter ecosystem patterns, the overall trend is still towards warmer temperatures.



NOAA reported that this year was the shortest duration of Arctic snow cover since record-keeping first began in 1966. And areas like Greenland continue to experience significant ice and glacier loss. With more fresh water mixing into the Arctic's oceans, everything from algae growth to fish populations to currents gets disrupted.

The Arctic regions are experiencing polar amplification whereby, with more sea ice melting (sea ice that would normally reflect sunlight), more dark exposed ocean now absorbs sunlight which accelerates the warming process. A by-product of this effect is changes in polar winds. Pushed southward, these cold winds can produce colder winters in mid-latitudes - making some people wonder how can there be global warming when I'm freezing? Just ask a polar bear.

Check out the Tundra Connections webcasts.
Read the NOAA Arctic Report Card 2010.

CITES Conference: one week until important conservation meeting

The CITES Meeting is now only one week away. Scheduled for March 13-25 in Qatar, this meeting is shaping up to be the "Copenhagen Conference of endangered species." Let's all hope the end results are more productive and substantive.

I've mentioned CITES in several past postings, but for those of you who are unfamiliar with this international organization, it stands for Conference on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. And although there are some who would be concerned over any organization that would seem to be involved in regulating trade in endangered species rather than eliminate it altogether, it has become an important body because that very position has enabled it to include a large number of member nations. Through its program of Appendix ratings (Appendix I being the most severe: a labeling of "endangered" for the particular species and often a complete curtailment in trade - no hunting, no buying), CITES has become a recognized force in worldwide conservation of flora and fauna.

The CITES web site has been completely revamped in anticipation of the meeting and you can look at a program of all the amendment proposals, which include adding species to their list or moving a species from Appendix II (a threatened species with with regulated or restricted trade) to Appendix I and, in some cases, proposals for the reverse based on some measure of improvement. Unfortunately, all of the species are listed by their scientific names, so you will need to pull out your biology and botany books or spend time Googling the Latin names. But here's a list of those that have received a lot of attention:

• Bluefin Tuna
• Grey Wolf
• Bobcat
• Polar Bear
• African Bush Elephant
• Nile and Moreletii Crocodiles
• Great, Scalloped, and Smooth Hammerhead Sharks
• Great Hammerhead Shark
• Sandbar Shark
• Dusky Shark
• Oceanic White Tip Shark
• Porbeagle Shark
• Spiny Dogfish

And that's not all. You can look at the entire list and download the complete proposals (15MB Zip file), or look at comments from member nations to get a feel for the mood regarding any one proposal. While I do not want to take away from the importance of any proposed amendment, I personally will be watching what is decided regarding the tuna, wolf, bobcat, polar bears, and sharks.

This will be the "Fifteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties." And it's one to watch.

Polar Bears: PSA's bring message to over 90 million

I'm sure that all of the readers of this blog are aware of the threats polar bears are facing with the decline of arctic sea ice. The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) has pressed the issue not only through legal and decision-making channels but also through the media.

Much attention is being placed nowadays on "new media" which includes avenues like blogs and other social media and online sites. They are certainly coming into their own, but good public relations strategy incorporates all media channels - and that includes "traditional media" (believe or not, but not all people get their news and information from the Internet; I know, shocking but true).

The Center for Biological Diversity, with the help of media supporters, produced two public service announcements about polar bears for television that have, to date, reached over 90 million viewers. Here's CBD's commentary, followed by one of the two ads:

Save the polar bear? We’re doing it. Not just in court and in the papers — also in the homes of millions of people across the country. Our polar bear TV ads, showing the stark reality of warming’s effects on the bear and its habitat, have educated 90.7 million and counting, in both English and Spanish, from Alaska to New York to Arizona. Since launching, the ads have ranked 13th most popular of all public service announcements nationwide, creating the groundswell of public fervor that helped us deliver 94,000 petitions telling the Obama administration we won’t let climate change doom our polar bears, planet, and selves.



You can check out both ads and learn more about what you can do by clicking here.

Polar Bears: Interior secretary leaves them in peril

Recently, despite a strong response from supporters and pressure from several leading conservation groups, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar chose to let stand the 11th hour ruling handed down during the Bush administration that limited protections for the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

The basic crux of the problem is that by listing the polar bear as endangered (as opposed to threatened), the ESA requires that the circumstances or causes of the endangerment must be corrected. That would mean correcting global warming (previous post).

While the incremental progress of the political process can eventually get things done - as in the case of the recent developments regarding the Canadian seal hunt (previous post), in this case this is where the wheels fall off the bureaucratic wagon. It's one thing to deny a power plant that threatens an isolated butterfly or restructure a dam project because it could wipe out a small minnow - that's treating a specific endangered species with a specific contained solution. But in the case of the polar bear, to address the issues that have put the animal in peril require such a monumental societal and commercial paradigm shift that it's just too big to handle.

It was said that the ESA was not the appropriate vehicle for addressing global warming. Then what is? The Clean Air Act has been used to push forward major commercial and societal change. What legal avenue can put global warming on the front burner? With the best of intentions, we can talk about the moral imperative of climate change, talking ourselves right into extinction, but it will be the rule of law that actually gets the job done - if only we have the courage to use it.

Looking North: Polar Bears' survival under the Endangered Species Act

I was just reading in Newsweek about the listing of polar bears as a "threatened" species as defined by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). As the Arctic sea ice melts, as I saw last year on an expedition through the Northwest Passage with InMER.org, it's a step in the right direction - but a very small step to many environmentalists. If listed as "endangered", the ESA requires the government to preserve critical habitat and develop a recovery plan. In essence that means what is specifically endangering the species - a dam or construction project, or excessive hunting/fishing - must be dealt with.

This put the current administration in the uncomfortable position of having to recognize and address the issue that is jeopardizing the future of polar bears if they were designated as "endangered": global warming. The Interior Department agrees that the polar bear is threatened by climate change, but it hedged its bet with the "threatened" designation which is a less proactive designation. Unfortunately, this adds to the current administration's dismal record on species protection - only 60 species have received protection, compared to 522 in the two-term Clinton administration and 231 in the elder Bush's one-year term.

We find ourselves back to some fundamental questions: what are we going to do about these long-term environmental issues? Where is the forward-thinking, visionary leadership that can address the interests of the people, commerce, and most importantly, the planet's species?