POLITICS - This one has been bothering me...

[Ysabel Kid]

All the enviro-weenies seem to be obsessed with making sure not one species of anything ever goes extinct again. The polar bear seems to be the latest cause-of-the-day for these knit-wits. The fact that the polar bear population has actually increased over the last 20-25 years doesn't seem to phase these "gorons".

So, if these folks supposedly know more about plants and animals than anyone else, and care about them more than anyone else, I have two questions.

(1) Isn't it just natural for most large predators to have very low populations compared to most "game" animals? Large predators require large hunting areas, so they have never been as numerous as herd herbivores.

(2) Isn't extinction a natural process too? Millions of species of animals and plants lived and died out long before man had anything to do with it. I would have loved to see (and hunt) a saber-toothed tiger, but isn't it probably a good thing that these died out? What species would we be without had they survived? What species are we denying a chance to evolve/establish by artificially extending other species natural life-cycle?

Hey, I like the polar bear as much as the next guy. They look mighty cool. But, assuming the nutcases are right and man does contribute to "global warming", am I willing to protect a species that can't adapt while destroying our way of life?

I don't think so!

[Texican]

It's a power grab. Control the land, control the resources, control the people.

You'll be pleased to know that the lady governor of Alaska is fighting back and has announced that the state will file suit against the fed to have the polar bear removed from the endangered list. This is great news. Individuals or companies don't have the resources to fight this one, but a state does...

As has been said in the modern common vernacular: "You go girl!"

[rjohns94]

+1 on the power grab comment

[Jaguarundi]

+1 on the power grab comment

+2 on the Marxist Social experiment !

[gundownunder]

If extinction is such a big problem someone should hang the guy that killed all the dinosaurs, cause he did us out of some fine hunting.

Here in Oz we get dimwits who say the kangaroo is endangered, there are more now than when white man arrived here, they just dont live on city streets in broad daylight, being mainly bush creatures and nocturnal.

[Rusty]

Just as in gun control, it's not about the guns. The environmental protection scam isn't about the environment either. It's about control. It's about programing people.

The true outdoors men I know are the best environmentalists.

[brucew44guns]

I wish the governor of Alaska would come on down and run for governor of Kansas when her term runs out. Our current governor is being rumored to be Hussiens VP choice, so we could use a good governor here.

[Ysabel Kid]

The true outdoors men I know are the best environmentalists.

Amen brother, AMEN!

As I have said, the environmental movement in this country is made up of "watermelons" - green on the outside, commie red on the inside. This is the home of the modern socialist movement here and abroad. I guess I'm just wondering how they can make their arguments with a straight face. I suppose some know they are lying through their own teeth, and others are deluded - or a combination of both (as in the case of Gore).

It is just depressing to see that so many of our countrymen - and other free people from around the world - as so gullible, so willing to drink the "enviro-weenie kool-aid" and chuck our way of life - and the safety and freedom of our children - to follow these idiots...

[505stevec]

What this is all about is... The Hippies of the 60's have now realized that even though they still dont want to work or take up responsibility in our society they can get PAID for their nonsence. Free Money is another thing this is all about.

Maybe we should for a "non-profit" and get the government to fund a study on how shooting helps young men and women become self aware and responsible? hmmm

[Ram Hammer]

+ on the land grab. The endangered species act has been used as a political tool for many years by special interest groups to put a stop to hunting, oil and mineral production and land development. I've heard people say that the polar bear issue could have world wide impact. Think about it. Someone wants to build a power plant. The greenies say "No! this will result in global warming, thus reducing the habitat of the polar bear. Therefore the endangered species act says you cannot complete your power plant project.

On another note. Species going extint is a natural phenomena. This is a fact that the endangered species act ignores. Some species become so specialized that they cannot survive even a small change in their environment. Lack of adaptability dooms them. Not human activity. Millions of dollars have been spent trying to reverse the natural course of nature just because.

I have worked in an area of California where a rare fish is protected. It is described as a poor swimmer! Not a good thing to have on a resume if you are a fish!

PS I ran across this yesterday. My jaw hit the floor

http://www.ecoenquirer.com/polar-bear-heat.htm

[Old Time Hunter]

What a crock!

[nemhed]

My first point, anything (subject) can and will be used as a political tool. Second point, in the last 30-40 years we have seen a dramatic improvement in the quality of water in the lakes rivers and streams in the United States. I can speak from personal experience that the level of bio-diversity in the midwest has improved greatly during the same time period (okay it's no Amazon Basin but I hope you see my point). Was this all brought about by communist red enviro-weenie land grabbers? Concern for the environment should not be a political issue, but of course it is. Am I a communist if I care how much coal the Chinese burn, or how much the Russians pollute their waterways,or if the people of Brazil burn down the Amazon, or if my neighbor throws trash in the ditch or dumps his used motor oil down the drain? I'm just asking.

[AmBraCol]

PS I ran across this yesterday. My jaw hit the floor

http://www.ecoenquirer.com/polar-bear-heat.htm

The "ecoenquirer.com" site is apparently a "tabloid website" type thing. It's on a par with the spoof "news" sight "The Onion" or some such that comes up with outrageous "news" items - complete with a spoof "news ticker" strip along the bottom of the screen. Take a look at some of the other "news" on the same page on the left.

"Antartic ice increasing AND decreasing"

"Pristine Alaskan glacier turns into tropical wasteland"

"Court orders fisherman to apologize to eagle"

:D:D:D:D:D:D

Hilarious stuff...

[AmBraCol]

First, we SHOULD be concerned about the world around us, and those of us on this forum ARE concerned - and probably more knowledgeable about the environment in general than your average "Joe Citizen" - and with much more common sense than your average "Eunuchstein R. Envirowacho". I believe we should all have our personal standards as well as any set by law. Back when I was growing up in the Amazon basin we had wildlife all over the place. We'd go hunting "for breakfast" or "for dinner" or "for supper" - very rarely did we go "deer hunting" or "quail hunting" or anything else that specific, if it walked, ran, crawled, slithered, flew or hopped it was pretty much fair game. There was an abundance all over the place and we never gave it two thoughts. The same with the fishing. We'd go fishing and never worried about limits and such. But the same thing happened there that did in the US of A in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Market hunting and fishing nearly killed the resource. I remember the last time I fished the Araguaia river. It was the late 80's and other than fish sold in the US for "glass cleaners" to the aquarium crowd there was almost nothing else in the river - not even piranha were to be found for the most part. I don't know what the status is 20 years later but I hope it's improved.

Anyway, about that time I pretty much quit hunting and rarely fished either. There was a river near where my sons were born that had been poisoned by some local idiot who wanted some fish "now" and never gave a thought to what he was doing to the river down stream. He used a vine which the indians used and got enough fish to feed himself and his family for a few days - but it took years for the fish to return. That little river emptied out into a larger river - that was nearly fished out. And so it had no where to draw replacement fish from except in the slowest fashion.

The US is a huge success story in the recuperation of animal species. We now have more white tails than there were when Colombus found the islands. And the squirrels are all over the place - with greatly expanded territory. And so on. Even predators are making a comeback to the point where they are becoming a nuisance. Our great problem now is to find a balance point that ensures healthy breeding populations of animals within the reduced territory that remains to them.

Now, what about all that nonsense about the Amazon forest being destroyed? It's about like what happens when there's a fire in the forests up in the US. The "destruction" also brings new habitat opportunities to many species that otherwise have few places to live. Yes, it will take centuries for the old growth to return - but it IS returning. Even in the area between the "Atlantic Forest" and the "Amazon Forest" where the growth is less dense than further west you can see what happens when man messes with the forest - as soon as he moves on it springs back up. In fact, most of the farmers farm the same field only about four years in a row. The first year after they clear it the crops do pretty well, there's minimal work to do in clearing out the unwanted growth. But the second year the weeds and such are greatly increased -as is the effort required to get a decent crop. The third year is worse yet and by the fourth year they're wondering if it might be better to simply clear a new piece to plant. And when they DO move on to plant a new piece the old one chokes over rapidly and the trees start growing and the vines and other plants do too. The biggest problem is mechanized farming in which tractors and plows are used to disc up the ground and to keep the weeds and such down. The use of herbicides and insecticides and such is another problem which does a lot of damage to the environment as well. Still, I've seen fields abandoned by mechanized farming and they too soon start to return to "normal".

Our planet is very resilient. God built it in an amazing way. There's a few questions I've got for the envirowhackos.

If domestic herbivores create such an environmental problem - ain't it great we no longer have those horrid herds of bison? And thank GOD we got rid of all those plains animals in Africa as well, right?

If the rain forest is "the planet's lungs" - isn't it a good thing when the relatively sparse old growth is knocked down and replaced with much denser and more oxygen producing young growth?

I believe we need to use our resources wisely. But to jam our heads in the sand and refuse to see when we're actually making headway is asinine.

What does all that have to do with polar bears? Not much, directly, but since you started the vent on environmental issues I let off a bit of steam as well.

As mentioned above, hunters and other outdoor sportsmen tend to be MUCH better conservationists and environmentalists than nonhunters - because our desire is to perpetuate our way of life and to ensure the continuation of the beautiful resources around us. We also know how animals act rather than thinking that the world is one big Disney movie.

[mikld]

Regarding the "ecoEnquirer";

Boy, you can tell that "Jeremiah Johnson" guy is an expert. "Sky McCloud" is a greay name for a TV weatherman (woman?). Never heard of "Cold Bay, Alsaka" either. And I really like the story of a Polar Bear eating only half of a homeless man.

If you look at this as anything other than "Eco-humor" you will probably vote for Klinton.

[Andrew]

I saw on "News Hour with Jim Lehr" some moron harping about how the Gobberment should do something about the polar bears. They also had some guy form some bureau telling him why it was hard to take action. Sad/weird as it is, I agreed with the gooberment talk monkey.

He said...
1)The endagered species act was never ment as a tool to fight "global warming"

2) You have to connect the dots between the cause(exhaust pipe) and the issue(poor mister bear), and that's just not possible to do in this situation.

[Gun Smith]

They finally found a way to stop the possibility of drilling for more Alaska oil. $8.00 gas, here we come!

[O.S.O.K.]

Jeramiah Johnson? You've got to be kidding me - this is a made-up story if I ever saw one... what a load!

I didn't see Robert Redford anywhere in that report....

And the whole idea that the polar bears can't handle a 5 degree shift in temperature is rediculous.

How long have they been around? And how many climactic cylcles have they existed in and survived?

None of this adds up. I call BS on the whole report - bet its a fake.

[YellowHorse]

The fact that the polar bear population has actually increased over the last 20-25 years doesn't seem to phase these "gorons".

I personally know an Inuit lady who's brother is up in Alaska and and told me the tribe is trying to "downsize" the bear population because they are really overpopulated and depleating the ungulate and seal population. They depend on these species for survival.
When I said, "The environmentalists are making it sound like they are endangered." She replied, "No! there are more bear than ever seen before!"

[Kismet]

I have two questions.

(1) Isn't it just natural for most large predators to have very low populations compared to most "game" animals? Large predators require large hunting areas, so they have never been as numerous as herd herbivores.

(2) Isn't extinction a natural process too? Millions of species of animals and plants lived and died out long before man had anything to do with it. I would have loved to see (and hunt) a saber-toothed tiger, but isn't it probably a good thing that these died out? What species would we be without had they survived? What species are we denying a chance to evolve/establish by artificially extending other species natural life-cycle?

1) Sure. But, unless the science is doctored, that fact would be included in any discussion about what a sustainable population level would be. I can't quite see how that question is relevant to whether or not the polar bear is in trouble.

2) Again, sure. But let's face it, we can change the surface of the earth faster than any animal can adapt. Though I agree that many times the endangered species act is used wildly inappropriately as a political tool, the basic fact that species go extinct without our help is rarely relevant to any discussion of whether we should try to mitigate our impact on the earth.

Now, all that said, I agree that some species have essentially sealed their own doom by becoming too specialized. If a little blue butterfly lives only on a few acres near our airport here, I don't think we should eliminate jet travel in order to save it. And I also agree with the point of some other posters here that the using cause and effect of climate change to make a species specific decision is probably not the most honest application of the endangered species act.

Of course, not much of this response is relevant to the polar bear, but you asked the questions!!

Michael in NH

[DavidF]

Jeramiah Johnson? You've got to be kidding me - this is a made-up story if I ever saw one... what a load!

I didn't see Robert Redford anywhere in that report....

And the whole idea that the polar bears can't handle a 5 degree shift in temperature is rediculous.

How long have they been around? And how many climactic cylcles have they existed in and survived?

None of this adds up. I call BS on the whole report - bet its a fake.

+1
I just watched my kids animal video from the San Diego zoo. 2 or 3 good sized polar bears in an open air enclosure running around playing, very active. Last time I checked San diego's avg. annul temp was somewhere above -10.

[TomD]

They fatten up on seals snatched through holes in the ice. Other than that they are a lot like teens hanging around at the mall. The fear is modest changes in temperature will affect available ice cover and they will starve, or better yet move south and start feeding on deer and ground hogs. The sporting options could get real interesting.

[sore shoulder]

The environmental conservationaist movement that was started by folks like Muir and his contemporaries has inded been infiltrated and taken over by Marxist. I was never made so aware of the truth of the Marxist control of environmental groups until I watched an interview with one of the co-founders of Greepeace who left the group due to exactly that, takeover by Marxists. His words. I was truly amazed.