Like the potential Wolverine re-introduction in Colorado, Alaska now seeks to prevent Critical Habitat Designation for Polar Bears from being designated.........Sometimes I feel that we are back in 1850...................that we have not learned anything about the long-term benefits of optimizing biodiversity in every State in the USA................Republicans shouting that jobs and livelihoods will be lost..................where are the Teddy Roosevelt Republicans...........those that champion fiscal responsiblity while simultaneously seeking broad and lasting protections for our Wild animal cousins?

Alaska Sues Government over Polar Bear Protection

Posted by Erin

The state of Alaska filed notice on Tuesday stating their intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over protections recently put in place to help polar bears faced with the effects of climate change. Republican Governor Sean Parnell argues that the critical habitat designation that was announced by the Obama Administration last month will delay jobs and increase costs. Parnell stated that the designation could kill resource development projects important to Alaskans. "Once again, we are faced with federal overreach that threatens our collective prosperity," Parnell stated. "We don't intend to let this stand.

" Designation of a critical habitat does not necessarily block economic activity or other development, but requires federal officials to consider whether a proposed action would adversely affect the polar bear's habitat and interfere with its recovery. Almost 95 percent of the designated habitat, which covers 187,000 square miles, is sea ice in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas off Alaska's northern coast. Polar bears spend most of their lives on frozen ocean where they hunt seal, breed and travel.Tom Strickland, assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks at the Interior Department, said the designation would help polar bears stave off extinction, recognizing that the greatest threat is the melting of Arctic sea ice caused by climate change. "This critical habitat designation enables us to work with federal partners to ensure their actions within its boundaries do not harm polar bear populations," Strickland said. "We will continue to work toward comprehensive strategies for the long-term survival of this iconic species."

Parnell contends that the critical habitat designation in the oil-rich Arctic could result in hundreds of millions of dollars lost in economic activity and tax revenue for the state. Alaskan officials and the state's oil and gas industry maintain that polar bears do not need the additional protection. "Already, there are state laws, international agreements, and the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act to protect polar bears," Parnell said on Tuesday. "The polar bear is one of the most protected species in the world."

Despite Parnell's claim of the polar bear being protected, the species is still shrinking. Due to global warming and loss of habitat, it is estimated that only 20-25,000 polar bears live in the wild. Brendan Cummings, attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, says that the threat of lawsuit over polar bear protection is not a surprise. "They have opposed every Endangered Species Act listing to date," Cummings said. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does not comment on pending litigation. The state put the federal agency on 60-days notice that it intends to sue unless the critical habitat designation is withdrawn or corrected.