DesertFox
02-16-2008, 04:40 PM
Exxon used to encourage motorists to ''put a tiger in your tank.'' Well, a different animal may begin influencing traffic soon. Polar bears could force drivers to shell out even more money for gasoline.
Why? Because environmental groups are pushing to list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, and the Bush administration is considering their demands.
It might make sense -- if the polar bear were endangered. But the worldwide population of these bears has more than doubled since 1965, to an estimated 20,000-25,000 today. Far from being threatened, by all accounts the bears are thriving.
So what's behind the push to ''save'' the bears? A desire to ban energy exploration in much of Alaska, and a threatened species tag is just the ticket to make it happen.
Once a species is listed, its ''critical habitat'' is broadly defined to include vast areas. The government then drafts a ''recovery plan'' that often contains onerous restrictions on economic activity inside the habitat and, in some cases, even outside it, trumping property rights in the process. Plus, environmental groups can sue to force the Interior Department to include additional restrictions.
More (http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/421435.html)
Why? Because environmental groups are pushing to list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, and the Bush administration is considering their demands.
It might make sense -- if the polar bear were endangered. But the worldwide population of these bears has more than doubled since 1965, to an estimated 20,000-25,000 today. Far from being threatened, by all accounts the bears are thriving.
So what's behind the push to ''save'' the bears? A desire to ban energy exploration in much of Alaska, and a threatened species tag is just the ticket to make it happen.
Once a species is listed, its ''critical habitat'' is broadly defined to include vast areas. The government then drafts a ''recovery plan'' that often contains onerous restrictions on economic activity inside the habitat and, in some cases, even outside it, trumping property rights in the process. Plus, environmental groups can sue to force the Interior Department to include additional restrictions.
More (http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/421435.html)