In May 2008, polar bears were listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. The U.S. Department of the Interior listed polar bears under the act based on scientific evidence that the sea ice habitat they rely on to survive is shrinking. The listing of polar bears is seen as a special case because they’re taking precautionary measures for the future decline of their species due to sea ice melt. But is the listing enough to help save the polar bears?
 
The Decision to List Polar Bears
Listing a species as “threatened” under the ESA means that they’re at risk of becoming an endangered species and in danger of becoming extinct. According to Interior Secretary, Dirk Kempthorne, they made the decision to list polar bears as threatened based on evidence that sea ice habitat is essential to polar bear survival and that sea ice continues to melt at an alarming rate. Based on a computer model studied by the Interior, sea ice is projected to decline 30% by 2050. They’ve found that if sea ice habitats continue to be reduced then polar bears will be extinct within 45 years.
 
Kempthorne admits that the decision to list polar bears under the ESA was difficult because of the unique conservation challenge it poses to the country. Most species are faced with localized threats that can be more easily isolated, but polar bears are threatened by the global impacts on sea ice. But despite their listing as a threatened species, they’re not protected from being hunted by natives for food and other resources.
 
Questionably Long Decision-Making
In the end the listing was a small victory for polar bears, but the decision did not come easy. The Interior Department promised to make the decision by January 9, 2008, but they did not hold up to their commitment. The U.S. District Court Judge, Claudia Wilken, had to order the George Bush administration to hurry up and make the decision by May 15. The Interior requested to postpone the fate of the polar bears until June 30 but Wilken did not give in. Kempthorne said that their decision took longer than expected because of the large amount of data they needed to study and debate.
 
But one accusation the Interior faced for the delay was that they were waiting for business deals to be finished in Alaska. According to Andrew Wetzler, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Endangered Species Project, during the time of decision making, the Minerals Management Service (now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management) were finalizing lease sales for exploratory oil and gas off the Alaskan coast. These oil and gas leases covered about 46,000 square miles (120,000 square kilometers) in the Chukchi Sea off the northwest coast of Alaska. The Interior may have delayed the fate of the polar bears to ensure that these economic endeavors would not be compromised. Kempthorne denied these claims.
 
Lacking Commitment for Climate Action
Although Kempthorne has made it clear during press conferences that the sea ice habitat of polar bears is melting due to climate change, he does not want to associate the ESA with regulating greenhouse gas emissions. He also acknowledged that their decision to list polar bears does not necessarily mean that sea ice will stop melting or that the problem of global climate change will suddenly disappear. Unfortunately, it seems as though the Interior has little interest in trying to help mitigate the effects of climate change, even though it’s a leading cause of sea ice melt.
 
And even worse, there are others who think that the effect of greenhouse gas emissions should not be linked to the vulnerability of polar bears at all. According to Dale Hall, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the ESA "can't make connections between greenhouse gas emissions and the polar bear's status as an endangered species". Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute also disputed the Interior’s decision and argued that the science they based the decision on was obsolete. He believes that the decision was more political rather than scientific.
 
When the decision was made to list polar bears under the EPA, the Bush administration also allowed oil and gas drilling to continue in the Arctic despite its negative effects on the Earth and climate change. This leaves us questioning whether the decision was made to help save the polar bears or whether it was a way to shush citizens and environmental groups while oil and gas extraction would continue.
 
The Interior may have acknowledged and raised awareness on the fact that polar bears are in danger because of the rapid melting of sea ice, but the government needs to take climate action in order to effectively save the species. Changes need to be made to reduce the amount greenhouse gases that ends up in the atmosphere. It’s important to assess our own energy consumption and opt for renewable energies. As citizens it’s also important that we speak up, raise awareness and push our governments to take climate action, not just for the polar bears but for the planet as a whole.