DOI’s Polar Bear Problem

Photo courtesy i can has cheezburger.

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Congratulations, polar bears! You’ve just won 200,541 square miles of Alaskan habitat… maybe. After being sued by several environmental groups, the US Fish & Wildlife Service announced today that polar bears may receive what’s thought to be the largest critical habitat ever. Too bad just earlier this week the Minerals Management Service announced that they’d approved Shell to drill in some of those those same 200,541 square miles. So what’s it gonna be? Oil, or bears? Right now, that’s to be determined. Fish & Wildlife will open a 60-day public comment period on the bear habitat proposal, but doesn’t have to make a final decision on whether to actually award the land under the Endangered Species Act until June 30, 2010.

The proposed polar bear habitat, if it gets awarded, is extensive enough to encompass summer and winter sea ice, terrestrial denning areas, and islands. The terrestrial portion is in the Northern part of Alaska, some of it within a 20 mile radius from the US-Canada border, and some of it within a 5 mile radius of Barrow and the Kavik River. The sea ice/water portion extends over the Continental Shelf and includes water up to 300 meters deep. Under the Endangered Species Act, now that the polar bear is finally listed, the government must designate critical habitat.

But that’s not stopping the State of Alaska: this week it filed a supplement to its 2008 lawsuit  contending that the government didn’t really listen to its concerns before listing the polar bear as endangered. In a press conference yesterday, Alaska’s attorney general said the state was doing “a good job in protecting the species,” and that the government’s models predicting further sea ice declines were “flawed.” A representative from the Center for Biological Diversity, quoted by the AP, begged to differ

“We are really disappointed to see that the state of Alaska is continuing to deny the science of climate change… It is ironic in a state that is feeling the impacts of global warming before everyone else that the state would take this position that can only hurt Alaskans.” 



Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend