Polar Bear Ruling Sparks Reaction
The U.S. Department of Interior had only a muted reaction to Monday's federal court ruling demanding a quick decision on whether to protect the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act because of global warming. But that didn't keep the department's critics from weighing in.
A spokesman for the department headed by Secretary Dirk Kempthorne (pictured), in an e-mail forwarded Tuesday to Climate Law Update, gave little clue as to the government's next step in aftermath of U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's ruling:
"We have received the court's decision and we are reviewing it. We will evaluate the legal options and will decide the appropriate course of action."
Wilken Monday ruled in favor of a number of environmental groups and ordered the department to decide by May 15 whether to shield the animals under the endangered species law. The judge, who sits in Oakland, Calif., also rejected calls by the government, which has previously proposed designating the bears as "threatened," to delay the effect of its decision (see Climate Law Update story below).
The ruling gave those skeptical of the agency's motives plenty of ammunition, and also a chance to talk about the larger implications of a listing under the powerful federal statute. They also seemed to have little doubt that the government will extend law's protections to the bear.
Kassie Siegel, a California attorney and climate program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit prodding the government to act, in a written statement (see text here) called the decision "a huge victory" for the Arctic-dwelling predator. By the judge's deadline, Siegel said, the bear "should receive the protections it deserves under the Endangered Species Act, which is the first step toward saving the polar bear and the entire Arctic ecosystem from global warming."
Activists have long said that they see the listing of such animals as the polar bear -- which would be the first mammal given an endangered species designation because of climate-related reasons -- as bringing the law into the broader struggle against global warming. It could also have implications for more local concerns, such as oil exploration in the Arctic (see previous Climate Law Update story here).
Andrew Wetzler, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's endangered species project, said in the same statement that the federal court decision was a lifeline for the "incredible animal." He added that the endangered species law "requires the decision to be based solely on science, and the science is absolutely unambiguous that the polar bear deserves protection." The NRDC, along with Greenpeace, is also a plaintiff in the case.
Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, no friend of the Bush administration, also took the opportunity to weigh in (see statement here). Boxer, a California Democrat, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and who has repeatedly clashed with the executive branch's environmental officials, had this to say:
"Interior Secretary Kempthorne, like [Environmental Protection Agency] Administrator Stephen Johnson, has been stonewalling our committee, and I am very pleased that the court has ordered the Interior Department to stop stalling and finalize its decision regarding polar bears. These magnificent creatures are in peril, and this administration has no right to walk away from protecting them."
(Photo: U.S. Department of Interior)
