Commentary: Polar bear protection shouldn't influence global warming policy | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Opinion

Commentary: Polar bear protection shouldn't influence global warming policy

The Anchorage Daily News

May 12, 2009 10:35 AM

This editorial appeared in The Anchorage Daily News.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar made a call for common sense last week. He agreed with the Bush administration that the Endangered Species Act should not be used to drive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

His predecessor, Dirk Kempthorne, was right (if reluctant) to list the polar bears in 2008 as a "threatened" species under the act. Their Arctic ice habitat is diminishing, and the scientific consensus is that global warming is the culprit.

So there's logic in trying to limit greenhouse gases to protect the bears – but the Endangered Species Act is not the way to do it. Using the act that way would cast a cloud over every federal decision and federal permit that involves the production of significant greenhouse gases anywhere in the country.

There's no question that Salazar and the Obama administration intend to protect the polar bear. Unlike their predecessors, they understand that the nation must act to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, but they recognize the Endangered Species Act is the wrong tool for the job. For Alaskans it might have meant a presumptive "no" to future oil and gas development on the North Slope.

As Secretary Salazar pointed out, there's more than one way to spare the bear. We don't need a blanket prohibition against creating any more greenhouse gases.

To read the complete editorial, visit The Anchorage Daily News.

Related stories from McClatchy DC

politics-government

U.S. to keep Bush administration rule on polar bears

May 08, 2009 12:49 AM

Read Next

Opinion

This is not what Vladimir Putin wanted for Christmas

By Markos Kounalakis

December 20, 2018 05:12 PM

Orthodox Christian religious leaders worldwide are weakening an important institution that gave the Russian president outsize power and legitimacy.

KEEP READING

MORE OPINION

Opinion

The solution to the juvenile delinquency problem in our nation’s politics

December 18, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

High-flying U.S. car execs often crash when when they run into foreign laws

December 13, 2018 06:09 PM

Opinion

Putin wants to divide the West. Can Trump thwart his plan?

December 11, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush, Pearl Harbor and America’s other fallen

December 07, 2018 03:42 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush’s secret legacy: his little-known kind gestures to many

December 04, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

Nicaragua’s ‘House of Cards’ stars another corrupt and powerful couple

November 29, 2018 07:50 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service