The Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources while honoring our various heritage, cultures, and tribal communities as well as supplies the energy of the future. The primary focus is within the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Federal Government. The existence of wildlife and plants is constantly threatened as a direct result of humanity. Global Warming is finally receiving acknowledgement necessary to make a difference in the wasteful and destructive routines of human expansion. Artic wildlife is experiencing the most difficulties as the surrounding glaciers are all melting. Our primary focus is on polar bears as they rely on masses of ice to rest after hunting for food. With the emergence of warmer climate, the areas of ice are diminishing leaving polar bears swimming for even longer until they drown from exhaustion. A federal regulation was passed in May of 2008 to protect the polar bear species from extinction by adding them to the endangered list. This should be a wake-up call to every individual living on the planet Earth as it is time to take responsibility for our actions and start making serious changes. Continued decrease of sea ice levels is expected in the future which affects the entire span of polar bears which reclassifies their status as threatened and endangered. The initial process began with a 12-Month Petition Finding and Proposed Rule during the year 2007. Polar bears are considered threatened with critical habitat under The Endangered Species Act of 1973. According to the Act: “Through Federal action and by encouraging the establishment of State programs, The Endangered Species Act of 1973 provided for the conservation of ecosystems upon which threatened and endangered species of fish, wildlife, and plants depend on.” (FWS, para. 1). Comments from the public were encouraged and were to be received by April 9, 2007, Alaska local time. The Proposed Rule was made final within the following year. The final ruling of the Federal Regulation: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Polar Bear became effective on May 15, 2008. Additional scientific information has been established since the rule was proposed which includes more sea ice research, climatological studies by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and Scientific Analyses conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The proposed to final rule protects a “Critical Habitat” by designation for the Polar Bears. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) defines a critical habitat as “An area that contains habitat features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and which may require special management considerations. A critical habitat designation does not set up a preserve or refuge. Federal agencies that undertake, fund, or permit activities that may affect critical habitat are required to consult with the Service to ensure that such actions do not adversely modify or destroy designated critical habitat.” (FWS, p. 1). Knowing more about the species biology and behavioral patterns helps us to better protect and even predict future existence. Polar Bears evolved from Grizzly Bears after the ice age, or as scientists refer to as the Interglacial Ice Period. The evolutionary process resulted in some unique characteristics that enabled their survival in arctic climates. Water repellant dense fur, carnivorous shaped teeth, and small-circular shaped projections from the soles of their feet to provide traction are among a few that made them adaptable to life on ice. The species preference is sea-ice but during melting periods will spend time on land for portions of the year as they wait for new ice to form. Due to the climate change more polar bears than ever recorded in history are found on land. The large species requires 4-5 pounds of seal fat a day to survive. When food is not abundant they will hunt walruses, beluga whales, and feed from human garbage remains if hungry enough. The species reproduction rate is very low as they produce small litters. The newborns are blind and require care until they are in the weaning stage which doesn’t occur until the cubs reach the age of a little over 2 years. Only then can the mother reproduce again making the birth interval very low. Due to very low reproduction the species requires a very high survival rate to maintain population levels. Present population levels are approximately 20,000-25,000. The species relies so heavily on sea ice to hunt, breed, and travel that the reduced levels truly threaten these creatures. Past research within the years of 1978-1996 has shown the cumulative annual sea ice levels have declined 2.8% per decade. From 1996-2005 the length of the melting periods has increased approximately 10-17 days per decade and are arriving up to two weeks earlier than the annual average. The decline in sea ice levels has been narrowed down to three factors: warming, atmospheric changes, and oceanic circulation. Polar bears have survived warming periods in the past but had a sufficient amount of time to adapt to the changes, whereas present changes occur rapidly, about 10 times faster within the 20th century. As fragmented sea ice becomes more frequent, polar bears will be pressured to move. Habitats will diminish as well as food resources while energy exertion will increase from traveling. Without sufficient amounts of nutrition, their conditions will weaken and cause the survival rates to falter. As stated earlier, Determination of Final Rule has taken place and the public commentary period is therefore closed. However, if I were to submit a comment it would state the following: The extensive emphasis on political monopoly seems to be denial of the damaging effects of Global Warming. By adding any threatened species to the endangered species list has a chain-reaction effect throughout the entirety of the ecosystem. The decline of sea ice levels will worsen, it’s a certainty. The sea ice is melting and forming large expanses of water that directly affects the polar bears that feed from the seals that feed from the artic cod and so on and so forth. The elements that need to be addressed are the population levels, technological advancements, and arctic hunting activities with corresponding data rates as a result thereof. This will serve as a comparison of effects of human expansion before the Industrial Revolution and into present day exploring the atmospheric and oceanic pressure from pollution that we are responsible for producing. My hopes are that people start educating themselves on this global matter as it is greatly affecting wildlife’s existence. Polar bears are such magnificent creatures and I cannot imagine never being able to see them again. However, I believe that by acknowledging global warming is the starting point for Earth’s preservation efforts. The proposed rule opened a 90-day public commentary period and requested that all participants submitted reports of scientific data, and any other information that will support the determination of regulation which deadline was April 9, 2007. After the (USGS) U.S. Geological Survey provided a set of nine reports consisting of analyses of various studies conducted on polar bear population, habitats, and fluctuating sea ice levels within the Arctic. The public commentary reopened after notifying the public of availability of these reports extending the commentary period 15 days longer. After numerous requests by the public the period was then extended once more until October 22, 2007. After submitting my comment, I’m entitled to a response from the administrative agency. After the agency publishes their responses to the issues of the public, an updated analysis is drafted to answer some dead-end issues or questionable information while justifying the rule. The proposed rule is shown again in federal register and if no other objections/issues arise, the rule is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. If however, there are individuals and/or public parties that object to the rule, they can file a lawsuit against the rulemaking. The courts examine carefully that the procedures were followed correctly and that the regulation exceeds the rulemaking authorities. The value of (APA) American Procedure Act is the governing of the way administrative agencies propose and establish regulations resulting in just and fair outcome for all parties involved. The proposal succeeded and was made final. For argument sake however, I would like to identify some ongoing concerns voiced by the public that serve as adversary viewpoints to the proposed regulation. An important point to emphasize is that a threat upon any wildlife species is cruel and unfair. The ongoing effort to support the wildlife is profound, but the political agendas involved are the most prominent concern among the public. The legal theories of jurisprudence will help to outline some key issues of global warming and polar bear populations that suggest political falsification and the manipulation of society. The theories of law under Jurisprudence; the philosophy of law are Positive Law, Benefitting People, Justice, Safety and Certainty, and Natural Law. Each theory views the law differently while discerning the validity. Positive Law associates power with law, the law is non-existent without power. Benefitting people suggests that law must benefit people, what authorities claim to be a benefit equates as the law. The wording of this theory allows benefits gained by authority can serve as a benefit of the public. These two theories of law use power to manipulate others. Similar behavior has been exhibited with the emergence of climate change or Global Warming through politics and scientific research. A widespread alert has increased from what I like to call the Global Warming Movement. The Global Warming Movement has heightened the awareness of others to protect the environment and the wildlife species that roam the planet. The three causes of climate change are increasing climate levels, melting periods of sea ice, and air quality. The validity of scientific reports is uncertain due to other evidence that proves the contrary. An article by Steve Elliott explains how reports generated from computer models can result in inaccuracy and misconceptions: “NASA and the World Meteorological Organization both say the Earth has experienced massive warming during this time. The bottom line is both cannot be correct. The main reason NASA and the WMO have data showing a warming trend during this time is because they are not recording actual temperatures taken, but are presenting the public with overall temperature projections from computer generated models. Such models have nothing to do with actual temperatures, but show a temperature model made from actual data, along with an assumed warming of a particular period of a certain area. Thus, their computer models show rising temperatures.”(Elliott, para. 2). These reports display significant increases in climate which contradict other scientific reports that show evidence of the cooling phase the planet is experiencing. Contradictory evidence has also been found in the melting of sea ice. Glacier ice packs recede and advance as a result of precipitation and ice levels. The most recent scientific evidence has shown that the sea ice levels within the North Pole and Antarctica have increased. The biggest concern for the polar bear is the melting of ice, if evidence is displaying the opposite of the reports within the regulation then this presents a potentially large misconception. The CO2 levels have dramatically affected the atmospheric layer according to several scientific analyses. Such analyses have been a result of reports generated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that shows an increase in industry/automobile production as well as deforestation. Various comment submitted during the public commentary period for the proposed rule determination questioned the accuracy of the scientific research provided. Contradictions were being proved left and right such as populations of polar bears have immensely increased leaving no reason to add them to the endangered species list. This concern has led many to give credit to the opposition of this regulation as it appears to be using the species to increase recognition of the Global Warming Movement by manipulation of the public vulnerabilities to animals. Several comments submitted doubted the accuracy on the nine reports provided to the public by various comparisons with more reliable sources. The responses provided to the comments were insufficient as the administrative agency just pointed to their findings as accurate and valid. Political involvement within this movement may seem dignified and honest but the majority of public comments show the opposite. Steve Elliott once again expresses concern from the deceit of political monopoly as he states: “Global Warming has been of concern since the Clinton Administration and is in existence to provide financial gain for investors of green technology and enact laws for the purpose of allowing the U.S. government more control over its citizens, more power over their people.”(Elliott, para. 13). Financial gain to authoritative powers will be a direct result of inflated prices from legislation including gasoline, utilities, and food as these essentials will be heavily taxed as commodities of fossil fuels. Since petrol products control transportation from the products we purchase, prices will rise profoundly. Green based items have gained popularity from Global Warming Movement and since they are produced by fossil fuels the prices will similarly increase. The two theories of law mentioned above support the fact that power is a necessity for implementation of law. The remaining three theories are less vindictive and require a conscious. The theory of law known as Justice denies validity of law and requires no obedience if law denies an individual’s will to Justice. The fourth theory of Safety and Certainty acknowledges that equilibrium cannot always be reached, which leaves the bad, detrimental, and unjust laws that should be denied if the character of the law is malevolent. The fifth theory of law is Natural Law also known as the voice of reason, or the voice of god which speaks to the conscious of an individual. The authority of god supersedes the authority of man. With reference to the above scrutiny of political involvement, it is relieving that the conscious is still referred to even within the deceitful

REFERENCES:

1. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: 50 CFR Part 17. (2008). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Throughout Its Range; Final Rule. Federal Register: Vol. 73, No. 95. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi

2. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: 50 CFR Part 17. (2007). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Petition Finding and Proposed Rule To List the Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) as Threatened Throughout Its Range. Federal Register : Vol. 72, No. 5, Proposed Rules. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi

3. Elliott, T. (Dec. 28, 2010). Global Warming is all About Politics and Nothing to do with Climate. The Cypress Times. Retrieved from: http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/Opinion_Editorial/GLOBAL_WARMING_IS_ALL_ABOUT_POLITICS_ AND NOTHING TO_DO_WITH_CLIMATE/38062

4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Digest of Federal Resource Laws: Endangered Species Act. Last Updated: June 29, 2007. Retrieved from: http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/ESACT.HTML

5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Polar Bear Critical Habitat: Some Frequently Asked Questions. Last Updated: January 30, 2012. Retrieved from: http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/mmm/polarbear/pdf/critical_habitat_factsheet_11_2010.pdf