Please invest in Our Daily Planet today, by making a one time or monthly contribution.
We do not charge our readers a subscription fee for our content. We want to continue to grow our readership, particularly among millennials and public servants. Voluntary contributions from readers will help us employ interns and freelance journalists, expand our content, and reach a larger audience.
The Trump Administration finally released the results of a long-awaited study on the cumulative impacts of oil and gas development in the Arctic on the endangered polar bear population and, not surprisingly, it was bad news for the bears. The study by the U.S. Geological Survey, as reported by The Washinton Post’s Juliette Eilperin, demonstrated that polar bears are highly vulnerable to climate change and that the proposed oil drilling would diminish their habitat, causing the remaining animals new stress. The head of the agency explained the months-long delay in the study’s release saying he needed to be “satisfied” with the science in the report before releasing it to the public.
Why This Matters: The head of an agency should review a major work product before it is released to the public. But delaying the release of a scientific report for months because it does not square with the administration’s policy viewpoint is another matter altogether. An agency head must review any work for which he/she will be held accountable and it is fair for them to ask for a briefing on the findings and ask questions. But refusing to release the report because it does not support a pro-drilling narrative is completely unacceptable, a position even he could not defend.
According to The Post, the study’s authors concluded that “The long-term persistence of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) is threatened by sea-ice loss due to climate change, which is concurrently providing an opportunity in the Arctic for increased anthropogenic activities including natural resource extraction.” Climate change is causing the bears to be at risk of extinction, in other words. In addition, the study found that “34 percent of the western U.S. Arctic’s maternal dens are on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which has implications for the Trump administration’s plans to auction oil and gas leases on the refuge.” The agency head held up the study, asking why researchers could not count every single polar bear maternal den in an area that spans tens of millions of square miles, according to two internal memos obtained by The Post.
by Amy Lupica, ODP Contributing Writer Sharks have killed seven people in Australia in 2020, the most since 1934, and scientists believe climate change might be responsible. According to the Taronga Conservation Society Australia, for the past 50 years, the average number of yearly shark attack fatalities was one. Despite the total number of shark […]
Human activity has nearly doubled the rate of natural disasters in the last quarter-century. And as the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) explained in a new report out this week: While many natural disasters cause great financial hardship and can tragically result in loss of human life, animals are often overlooked in the chaos. […]
Our Daily Planet is your daily dose of the stories shaping our world and the ways that you can take action. From the climate crisis to the protection of biodiversity, if these issues matter to you then please subscribe & stay informed!
Your privacy is Important! We promise never to use your email address to send you spam or advertisements.