Polar bear not ‘endangered’, just ‘concerning’ - April 28, 2008
While we await a US decision on the status of the polar bear, a Canadian expert group has decided it is in trouble, but not quite enough trouble for it to be considered endangered just yet.
In America they have been dragging out making a similar decision for months, and there’s still no answer (see Nature).
Meanwhile, north of the border, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada says the bear is merely of ‘special concern’, just one step up from ‘fine and dandy’ although the government group does admit to some worries. “Although the current and projected decline is insufficient to justify a status of Threatened, considerable concern exists over the future of polar bears in Canada,” says the latest assessment.
“Based on the best available information at hand, there was insufficient reason to think that the polar bear was at imminent risk of extinction,” says panel chairman Jeff Hutchings (BBC, Reuters). “That’s not to say that it's not in trouble. A special concern species is a species at risk in Canada and requires legislative action.”
However Canada’s Environment Minister John Baird still has to decide what to do with the listing of the bear as of concern. Reuters says he pledged to take action while “standing in front of a stuffed polar bear at the Canadian Museum of Nature in Ottawa”. I can’t work out if that’s appropriate or deeply inappropriate.
But while the polar bears are getting most of the coverage there are some more tragic tales unfolding in Canada...
The latest set of assessments by the committee notes there are fewer than 20 Spotted Owls left in Canada, with only five breeding pairs. “All adults are old and near the end of their breeding age and there is no recruitment of young owls into the population. If current trends are not reversed, extirpation will likely occur within the next decade,” says the committee.
Or how about the Vancouver Island Marmot? “Fewer than 30 mature wild-born individuals of this Canadian endemic remain in the wild. Despite the apparent initial success of reintroductions, the wild population of this species remains extremely small and could be subject to stochastic events.”
Then there’s the Fragrant Popcornflower, which has to rely on seeds: “Although only a single plant was seen in 2005 and none in 2006, the species is likely extant in the form of seeds in the soil.”
And according to a paper published recently in Ecological Applications, the narwhal is in bigger trouble from global warming than the polar bear anyway. Researchers assessed seven Arctic mammals and found the spiky-faced whale should be concerning us more than the polar bear.
“What we wanted to do was look at the whole picture because there’s been a lot of attention on polar bears,” Ian Stirling, paper author, told AP. “We’re talking about a whole ecosystem. We’re talking about several different species that use ice extensively and are very vulnerable.”
It’s all very well having iconic species for your conservation efforts. Sometimes though it seems we’re in danger of only saving the cute things that we like the look of. Here’s an extract from recent study published by the journal Conservation Biology:
We reviewed 60 recent papers on economic valuation of biodiversity and carried out a meta-analysis of these studies to determine what factors affect willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. ... Funding allocation mostly favored the conservation of species with anthropomorphic and anthropocentric characteristics instead of considering scientific factors.
Sorry to all the ugly, weird looking beasts out there. You’re just not high on our agenda right now...
Image top: Polar bear / USFWS
Image lower: Northern spotted owl / USFWS
Comments
That's both disappointing and unsurprising. I know Jeff. He's an obsessive ichthyologist, which isn't in itself a bad thing, but he's not a big fan of the charismatic megafauna. They draw focus away from his fishies. Not to mention that COSEWIC reports to the Federal Government, and the Canadian Federal Government is a farce. All anyone in Parliament does anymore is thumb their noses across the floor.
Anyway, I get the focus argument. Really, I do. But there is something to be said for umbrella species, is there not? We get decent protection for polar bear habitat- because people think they're pretty and majestic, they're on the Toonie, Al Gore showed one drowning in a movie, whatever- and all the smaller, less visible species who share that habitat are protected by extension. It certainly wouldn't make things any worse.
(FWIW, I actually think the narwhal would work as a poster animal.)
Posted by: DeNatured | April 28, 2008 06:07 PM
Just did a quick bit of research on the Fragrant Popcornflower, there are quite a number of similar species which are almost indistinguishable from each other and many of them are very common. Plagiobothrys figuratus ssp. corallicarpus, I believe, is the endangered one in this case. I sometimes wonder if it is right to expend considerable effort preserving almost indistinguishable subspecies versus unique branches of the tree of life which presumably hold more scientific value than a slight variation on a otherwise common species.
Posted by: Firri_Triah | April 29, 2008 06:10 PM