The challenge of saving the orangutan – man’s closest relative – from extinction is trickling down to the weekly shop. Many of the biscuits, margarines, breads, crisps and even bars of soap that consumers pick off supermarket shelves contain an ingredient that is feeding a growth industry that conservationists say is killing the orangutans.

The mystery ingredient in the mix is palm oil – the cheapest source of vegetable oil available – and one that rarely appears on the label of most products. Palm oil is grown on land that was once home to the vast rainforests of Borneo, and the natural habitat of the orangutan.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature estimates that the population has declined by 50% in recent decades and the Indonesian government admits that 50,000 orangutans have died as a result of de-forestation.

A BBC Panorama investigation into clear-cutting in Indonesian Borneo – the island it shares with Malaysia – found that the thirst for land on which to plant palm plantations is encroaching on areas that the Indonesian government has deemed to be off-limits.

The orangutans, displaced as the trees of old-growth forests are burned and at times killed by workers who see them as a nuisance in the logging process, are not the only victims of the runaway growth in palm oil – scientists say there is a wider environmental price being paid.

Greenpeace has identified the draining of ancient peat lands to make way for palm oil as a global threat, saying it had lead to massive amounts of trapped methane and carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere. As a result, Indonesia is the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind only America and China.

ORANGUTAN FACTS

• Orangutan means “old man of the forest” in Malay
• Only apes living outside of Africa
• Largest tree-dwelling mammals

Using GPS technology and satellite imaging, the BBC team pinpointed exact locations where palm oil giant the Duta Palma Group is logging on both high conservation lands and deep peat lands – both are illegal.Shailendra Yashwant, Greenpeace director for Southeast Asia, said this illegal logging is widespread and includes major suppliers to the UK’s food and household product market.

“We want the Indonesian government to immediately announce a moratorium on further deforestation…beginning with peat lands.”

Willie Smits, a former advisor to the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry turned environmental campaigner, said of the findings: “This is criminal, this should not take place. It means there is no hope left for the most endangered sub-species of the orang-utan in west Kalamantan.”

He said the wider environmental issue of greenhouse gases can no longer be overlooked by both manufacturers and everyday consumers.

“This is not just a matter for Indonesia to decide, this is a matter for the world.”

Currently, only 3% of the world’s palm oil is certified sustainable, meaning it comes from plantations that pass an environmental and social impact test. Many have joined the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) scheme set up to promote certification of where palm oil originates.

Bulk oil from a variety of plantations – including that of Duta Palma Group that the BBC found to be illegally clear-cutting – is mixed together and shipped around the world and sold on to manufacturers behind everyday products. Duta Palma declined to comment on the BBC’s evidence of illegal deforestation.

Many of the sweets and staples in our shopping trolleys contain palm oil. Current labelling laws allow manufacturers to list palm oil as ‘vegetable’ oil, without singling out the palm oil content. However, Sainsbury’s supermarkets had earlier taken the decision to not only single out palm oil on the ingredients lists of their own-brand products, but to state directly that it is from a sustainable source.

Recently Unilever, the UK’s largest user of palm oil in products that range from Dove soap to Pot Noodles, Knorr soups and Flora, terminated a large contract with a supplier called Sinar Mas, because of reports it was destroying high conservation value forests.

We need to make people aware of issues like this that affect others we may not realise, whether they are human or orangutans. If the public are not aware the products they buy are destroying natural habitats then they won’t do anything about it. Help spread this message so we can make a change.

Celebrities are showing their support for an end to animal testing by joining an on-line virtual protest. Comedian Ricky Gervais, actress Joanna Lumley OBE and rockers Brian May CBE and Chrissie Hynde, are joining tens of thousands of people taking part in the virtual march to Brussels where the 20-year old law on animal experiments is up for review by politicians.

‘Mini-me’ virtual characters of Ricky, Joanna, Chrissie and Brian appear in the campaign cheering on the thousands of marchers from across the EU and they hope to persuade thousands more to take part at www.makeanimaltestinghistory.org/march

More than 12 million animals such as rabbits, hamsters, monkeys, cats and dogs, are used in experiments in Europe each year. Many of the experiments can cause physical and mental distress to the animals. Animal lovers across the UK and Europe are taking to cyber-space to demonstrate support for improvements to the 20-year old law on animal experiments. Make Animal Testing History is run by the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research, Four Paws and Humane Society International who are seeking a massive drive to develop non-animal alternative tests to replace the use of animals altogether with humane, 21st-century methods.

Ricky Gervais says: “When I was asked if I’d like to back the campaign to Make Animal Testing History I said “Yes”, immediately, as it is a cause that I am very, very passionate about. When they said it involved a march, I said forget it. But when they said it was a virtual march and I would have to do very little except show my support and give a quote, I jumped at the chance. On a serious note, we need EU politicians to vote for more humane science. With all the non-animal techniques available now and in the future, we really don’t need to hurt animals to make medical progress.”

Joanna Lumley OBE, said: “Join me fabulous walkers, in showing how much we care for the feelings of our fellow creatures, and how soon we long for all animal testing to become a thing of the past. Tell everyone you know how easy it is to sign up, pack some sandwiches and, as Nancy Sinatra so succinctly put it, “Start walking!!!”

Queen guitarist Brian May CBE said: “Humans do not have the right to abuse other animals in any way whatsoever. What on Earth makes us think we are that important? If we want to call ourselves civilised, a change is long overdue. No animal should ever be subjected to indignity or discomfort, far less, a painful death, in the name of science.”

Chrissie Hynde said: “Animal experimentation just doesn’t make sense in the 21st century. It causes suffering to millions of animals and it’s hardly cutting-edge science. Thousands of people are cyber-marching right now to Make Animal Testing History and I’m right there with them cheering them on. Let’s stop filling our laboratories with monkeys and mice and use modern alternative research methods instead. See you on the march!”

Citizens from across Europe are being invited to get e-active by signing an online pledge of support to Make Animal Testing History and creating their own personalised character to join the mass cyber parade through Brussels towards the European parliament. The law will be debated during the coming months by politicians across Europe.

• October 1989: At least 20 whales of three species strand during naval exercises near the Canary Islands.
• December 1991: Two Cuvier’s beaked whales strand during naval exercises near the Canary Islands.
• May 1996: Twelve Cuvier’s beaked whales strand on the west coast of Greece as NATO ships sweep the area with low- and mid-frequency active sonar.
• October 1999: Four beaked whales strand in the U.S. Virgin Islands during Navy maneuvers offshore.
• May 2000: A beaked whale strands in Vieques as naval exercises are about to begin offshore.
• May 2000: Three beaked whales strand on the beaches of Madeira during NATO naval exercises near shore.
• April 2002: A beaked whale and a humpback whale strand near Vieques during an offshore battle group training exercise.
• September 2002: At least 14 beaked whales from three different species strand in the Canary Islands during an anti-submarine warfare exercise in the area. Four additional beaked whales strand over the next several days.
• May 2003: As many as 11 harbor porpoises beach along the shores of the Haro Strait, Washington State, as the USS Shoup tests its mid-frequency sonar system.
• June 2004: As many as six beaked whales strand during a Navy sonar training exercise off Alaska.
• July 2004: Approximately 200 melon-headed whales crowd into the shallow waters of Hanalei Bay in Hawaii as a large Navy sonar exercise takes place nearby. Rescuers succeed in directing all but one of the whales back out to sea.
• July 2004: Four beaked whales strand during naval exercises near the Canary Islands.
• January 2005: At least 34 whales of three species strand along the Outer Banks of North Carolina as Navy sonar training goes on offshore.

So far, NRDC has been successful in pushing for stricter control of two major types of military sonar, the widely used mid-frequency sonar and long-range low-frequency sonar – despite strong administration resistance. In early 2008, a federal court prohibited the Navy from conducting major mid-frequency sonar exercises in California without safety measures in place and rejected a White House bid to excuse the Navy from following the law. The Navy appealed this decision. Also in early 2008, federal courts limited the regions where low-frequency sonar may be used and deemed certain species-rich areas, such as the Galapagos Islands and the Great Barrier Reef, off-limits. The NRDS’s advocacy has pressured the Navy into preparing impact reviews and seeking environmental permits for sonar training on all of its U.S. ranges.NRDC’s goal is to encourage the military to use sonar responsibly, not to stop its use altogether. Necessary safety measures include putting rich marine mammal habitat off-limits; avoiding migration routes and feeding or breeding areas when marine mammals are present; and turning off active sonar when marine mammals and endangered species are spotted near by. The principle behind active sonar will be familiar to anyone who has ever watched a submarine movie. Active sonar systems produce intense waves of sound that sweep the ocean like a floodlight, revealing objects in their path. Some systems can put out over 235 decibels, a level that can spread harmful sound across tens or even hundreds of miles of ocean.

Evidence of sonar’s dangers surfaced in 2000, when whales of four different species stranded themselves on beaches in the Bahamas after a U.S. Navy battle group used mid-frequency sonar in the area. Although the Navy initially denied responsibility, the government’s investigation established that sonar caused the strandings. After the incident, the area’s population of Cuvier’s beaked whales nearly disappeared, leading researchers to conclude that they either abandoned their habitat or died at sea. Similar mass strandings have occurred in the Canary Islands, Greece, Madeira, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Hawaii and other sites around the globe.

Many of these beached whales have suffered physical trauma, including bleeding around the brain, ears and other tissues. 

In addition, many have shown symptoms akin to a severe case of “the bends” — the illness that can kill scuba divers who surface quickly from deep water. The clear implication is that debilitating and lethal injuries are occurring in whales exposed to sonar at sea, perhaps by altering their dive patterns.

But stranded whales are only the most visible symptom of a problem affecting much larger numbers of marine life.  

In the darkness of the ocean, marine mammals and many fish rely on sound to follow migratory routes, to locate each other over great distances, to find food, to breed and to care for their young. Naval sonar has been shown to disrupt feeding and other vital behavior and to cause a wide range of species to panic and flee. Scientists are concerned about the cumulative effect of all of these impacts on populations of animals. Ongoing NRDC campaigns have made strides toward requiring the Navy to use proper safeguards when employing sonar.

• 2008: A federal court limits the regions where low-frequency sonar may be used and deemed certain species-rich areas, such as the Galapagos Islands and the Great Barrier Reef, off-limits.
• 2006: Two years after an earlier exercise caused the stranding of 200 whales in Hanalei Bay, a federal court halts sonar use during the Navy’s massive Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise off Hawaii. The Navy agrees to additional mitigation to remove the injunction.
• 2006: After years of pressure from NRDC, the Navy begins to conduct environmental reviews and seek permits for mid-frequency sonar training off the U.S. coasts. The first review, for a proposed training range off North Carolina, is so heavily criticized that the Navy takes the unusual step of withdrawing it and starting from scratch.
• 2005: An NRDC-led coalition sues the Navy in U.S. federal court after years of attempts at constructive dialogue could not convince the Navy to take common-sense precautions during peacetime training with mid-frequency sonar.
• 2004: Responding to NRDC and other groups, a suite of intergovernmental bodies begins to take action on sonar. The European Parliament calls on its 25 member states to stop deploying active sonar without more information about the harm to whales and other marine life. ACCOBAMS, a European agreement for marine mammals, commits to develop guidelines for sonar and other noise-producing activities in the Mediterranean and Black seas. The World Conservation Congress of the World Conservation Union calls for international action.
• 2003: NRDC wins a major victory when a federal court rules illegal the Navy’s plan to deploy low-frequency sonar through 75 percent of the world’s oceans. The Navy agrees to limit use of the system to a fraction of the area originally proposed, and that use of low-frequency sonar will be guided by negotiated geographical limits and seasonal exclusions.

NRDC’s efforts to bring attention to the serious risks of active sonar have been aided immeasurably by the tens of thousands of messages their members and other activists have sent, insisting that active sonar not be used until the long-term safety of ocean wildlife can be assured. Today, they are increasing pressure on the international community and the U.S. Navy to reduce the impact of active sonar on our oceans, before it’s too late. As their campaign expands, they will need your help more than ever. Join NRDC’s Earth Activist Network. Please visit www.nrdc.org for more information.

The number of animals used in UK labs for scientific experiments is now more than three million – a level not seen since the beginning of the 1990s.

Home Office figures show that in 2007, all procedures in England, Wales and Scotland used 3.1 million animals.

The year-on-year increase of 6% continues the recent upward trend driven mainly by the use of rodents in genetics experiments.

Mice and rats constitute more than 80% of all animals used in laboratories.

The remainder involve primarily fish, birds, and reptiles/amphibians.

Dogs, cats, horses and non-human primates receive special protection under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. These were used in less than half of 1% of the procedures.

Most procedures are for research and drug development; safety testing accounts for much of the rest.

Animal welfare groups criticised what amounts to the the sixth yearly rise in succession, but scientists said the work was necessary if society wanted to find ever more effective treatments for debilitating diseases.

The number of animals used in lab experiments peaked in the 1970s with more than five million procedures carried out annually.

The statistics then fell rapidly during the 90s and 80s before picking up again at the start of the century.

Just over 3.2 million scientific procedures were started in 2007, a rise of about 189,500 (6%) on 2006.

The latest rise is the sixth in succession and largely reflects the increasing role of genetically modified animals in research.

The use of GM animals – mainly mice – has more than quadrupled since 1995.

By adding or knocking out genes in mice, scientists believe they can gain an insight into the molecular flaws in humans that lead to illness.

Animal welfare groups have long argued that the numbers – although smaller than they used to be – are still too high.

They say that many experiments often give misleading or wholly useless information; and that scientists ought to make better use of alternatives.

RSPCA senior scientist Barney Reed said his organisation was “extremely dismayed” to see yet another rise.

“Scientists and the government repeatedly state that animals are only used where absolutely necessary,” he added. “Yet with the numbers going up yet again the public will quite rightly question this statement.”

To coincide with the release of the official Home Office statistics, the Dr Hadwen Trust, a medical charity which funds non-animal medical research, issued its own report into the statistical trends under the Labour government.

The Trust said the 21% rise in animals used in labs since 1997 represented a severe disappointment given their manifesto promises.

The charity’s Wendy Higgins added: “It has resulted in an 11-year record of failure that has now seen the number of animals dying in British laboratories reach three million for the first time in 16 years. If the government doesn’t take urgent action to implement a clear strategy to replace animals with advanced techniques, Labour’s legacy for lab animals will be an appalling failure.”

Researchers counter that whilst great strides are being made in the use computer models, tissue cultures and other alternatives – some animal experimentation will always be necessary to help find cures for life-threatening diseases.

Home Office Minister Meg Hillier said: “Advances with non-animal test methods continue to be made, but at present licensed animal use remains essential to develop improved health-care technologies. The UK continues to maintain strong science-base, and high animal welfare standards, in line with the requirements of the 1986 Act.”

Northern Ireland’s figures are published separately to the rest of the United Kingdom. They are a small fraction of the overall total, representing a few thousand animals.

Levels of noise in the world’s oceans are causing serious problems for whales, dolphins and other marine mammals, a report warns.

The International Fund for Animal Welfare (Ifaw) says undersea noise blocks animals’ communication and disrupts feeding.

Naval sonar has been implicated in the mass deaths of some cetaceans.

In some regions, the level of ocean noise is doubling each decade, and Ifaw says protective measures are failing. “Humanity is literally drowning out marine mammals,” said Robbie Marsland, UK director of Ifaw. “While nobody knows the precise consequences for specific animals, unless the international community takes preventive measures we are likely to discover only too late the terrible damage we’re causing.” In its global assessment of cetacean species, released last month, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) concluded that ocean noise posed a significant threat.

Whales and dolphins use sound in ways that are clearly important to their survival, though not completely understood. Baleen whales, such as blue and humpback whales, produce low frequency calls that can travel thousands of kilometres through water.
Dolphins and toothed whales generate higher frequency clicks used to locate prey.
Noise generated by ships’ engines and propellers, and by seismic airguns used in oil and gas exploration, produce a range of frequencies that can interfere with both these groups of species, Ifaw concludes.

Its report – Ocean Noise: Turn it down – cites research showing that the effective range of blue whales’ calls is only about one-tenth of what it was before the era of engine-driven commercial shipping.

It also notes that high-energy military sonar systems have driven the mass strandings and deaths of beaked whales. The sonar is thought to disrupt the animals’ diving behaviour so much that they suffer a condition rather like “the bends” which human divers can contract if they surface too quickly. Pressure from conservation groups has led to restrictions on the use of sonar by the US Navy. In some places, companies involved in oil and gas exploration limit their use of seismic airguns.

But Ifaw argues these restrictions are not enough. The use of high-energy sonar and seismic airguns should be completely prohibited in sensitive areas, it says. National legislation, such as the UK’s Marine Bill, should comprehensively restrict the exposure of cetaceans to noise.

The UK branch of the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) has sounded alarm bells recently over oil and gas exploration in the Moray Firth, home to a small population of bottlenose dolphins.

The Ifaw report is not the first to raise the threat posed by ocean noise, and it will not be the last. The problem is that most of the activities causing the problem – commercial shipping, mineral extraction – are part and parcel of the modern, interconnected economy.

A further obstacle to legislation is that much of the noise is generated on the high seas, which are largely unregulated.
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Lions regularly survive outbreaks of canine distemper virus (CDV) and infestations by a tick-borne blood parasite called Babesia. But both normally occur in isolation. In 1994 and 2001, however, a “perfect storm” of extreme drought followed by heavy seasonal rains set up the conditions for the two diseases to converge, the study said. The effect was lethal: The synchronized infections wiped out about a third of the Serengeti lion population in 1994. The nearby Ngorongoro Crater lion population experienced similar losses in 2001.

“It was already well known that die-offs can be triggered by droughts and floods,” Craig Packer, an ecologist at the University of Minnesota explained from his research site in Tanzania. “We were able to identify the interacting components of a lethal co-infection that had not previously been considered,” he said.

Packer and his colleagues combed through more than 30 years of data on the lion populations to determine the complex combination of factors that caused the mass die offs. They found that at least five CDV outbreaks swept through the lion populations with no ill effect. The two die offs, which are also tied to CDV outbreaks, were preceded by extreme droughts.

Probing further, the researchers discovered the droughts weakened lion prey, including the Cape buffalo. When the rains resumed, Babesia-carrying ticks emerged en masse and proliferated in their buffalo hosts. Many of the buffalo died. The lions feasted on the weakened, parasite-infested buffalo, but the feast left the hunters with unusually high concentrations of Babesia. The subsequent CDV outbreak proved lethal, according to the study.

“CDV is immunosuppressive—like a short, sharp bout of AIDS—thus greatly intensifying the effects of the Babesia,” Packer said. This co-infection, or synchronization of the diseases, caused the mass die offs, Packer and his colleagues concluded.

Study author Packer and his colleagues warn that as global climate change continues to produce more extreme weather anomalies, potentially fatal synchronized infections are likely to become more common.

“Many mysterious maladies such as colony collapse disorder in honeybees are likely to result from co-infections,” Packer noted.

The research adds to a growing body of evidence showing how extreme climate events can have major impacts on the spread of infectious diseases. Since more deadly co-infections are likely to arise, researchers need to reconsider how they treat wildlife and humans.”Understanding the mechanism by which the animals are actually dying or succumbing to disease then changes how you should go about preventing that,” he explained.

In the case of the lions, Packer noted, wildlife managers may be able to better protect populations by reducing their tick loads immediately following a drought rather than controlling for CDV.

Today we must look beyond mere survival. The foundation need your help to secure the long-term future of the sanctuary. Without Nyaru Menteng – run by Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation – the lives of over 650 orangutans are at serious risk.

Your donation can be a major step to secure the future of this remarkable sanctuary that saves orangutans and nurtures them to healthy independence.

• £10 could buy 8 baby bottles to feed the smallest infants
• £25 could provide food, medical care and shelter to one orangutan for a week
• £60 could provide milk for a baby orangutan for 2 months
• £200 could help pay for the rescue and transport of vulnerable orangutans

Please can you make this one of your most significant gifts to help these persecuted and abused creatures? The staff and volunteers at the reserve are working round the clock. No one could ask any more of them. And it will be a great boost for them to know that there are people like you thinking of them and ensuring their work can go on.

You can do a tremendously special thing today. It is rare to be able to play a direct part in helping so many threatened animals whose species is so precariously close to extinction. By giving your support today you’ll become one of the first people worldwide to guarantee these beautiful animals a safe haven.

It only takes a few minutes to make a donation using the form on this page. If you have any difficulties, or would prefer to donate over the phone, please call Supporter Services on 0845 0777 500 (Mon – Fri, 9am – 5pm) to help save the orangutans.

“There’s this idea that because these are widely ranging species, they’re more resilient to fishing pressure,” said Sonja Fordham, deputy chair of the IUCN Shark Specialist Group (SSG) and policy director for the Shark Alliance conservation group. “In fact they’re becoming species of serious concern because there are no international catch limits for sharks. There are intense fisheries on the oceans, and they remain pretty much unprotected.”

The SSG assessed data on the 21 species of sharks and their close cousins, the rays, that swim in upper portions of the open ocean where they are exposed to fishing fleets. Of the 21, one – the giant devilray – is assessed as Endangered, and 10 are Vulnerable. A further five are listed as Near Threatened, which means the signs of decline are not serious enough yet to merit a full listing.

The classifications are based on a range of criteria that look at past or forecast declines in population size. For example, a population shrinking by 50% in 10 years would usually qualify as Endangered.
Some of these species have been assessed before; but for others, including the three species of thresher sharks with their spectacularly long tails, the dangerlisting is new.

The main threat to sharks is fishing, both accidental and targeted. The three thresher species are newly judged as Vulnerable to extinction “They used to be taken as bycatch by boats targeting tuna and swordfish,” said Ms Fordham. “But now as those species are declining we’re seeing more fishermen targeting sharks.

“Porbeagle and shortfin mako are targeted for fins and meat; species like blue shark are likely to be finned, but particularly in Europe we’re seeing more blue shark being landed.” Several of the bodies that regulate fisheries in international waters – the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) – have set up measures to curb shark finning, but there are different standards in place, a situation that enables fishermen to work around the regulations.

As East Asian economies boom, conservation groups say the market for fins is increasing. “Fishery managers and regional, national and international officials have a real obligation to improve this situation,” commented Nicholas Dulvy from Simon Fraser University in Vancouver. “But it doesn’t have to be like this. With sufficient public support and resulting political will, we can turn the tide.”

‘Finning’ refers to the practice of cutting off only the shark fins and discarding the body. Sometimes sharks are dead when they’re pulled into the boats, but often, they’re still alive as their four fins are cut off with a knife. When they’re thrown back into the ocean the sharks either bleed to death, or they drown, because sharks can’t swim without fins, and they need to go forward to get oxygen.

Divers have discovered hundreds of dead finned sharks at the bottom of the ocean in huge shark graveyards.

Fifty percent of sharks are bycatch — they’re accidentally caught by boats that are looking for tuna, swordfish or other fish. Many of the boats don’t want to keep the entire shark, so they just fin them. This greatly increases the amount of sharks killed, because a fishing boat can hold an enormous amount of fins.

Last August, a California ship was apprehended by the Coast Guard and brought into port in San Diego. It was transporting no shark bodies, but 32 tons of shark fins, which represents between 14,000 and 29,000 sharks. Finning has been illegal in U.S. waters since 2000, but regulating this can be difficult.

To find out more and show your support for this disgraceful act please visit www.stopsharkfinning.net

But conservation groups condemned the move as being tied to the transfer of offshore petroleum leases in one of the animals’ two United States habitats. Three groups sued the department after it missed its January 9th deadline for a final decision.

The petition to list polar bears seeks additional protections because of the threat to the bears’ sea ice habitat due to global warming.

In a reply to the lawsuit issued yesterday, Laverty said the proposed listing raises “significant and complex factual and legal issues.” But a spokesperson for the Center for Biological Diversity – who are one of the groups involved in the suit – said the government’s request falls outside requirements of the Endangered Species Act. “These are not questions for attorneys,” said Kassie Siegel, the principal author on the petition seeking protections for polar bears. “They’re questions for scientists.”

Last year several government studies concluded that polar bears could go extinct by 2050 if global warming continues to melt Arctic sea ice, which the bears rely on for hunting. Summer sea ice last year shrank to a record low, about 1.93 million square miles.

Alaska has the only two polar bear populations in the United States: the Beaufort Sea group off the state’s north coast and the Chukchi Sea group, shared with Russia. Siegal said the request for more time is likely a tactic by political appointees to delay a decision until the Minerals Management Service can finish issuing offshore petroleum leases in the Chukchi Sea.

The delay is meant to protect the leases from legal challenges, the groups claim. The conservation groups said they would ask for an agency decision no later than a week after a court hearing on May 8th before U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilkin in Oakland, California.

Once again money is power and anything that comes in its way gets cast aside, even our endangered wildlife. Let’s hope the people in power wake up before it’s too late.

EDIT:
After delaying a decision for several weeks, the U.S. government has finally listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), creating new protections for the bears in their Alaskan habitat, as of May 14th.