In the good news category is the 187,000 square miles of Alaska that was set aside by the Obama administration as a critical habitat for polar bears. This may add restrictions to future offshore oil and gas drilling in the future.

The UK created 15 new marine protected areas, where human activity is banned or restricted. Reefs, sandbanks and sea caves will be protected, as well as the marine life that makes them home.

Also in the UK, biologists celebrated the record number of bitterns that had flown in from northern Europe. As well, the pine marten enjoyed an enlarged range.

On the downside, British scientists published a list of “100 Weird Mammals under threat of extinction”. The list included the Long-Beaked Echidna, which is one of the most primitive mammals on the planet and lays eggs like a reptile. Also listed was the Saola or ‘Asian Unicorn’, which was unknown to western science until 1992.

The bad news also includes the plight of the world’s amphibian species, a third of which faces extinction.

More bad news involves sharks being caught in large numbers solely for their fins, and then they are often released back into the ocean for a slow death. 2010 reports also revealed Asian appetites for tiger parts means the current population of around 3,200 is facing serious threats. As well, the fight to save rhinos faces increasingly sophisticated poachers.

African bushmeat activities are decreasing the population of many animals, including chimpanzees. On the other hand, mountain gorillas in Virunga national park have increased their numbers due to intense efforts to reduce poaching and disease.

Happy New Year 2011. Let’s make this year a great one for conservation.

If you click on Our Exhibitions on the website, you will see some introductions to the Museum’s Exhibits and Galleries.  Then if you click on Explore Nature, you will find games, activities and 3-D dinosaur movies.

The games are fun ways to learn about animals.  Who knew that virtually building a bison’s digestive system could be harder than it looks?!  Matching polar bear and grizzly bear adaptations, or matching human behaviors to mammals with regards to coping with weather, are fun.  You realize how much you know when playing them.

The Museum also has several complementary websites for families and teachers, as well as a webpage listing their selection of 3D dinosaur, nature photographs, native plants, and insect games.

Have Fun!

Legally, the decision of whether or not to add a threatened species to the Endangered Species Act list requires the use of “the best available science in a couple of key areas,” Jon Hunter, Policy Director of the Endangered Species Coalition, told me on Monday.  So the integrity of the science is very important. 

“The polar bear is a great example in the last couple of years, [–] the best science we have indicates that they are on a very bad path,” Jon explained.  The science that was needed pushed the boundaries of what has been traditionally considered good science.  “It looked further out and relies more on modeling and other predictions rather than a more traditional head count of how many exist and how many there were ten years ago.”

The US Geological Survey had to consider what the best climate models indicate will happen to the ice around the Arctic and Alaska.  The models told the USGS that “this is what will happen to the ice” and “from the ice, this is what will happen to the polar bears,” Jon explained.  “As a result, they could indicate that the polar bears were at serious risk, losing a lot of what they depend on for survival.”  This leads to the conclusion that there “clearly is a threat to the polar bear population being able to survive as a species.” 

“The definition of a threatened species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future,” Jon continued.  “So they clearly said, ‘the best science we have, the models, indicate that there will be a risk at some point in the foreseeable future’.”  This is a fundamentally different use of science from the traditional approach which examines how “this species is being killed today by this cause.”  But Jon indicates that science is changing towards this model, and adds that “it’s important that we really look at science in this form to say ‘what can we expect with this species?’ ”  Good wildlife conservation considers the future of a species.

Sometimes politics enters into the field and politicians question scientific findings.  For this reason, agencies are doing more peer reviews.  That way, the science has a higher likelihood of standing up in court, which is where debates or challenges often go.  If the science is not solid, cases can be thrown out of court, which can sometimes allow threats to endangered species.  Most often, court cases examine “whether or not all of the science was used, if conclusions are actually founded in other determinations, and also how a decision or a delisting decision prescribes exactly as the law requires,” Jon explained. 

While not all endangered species decisions go through courts, there are a large number of challenges.  While details of challenges vary with species, the challenges are launched by members of two major groups.  “Oftentimes if a species isn’t listed, environmental groups look at it to closely to see if it would make a good court challenge.  If it does get listed, opponents to endangered species protection may challenge it,” such as a logging or a mining company.  And regardless of what side the court challenge comes from, the integrity and quality of the science used to make the decision can make a large difference for or against a threatened species.