Yes, but didn't you read the story, how one town actually was giving away free land to 24 prospectors.  And they couldn't build nothing there, because the ground was frozen solid, and there was a time limit...and it was during an alaskan winter.  Most of the places are inaccessable to live in the first place, and being on an island chain doesn't help.  That and due to rising sea levels, some of those island will be underwater not to soon.  So $1500 a year won't help people live unless you count burning $1500 worth of toilet paper for warmth.

So, alaska has to continue to strip mine and drill for more resources that aren't renewable so it can pay $1500 per person per year for people to live there?  I think the polar bears want their homes back.

if the polar bears want their land back, lets see them try to take it back by force!!!

Then the whole world would be pretty much [moo'd]...

You people are from the NRA and nuclear commission on expansion arn't you?  Arn't you!

http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/ says there are 20-25000 polar bears.

um 20,000 or 45,000, that's a lot more than 5,000

our country seems hell bent on destroying our economy

guess we'll feel better when our grandchildren sell concessions to China for factory cities, in lieu of debt payments

Yell, 1250 polar bears were hunted in 1968 and that's only 1 year. 5000 bears in the 1970s does not represent a stable population. 25% of the bear population does not pop out of nowhere. The growth in population between now and the 70s is population rebounding.

The polar bear doesn't meet the technical requirements for endangered status. It's on the list because everyone today is a corrupt @$$hole without an education.

"The polar bear doesn't meet the technical requirements for endangered status."

Only if you're a climate change denialist

Endangered: An endangered species is a population of organisms which is at risk of becoming extinct because it is either few in numbers, or threatened by changing environmental or predation parameters.

Polar bear conservation notes:

"In 2006, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) upgraded the polar bear from a species of Least Concern to a vulnerable species. It cited a 'suspected population reduction of >30% within three generations (45 years)', due primarily to global warming. Other risks to the polar bear include pollution in the form of toxic contaminants, conflicts with shipping, stresses from recreational polar-bear watching, and oil and gas exploration and development. The IUCN also cited a "potential risk of over-harvest" through legal and illegal hunting."

"this is what the environmental wackos call a "poster species" like the spotted owl or the panda, they want to destroy human development over a bioregion so they pick soemthing xtra cuddly and hype it"

Okay, let's sue Coca Cola

"When the hell did Minority Report become science fact?"

I think it's called modeling and projections. They do it in science and business to predict trends.

For example, cities use population projections to plan development and making sure enough water, food, transportation will be available to meet the increase in population growth.

So...what your saying is that scientists and state politicians personally went out and tagged 20k-50k polar bears with individual numbers from the 1970's till today?  Fact is the politicians are using scientific data based on that a certain # of polar bears were found in a 1 square mile radius.   They then assumed incorrectly that, that was the number of polar bears in every square mile of arctic tundra or alaskan wilderness.

Modeling and projections are completely worthless unless actual physical contact is made and the animal is tagged.  I mean, i'm pretty sure the alaskan governor is no Marlin Perkins, and that he doesn't play the Mutual of Omaha presents the Wild Kingdom card.  I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know who Marlin Perkins was.

But back in the 1970's we were shown television shows and movies of how splenderous were the amounts of wild life all over the world.   And we show the television shows and movies today, and it shows how devistated these animals had become due to human interferance and growth.   There's only a handful of animal species which have made comebacks from near destruction, the bald eagle being one of them. 

But I would never trust a politician coming up making a schpeel that there has been no impact on local fauna and wildlife after massive drilling and strip mining has occured in a large swath of land.