Palin's policies favor development over environment

U.S. Geological Survey biologists believe that, if current climate-change trends continue, every polar bear in Alaska could be gone by 2050, but The Times' Kim Murphy reports that may not be a major concern to Republican vice presidential nominee and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin:

Palin's administration has fought federal protections announced in May for polar bears, going to court to assert that the projections for a dramatic shrinking of the bears' icy habitat are unreliable and that polar bears are already protected enough.

Since becoming the Republican vice presidential nominee this month, Palin has championed a balance between energy exploration and environmental regulation. A review of her record as governor shows that, most often, she has tilted that balance in favor of oil and gas development, mining and hunting -- the economic backbones of a state that many residents consider both a scenic treasure and an exploitable resource.

"From further oil and gas development to fishing, mining, timber and tourism -- these developments remain the core of our state," Palin told state legislators last year.

"We here in Alaska share concerns about wildlife, of course -- every Alaskan has concerns about wildlife," she later said. "We're going to continue to . . . make sure that polar bears survive, and thrive, for decades to come."

Since Palin became governor in 2006, the state has sought to ramp up a program that encourages the shooting of wolves from aircraft in areas where they compete with human hunters for moose, caribou and deer.

--Francisco Vara-Orta

Photos: Polar bear, California Museum of Science & Industry; Sarah Palin with caribou she shot, Associated Press

Comments

[Brien Comerford]

Sarah Palin's compelling Pro-Life record is marred by her repelling support of masssacring wolves, bears, caribou, and moose. Her irreverence for animals and wildlife is revolting.

[Bob]

There isn't a candidate that won't say they are concerned about the environment. That is standard. The difference is Republicans are concerned whether environmental laws will restrict their ability to make more money.

In Palin's case Polar Bears and oil company profits are in direct competition. And the eradication of wolves will ensure other species are avilable for hunting by locals and many tourists from the lower 48..

Kill wolves now, more caribou to kill later. Allow Polar Bears to go extinct and we can drill without worry.

So she isn't lying when she says she is concerned about issues of our environment.

[Chris]

I don't think any god would appreciate the reckless killing of animals. Especially the one she so fervently worships. So hypocritical on so many levels.

[Sue Steinacher]

Here's an Alaskan woman's perspective: I've lived here almost 30 years, most of it in a log cabin with my own dogteam, and happy to haul my own water and fuel. No big deal. I'm adamantly pro-choice, never voted for Palin, and never will. I believe keeping habitat healthy for fish and wildlife should trump overly agressive resource development, but this is in part because harvesting organic wild-grown moose, caribou, sheep, salmon, etc. is at the forefront of the 'eat local' movement. Wildlife can be valued for a variety of reasons - viewing, photographing, eating, wearing - but not if we don't protect the habitat if depends on more than Palin does.

[JON BECKER]

Pro-life is only for zygotes. Teenagers should get ready for a war with Iran and Russia cause she says she is ready and capable of leading such wars.

[andee karman]

woman so no to Palin
This news is as important as the Bush/McCain financial disaster.

[RM]

Perhaps we could hunt all of the polar bears and put them out of there misery first.