Still Pissed Off About the Hawley-Smoot Tariff

Saturday, June 11, 2005

Formerly-Endangered Species

CNN reports that the grizzly bears at Yellowstone might be taken off the endangered species list.

Okay, personally I don't find the story very interesting. I'm not a bear. I don't plan on being a bear. And if I ever meet a bear, I hope it's either tame or dead. That's not to say I don't care about extinction -- it's just that if people who care about bears say the grizzlies aren't endangered anymore, then okay. Fine. Do whatever you bear-liking people have to do. And if they're still endangered, fine, leave 'em on the list. Just so long as they stay out of my garbage cans.

No, the really interesting this is the poll CNN is conducting right now. (As far as I know, there's no way to link to the poll). The question is: "Should grizzly bears around Yellowstone National Park be taken off the Endangered Species list?" And the poll results as of 8:00 p.m. PST is 31% yes (3021 votes) and 69% no (6701 votes).

In other words, the vast majority of people who care about the issue at all (which doesn't seem like very many -- apparently I'm not alone) don't care about the actual status of the bear population. They seem to want the bears on the endangered species list whether or not they are actually endangered.

Now what does that tell you about environmentalists?

Another Possibility Update: My first theory is that environmentalists ignore facts when those facts are inconvenient. I suppose another possibility is that 6701 people really, really hate people from Wyoming, and want to use burgeoning bear populations to kill off the people. Which, if you've ever driven through Wyoming, is kinda understandable.