After not getting an answer to our concern that rising oil prices might result in less enforcement of the endangered species protection, we spoke with Brendan Cummings, an attorney and Oceans Program Director with the Center for Biological Diversity, to get his take on the future of energy and polar bear policy:

EnviroWonk: What do you think of the judge saying energy is more important to public interest than stressing a threatened species?

Brendan Cummings: Finding new sources of energy is in the nation's interest. But, whether fossil fuel energy in the era of global warming is in our interest is another story. When Congress passed the Marine Mammal Protection Act it recognized the public interest in protecting marine mammals- so the balance should tip towards marine mammals. After all, environmental harm by its very nature is irreversible.

EW: Do you expect that more sensitive and marginal lands will be opened up for oil and gas drilling?

BC: It is already being talked about in the political arena. Senator McCain has been advocating offshore drilling as part of his energy plan, but it has little basis in economic reality and is bad energy policy because:

• With global warming, we shouldn't be investing in hydrocarbons.
• More drilling now won't bring oil to the pump for a decade, won't be a significant contributor to the supply.
• Anywhere we drill is going to have an insignificant' impact on prices, but a huge impact on that area's environment.

In addition, many of the areas off-limit to drilling provide economic benefits, such as tourism along Florida's beaches, and Bristol Bay, Alaska, which has the healthiest and largest salmon fishery. These areas serve important economic purposes that are too valuable to risk for a distant, short-term reduction in oil prices.

EW: How is oil exploration stressful to wildlife?

BC: There aren't any stages of exploration, both onshore and off, that aren't harmful to some kind of wildlife.

Offshore: Before they even drill, seismic surveys must be conducted to determine if there is likely to be oil under the surface. The loudest sounds humans create are injected into the water. At a minimum, animals are driven away from feeding areas, but they can even be permanently deafened or killed.

Onshore: "Bumper trucks", also known as explosives, are used for the seismic surveys and can disturb nesting polar bears. If a mother bear is disturbed in her den she will abandon it and her cubs, which will result in much larger cub mortality.

Once you start drilling there is the risk of oil spill. The oil companies have not yet discovered a way to clean up oil in icy waters; the proposed solution is to set it on fire. Assuming oil is found, the production process is also a threat- infrastructure needs to be built to pump and transport the oil.

EW: Is there a way to prevent drilling from going on during the denning period?

BC: If we had an administration that actually tried to protect wildlife, then yes, we could have seasonal restrictions. But this administration does not enforce any such restrictions.

EW: But the polar bear was recently listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. Doesn't this afford it any additional protection?

BC: As the regulation was written, there is no real protection for polar bears. Secretary Kempthorne listed the bear under ESA because legally and scientifically he was boxed into a corner, but then he did everything possible to render the decision as meaningless as possible. Less than a month after it was listed he gave the oil industry a 5-year free ride in polar bear habitat, which happens to be the subject of the most recent CBD litigation. His primary justification was that the polar bear is already protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.

EW: Is it true that polar bear populations are at an all time high, as the deputy secretary stated?

BC: No, its a relative comparison -- the bears were over-hunted in the 50s and 60s. Then, in the early 1970s polar bears were protected from hunting through international and domestic protections, such as the MMPA. That was a success story, but since the effects of global warming have been felt in the arctic, there have been studies that show populations have been declining. So while there are bears now than circa 1960, that doesn't mean its because they are healthy. And given that global warming will take away their habitat it doesn't matter- if a baby is born on the Titanic, it ultimately doesn't matter to the population.

EW: President Bush said that coral reefs can be protected by drilling sideways. Is this a legitimate drilling method?

BC: Horizontal drilling is real, but isn't any safer for the surrounding environment. It's wishful thinking, sort of like reasoning if you wear a seat belt you can drive drunk.

EW: Do you have any parting thoughts for us?

BC: Politicians in D.C. don't want to acknowledge it, but we are in a state of crisis because of global warming. We need to transform our economy in the immediate future to stop the worst effects, and allowing the oil companies to drill more doesn't not put us on the right path.