The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is dominated by Democratic-appointed judges, and many of its decisions have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit is even more liberal than the Obama Administration. A unanimous Ninth Circuit panel struck down a plan by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to delist grizzly bears from the category of “threatened” species. Such delisting would give the government agency greater flexibility in addressing the growing grizzly population that has killed tourists and hikers in the northwest, and required euthanizing or removing 75 grizzly bears just last year.
Grizzly bears are not in short supply in Alaska at all, and their population in and around Yellowstone Park probably would have never dwindled if the federal government had not intervened to “protect” them. In the 1960s, grizzlies in the northwest were thriving by feeding on “open garbage dumps,” into which tourists would toss food and enjoy viewing them. But government bureaucrats closed these dumps in the early 1970s due to a probably senseless objection to bears becoming attracted to “human foods.” The result of cutting off this food source was that grizzlies began dying off at alarming rates.
Nearly 40 years later, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service found that grizzlies are doing fine again and no longer need special protection. But the Ninth Circuit overruled the agency and prevented it from doing what it thinks best. The Court based its decision on global warming. A theory claimed that warmer temperatures would increase the population of mountain pine beetles, which could gnaw away at whitebark pine trees, which might die off and result in an increase in mortality by the grizzly population that benefits from them. Based on this theory, the Court held that the Obama Administration could not yet remove grizzlies from the “threatened” list.
Contributing Editor Phyllis Schlafly is Founder and President of Eagle Forum.
Used with the permission of Eagle Forum.