Polar Bears

It has always been the 'conventional wisdom' of naturalists and conservationists that we not interfere with animal habitats. But as human pollution grows, all but eliminating some habitats, perhaps that is an outdated notion. Human interference is destroying these habitats, so humans should interfere to help these animals. In the case of the polar bears, they are unable to hunt because of the reduced ice caused by global warming, which has of course been greatly increased because of human pollutants. So it would seem that there should be no scientific objection to feeding these animals in the wild. One might argue that it would adversely affect their ability to hunt, but they are not able to hunt now anyway because of the diminishing ice. They simply can't get to food. So if they are provided with food, it might deaden their instincts, but the habitat in which those instincts work is disappearing. These animals need help, and such efforts are only correcting the problem that we are causing and simply saving their lives.

I recently saw an article that proposed that we let the polar bears die out, as though they were being naturally selected for extinction. Having their habitat destroyed by exhaust from vehicles is hardly natural selection. This person was arguing from the point of view of someone who sees environmental and conservationist efforts as an inconvenience, as something that might impede economic growth. Maybe we should take away his car and computer, and when he begins to starve, we'll call that natural selection.