Sat, May 3, 2008 (2:05 a.m.)

A federal court has ruled that the Interior Department must decide by May 15 whether to protect polar bears under the Endangered Species Act.

The agency was supposed to have decided by Jan. 9 whether the bears should be listed as threatened. When that deadline passed without a decision, environmental groups sued the Interior Department.

In issuing her ruling in that lawsuit this week, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken rejected the Interior Department’s request to have until June 30 to decide the bear’s status. The ruling does not address whether the bear should be protected.

The bear’s status has been under debate since 2005, when conservation groups filed a petition asking that the polar bear be protected. The Arctic summer sea ice that provides a crucial portion of the bear’s habitat is melting at an alarming rate because of global warming, and as a result bear populations are in peril, the petition says.

In December 2006, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials recommended that the polar bear be listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act because its primary habitat is in peril. Climate experts have predicted that if current trends continue, the Arctic’s summer sea ice could be gone by 2030.

Threatened status is one step below endangered status and means a species could become endangered because of significant loss of its primary habitat. An endangered species is one that could become extinct without habitat protections.

If the polar bear is given federal protection because of global warming’s effects, it could result in a recovery plan that would subject offshore oil-drilling leases, the construction of new power plants and other projects to far more stringent federal review. Conservationists have accused the Bush administration of dragging its feet on rendering a decision out of fear of such consequences.

But the consequences of not protecting the bear could be catastrophic. Research by the U.S. Geological Survey says Alaska’s polar bear population could vanish by 2050 if steps to protect it are not taken. That this animal and its habitat need protection should be a no-brainer.