A war of words has erupted in the pages of the San Antonio Mercury News' op-ed section, with opposing views arguing for and against polar bear conservation in Alaska.

The debate was sparked by an editorial by Sean Parnell, the current governor of Alaska. Parnell argued against the designation of a large area in Alaska as protected habitat for polar bears because it would interfere with plans to drill for oil in the region. Parnell reasoned that the largest threat to polar bears, a lack of sea ice because of global warming, would not be countered by protecting a vast amount of valuable land. Parnell also challenged the assertion that polar bears were actually endangered.

Recently, environmentalist Kassie Siegel responded to Parnell with a piece of her own, citing a U.S. Geological Survey that found that polar bears could be gone in 40 years if measures weren't taken. Siegel also made the point that an oil spill would be catastrophic for the polar bear population and that given the recent trouble in the Gulf, Alaskans shouldn't take the risk.

The fact of the matter is that polar bears are listed as endangered and considered by many to be threatened. Travelers can avoid the politics of Alaska and see these majestic creatures on a Canadian polar bear tour before they disappear.