How much do you know about polar bear ecology?

Question

Many articles generally exhibit a poor understanding of polar bear ecology and use information out of context, which results in public confusion about the threat to polar bears.

While currently they still inhabit the majority of their original habitat, the species appears to be in trouble. If projections are correct, loss of a significant portion of their ice habitat will have profound negative effects on polar bears.

The symptoms of climate warming on polar bears are becoming clearer. If people are truly concerned about the fate of this species, we need to collectively reduce greenhouse gas production significantly, and quickly.

Your thoughts?

http://pbsg.npolar.no/docs/StirlingDerocher-WildProf-2007.pdf

Answer 1

Historically, we have had temperatures higher than today, for longer periods of time, and the polar bear survived just fine.

When people call fighting global warming a win win situation, because they believe that measures to fight global warming are good regardless if AGW is true, you have to wonder their motives.

Dr. Mitchell Taylor

Polar Bear Biologist,

Department of the Environment,

Government of Nunavut , Igloolik , Nunavut , Canada

"Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present."

Tim Flannery is one of Australia 's best-known scientists and authors. That doesn't mean what he says is correct or accurate. That was clearly demonstrated when he recently ventured into the subject of climate change and polar bears. Climate change is threatening to drive polar bears into extinction within 25 years, according to Flannery. That is a startling conclusion and certainly is a surprising revelation to the polar bear researchers who work here and to the people who live here. We really had no idea.

The evidence for climate change effects on polar bears described by Flannery is incorrect. He says polar bears typically gave birth to triplets, but now they usually have just one cub. That is wrong.

All research and traditional knowledge shows that triplets, though they do occur, are very infrequent and are by no means typical. Polar bears generally have two cubs — sometimes three and sometimes one. He says the bears' weaning time has risen to 18 months from 12. That is wrong. The weaning period has not changed. Polar bears worldwide have a three-year reproduction cycle, except for one part of Hudson Bay for a period in the mid-1980s when the cycle was shorter.

One polar bear population (western Hudson Bay ) has declined since the 1980s and the reproductive success of females in that area seems to have decreased. We are not certain why, but it appears that ecological conditions in the mid-1980s were exceptionally good.

Climate change is having an effect on the west Hudson population of polar bears, but really, there is no need to panic. Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada , 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present.

It is noteworthy that the neighbouring population of southern Hudson Bay does not appear to have declined, and another southern population ( Davis Strait ) may actually be over-abundant.

I understand that people who do not live in the north generally have difficulty grasping the concept of too many polar bears in an area. People who live here have a pretty good grasp of what that is like to have too many polar bears around.

This complexity is why so many people find the truth less entertaining than a good story. It is entirely appropriate to be concerned about climate change, but it is just silly to predict the demise of polar bears in 25 years based on media-assisted hysteria.

Dr. Mitchell Taylor,

Answer 2

I think the ultimate representation of the irony of mankind's interference in natural order is the day Greenpeace is out off of Newfoundland clubbing baby seals to feed to starving polar bears.