Al Gore’s “drowned polar bear” AIT source under investigation

This stock photo has been used time and time again by activists to illustrate the plight of the polar bear – except it’s fake, an artist rendering.

According to AP/Anchorage Daily News, he’s on leave pending results of investigation. It seems everywhere you look, there’s some sort of fakery going on with the polar bear issue. For example, the image at left, where Science magazine used this fake image to hype the issue. And of course, everyone remembers the scene from the 2005 Al Gore science fiction movie An Inconvenient Truth, where Gore had an animated clip of the polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this study about drowned polar bears.

(AP)  JUNEAU, Alaska — A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, possibly over the veracity of that article.

Full story:

http://www.adn.com/2011/07/28/1989382/arctic-scientist-under-investigation.html

This 2008 World Climate Report essay shows why an investigation is needed:

Where Are All The Drowning Polar Bears?

The Interior Department just announced its decision to list the polar bear as “threatened” under the U.S Endangered Species Act (ESA). The justification behind the decision is that polar bears are highly dependent on sea ice in the Arctic for their livelihood—hunting, mating, birthing, family rearing, etc.—and thus if sea ice declines, so will the overall health of the species.

While this may, in fact, be true in some sense, it also gives short-shrift to the bears adaptive abilities, which must be large, given that they survived the previous interglacial warm period as well as an extended period of warmer-than-present conditions in the Arctic (which undoubtedly were associated with reduced sea ice levels) about 5,000 to 7,000 years ago (give or take a thousand years) (see here fore example). If the bears fare worse this time around, it will mostly likely be because their natural adaptive response may run up against a human roadblock in the form of habitat disruption or other types of difficulties that an increased human presence may pose to the adapting bears. It seems that this is what the intent of the ESA is aimed at tempering, not trying to alter the climate—precisely how the Act should have be applied, despite all the criticism surrounding the decision.

All this renewed attention to polar bears has piqued our interest in just how the bears have been faring recently. Al Gore made movie stars out of drowning bears in his 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth with an animation sequence depicting a small patch of floating ice disintegrating under a struggling polar bear until it was left swimming alone in a vast expanse of open ocean. One couldn’t help to get a little teary-eyed at the notion.

And as the public just can’t get enough of cute, cuddly, slightly aggressive movie stars who are a little down on their luck, the paparazzi are never too far behind to document their each and every move. Pictures of Paris Hilton partaking in every activity imaginable abound and Britney can’t even pull out of a parking lot without running over a photographer’s foot. So where are all the pictures of drowned and drowning polar bears?

Last fall, as a massive media campaign reminded us, the extent of Arctic ice was at an all-time (since 1979) low, yet we cannot recall a single report of a drowned polar bear as a result. Surely, with all the attention on polar bear well-being that arose as the Interior Department considered its ESA decision, if there were evidence of polar bears drowning last summer, it would have been held up front and center. But it wasn’t. Because they weren’t.

So where does this now omnipresent notion come from that polar bears—famously strong swimmers—will perish in droves under the warming waves as the distance between the ice edge and the shore becomes too great to overcome? Let’s have a look-see.

The original source of the drowning polar bear story is a series of studies conducted by Charles Monnett and colleagues from the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) out of Alaska which as been observing and counting polar bears on Alaska’s north shore for the past 30 years or so as part of a broader efforts to survey bowhead whale populations in the region and assess any impacts that oil and gas exploration activities may be having on them. Since the late 1970s, aerial surveys have been conducted from small airplanes flown during the late summer/early fall documenting the numbers of whales, polar bears, and other large marine mammals.

In December 2005, Monnett et al. presented a poster at the Marine Mammals Conference in San Diego (followed soon thereafter by a publication in the journal Polar Biology in early 2006) in which they documented a change in the patterns of late-summer polar bear sightings. During the first part of the record, polar bears were usually spotted on ice floes lying off the Alaskan coast, between say Barrow and Demarcation Point, near the Alaska/Canada border. During the latter part of the record, from 1992-2005, most of the bears were spotted on land as there was little ice to be found within tens to hundreds of kilometers of the coast. Alone, these observations indicated that the behavior of the polar bears was changing as the environmental conditions around them were changing. Hardly newsworthy in and of itself—polar bears adapting as best they could to climate change.

But the part of the study that garnered the press attention so much so that it has become ingrained in global warming lore was that Monnett et al. reported the sighting of four polar bear carcasses floating in the sea several kilometers from shore, presumably having drowned. All four dead bears were spotted from the plane a few days after a strong storm had struck the area, with high winds and two meter high waves. Since polar bears are strong swimmers, the authors concluded that it was not just the swimming that caused the bears to drown, but that the swimming in association with high winds and waves, which made the exertion rate much greater, sapping the bears of their energy and leading to their deaths. The authors also suggested that the frequency and intensity of late summer and early fall storms should increase (as would the wave heights) because of global warming and thus the risk to swimming bears will increase along with the number of bears swimming (since there will be less ice) and subsequently more bears will drown. But they didn’t stop there—they suggested that the increased risk will not be borne by all bears equally, but that lone females and females with cubs will be most at risk—putting even more downward pressure of future polar bear populations. And thus a global warming poster child (or cub) is born.

But does all of this follow from the data? Again, we haven’t heard of any reports of polar bear drownings in Alaska in 2005, 2006, or 2007—all years with about the same, or even less late-summer sea ice off the north coast of Alaska than in 2004, the year of the documented drownings.

In 2004, the researchers saw four, that’s right 4, polar bear carcasses floating at sea where they had never seen any in previous surveys. The 4 dead bears, coupled with 10 other bears that were observed to be swimming in open water, more than 2 km from land, led them to conclude that global warming was making the bears swim long distances and then drowning as the exertion overcame them when they got caught in a storm.

But is this really true? This NASA web site shows the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice each summer since 1979. As you scroll down through the list of years, notice that in many if not most late summers, the edge of the sea ice is quite a ways from the north coast of Alaska. So, the sea ice conditions along the northern coast of Alaska were hardly that unusual during September 2004. No more so than they were in the years since or in many prior. So bears weren’t encountering unusual ice conditions in 2004. In fact, in the period 1992-2004, more than 50% of bear sightings were in regions of no ice (Monnett et al., 2005). Why an elevated number of bears were observed swimming in open water in 2004 is unclear, but it could be from any number of reasons, sampling effort, bear population dynamics, bear food dynamics, to name a few—but an unusual expanse of open water doesn’t seem to be one of them.

What was potentially unusual was a big storm that caught them off guard. But even that seems unlikely. True it was windy for a several day stretch in mid-September 2004, but such a windy stretch is not particularly unusual there during that time of year.

What all of this means is that the number of drowning polar bears is not very significant in terms of the overall population of bears, which number in the low thousands in Alaska. In fact, polar bears drowning seems to be quite rare and unusual events, perhaps brought about by a confluence of ice free ocean waters and an especially strong storm. However, as summer ice conditions off the north Alaskan coast couldn’t get much worse than they were in 2007, when there was hardly at all, and since there has been no evidence yet presented that a large number (if any) bears drowned as a result, it would seem that death by drowning is not putting any meaningful downward pressure on the population of Alaskan polar bears.

But, truth be told, we have been withholding a piece of information this whole time—there were reports of drowning polar bears in 2007, and they were directly attributable to human activities. But they didn’t drown because of global warming, instead, they drowned because they had first been shot with tranquilizer darts and then slipped into the sea and were unable to be recovered.

This goes to show what we have been proclaiming all along—the real reason polar bears may suffer under climate warming is their increased encounters with humans as the bears change their adaptive behavior.

And this is where the application of the ESA to polar bears could prove most effective.

References:

Monnett, C., Gleason, J. S., and L. M. Rotterman, 2005. Potential effects of diminished sea ice on open-water swimming, mortality, and distribution of polar bears during fall in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. 16th Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, 12-16 December 2005, San Diego, CA.

Monnett, C., and J. S. Gleason, 2006. Observations of mortality associated with extended open-water swimming by polar bears in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. Polar Biology, 29, 681-687.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
91 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ImranCan
July 29, 2011 1:50 am

To get suspended, you have to do something pretty bad. I’m going to speculate and say that the bears were shot …… then made to look like they had drowned.

Alec, aka Daffy Duck
July 29, 2011 2:57 am

[David wrote “Are you guys reading this? …”]
Your post made me look it up, and it is a RIOT!!!!……
ERIC MAY: Um, and I‟ll, I‟ll quote to make this – you indicate that “No polar” – and I‟ll quote, “No polar bear carcasses, carcasses were observed, and no dead and floating polar bears were observed during aerial surveys conducted in September 1987 through 2003.”
CHARLES MONNETT: That‟s what the database told us, yeah.
ERIC MAY: Okay. What database are you talking about?
CHARLES MONNETT: Well, the BWASP database.
ERIC MAY: Okay.
CHARLES MONNETT: The, the big one that, that, um, did not have a way to record the dead ones in it, but we checked with, um, (inaudible/mixed voices).
ERIC MAY: Okay, because in, in, uh, referencing the BWASP studies –
CHARLES MONNETT: Yeah.
ERIC MAY: – in the studies that we reviewed, I‟ll quote, um, “1987 to 2003, BWASP aerial survey reports state, „Sightings of dead marine mammals were not included in summary analysis or maps.‟”
CHARLES MONNETT: Yeah. ERIC MAY: So how could you make the statement that no dead polar bears were observed during 1987 to 2- –
CHARLES MONNETT: Because we talked to the people that had flown the flights, and they would remember whether they had seen any dead polar bears.
ERIC MAY: So you talked to each individual from ‟87 to –
CHARLES MONNETT: No, no, we talked to the team leaders. We talked to Steve Treacy and, and –
ERIC MAY: All the way back to 1987?……..
http://www.peer.org/docs/doi/7_28_11_Monnett-IG_interview_transcript.pdf

Larry Fields
July 29, 2011 3:31 am

Pardon me for stating the obvious. Any given polar bear has to die somewhere. If an adult PB happens to die on land, that’s where we should expect to find the corpse–provided that we can get there before the scavengers have had their fill. On the other hand, if a PB suffers a heart attack while doing its morning aerobic water workout, we’d expect the sharks to quickly dispose of the remains. What is the ratio of land deaths to water deaths for PBs, and why, and is that ratio changing over time? I haven’t the foggiest idea, and neither does anyone else.
Given the small sample size for floating PB corpses, we cannot reasonably draw strong conclusions from that fact, aside from the obvious one that PBs–unlike hockey sticks–are not immortal.

Steve from Rockwood
July 29, 2011 4:50 am

,
My point was the likelihood that more than 4 dead bears could be found in Arctic waters – it seems like a very small number for an animal that hunts in water for food – but that actually locating dead polar bears in the water is a needle-in-haystack problem even with a fixed-wing aircraft.
I think photographing 4 dead polar bears is entirely reasonable.
Attributing their death to global warming is beyond speculative and into the idiotic if the guy calls himself a scientist.
It would be interesting to know what else these guys do (Mineral Services).

Ulrich Elkmann
July 29, 2011 5:02 am

“Where are all the drowned polar bears?” – Here: “Knut (German pronunciation: [ˈknuːt] ) (5 December 2006 – 19 March 2011) was a polar bear who was born in captivity at the Berlin Zoological Garden. …On 19 March 2011, Knut died unexpectedly at the age of four. His death was caused by drowning after he collapsed into his enclosure’s pool while suffering from encephalitis.” [The notorious wiki]. If Al Gore declares that it is so, his folks comply. Ursus talibanus, anyone?

pat
July 29, 2011 5:05 am

28 July: MSNBC: Scientist in hot water over polar bears, Al Gore
A federal scientist under internal investigation — apparently over a study on polar bear deaths that was cited by Al Gore in “An Inconvenient Truth” — went on the offensive Thursday, filing a complaint alleging persecution from within the Interior Department…
The complaint alleges that Interior Department “officials have actively persecuted Dr. Monnett, acted on hearsay and rumors, gratuitously tarnished his reputation and substantially disrupted important scientific research.”
It specifically alleges that his boss, ocean agency Director Michael Bromwich, and investigator Eric May committed scientific and scholarly misconduct. …
Story: Arctic also sees heat wave, on course for record ice melt …
Story: Fewer polar bear births tied to less sea ice …
The agency did not immediately reply to a request for comment from msnbc.com.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43933715/ns/us_news-environment/
19 July: Alaska Dispatch: Tony Hopfinger: Lost interview: Alaska scientist described how he discovered ‘drowned polar bears’
Here are some selected transcripts from my July 2007 interview with Dr. Monnet…
Did the polar bears really drown?
.You can never say for sure — a scientist can never say for sure anything. But it seems pretty obvious. …
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/lost-interview-alaska-scientist-described-how-he-discovered-drowned-polar-bears
28 July: NYT: FELICITY BARRINGER: Report on Dead Polar Bears Gets a Biologist Suspended As word of the sightings spread, images of drowned polar bears became a staple for activists who warned that global warming and the retreat of sea ice were threatening the bears’ survival.
Dr. Monnett did not respond to a voicemail message left at his home near Anchorage. Efforts to reach Dr. Gleason were also unsuccessful. .,,
Dr. Monnett said that information had been relayed by a predecessor in his position, Steve Treacy.
In an interview, Dr. Treacy said that when he was in charge of the surveys on Alaska’s North Slope, “We recorded all the polar bears we saw. If there were dead ones, we would have noted that as such.” He added, “I don’t remember anything in the way of dead polar bears.”
He said of Dr. Monnett: “I think his integrity is good. What I’ve seen of it, he’s an honest guy who would tend to treat fairly with the data.”…
In the interview transcript, Dr. Monnett is quoted as saying that “we got blasted, you know, really hard, by the agency” after the reports of the drowned bears circulated.
At another point, he said of his superiors, “They don’t want any impediment to, you know, what they view as their mission, which is to, you know, drill wells up there” and “put areas into production.”
A version of this article appeared in print on July 29, 2011, on page A18 of the New York edition with the headline: Report on Dead Polar Bears Gets a Biologist Suspended..
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/science/earth/29polar.html?_r=1

M2Cents
July 29, 2011 7:53 am

“But, truth be told, we have been withholding a piece of information this whole time—there were reports of drowning polar bears in 2007, and they were directly attributable to human activities. But they didn’t drown because of global warming, instead, they drowned because they had first been shot with tranquilizer darts and then slipped into the sea and were unable to be recovered.”
Sounds a lot like when the rapid spread of Chytridiomycosis in frog populations was traced to scientists studying the rapid spread of Chytridiomycosis in frog populations.
Oopsie!

July 29, 2011 8:17 am

There are many documented incidents of whalers killing bears in defense of life and property.
One reports that 9 bears were killed at a whale flensing (blubber stripping) site in one day. Bears swim all the time and there are storms all the time and there had been no reports of them drowning. The dubious argument to support the contention that the bears drowned far from shore suggested that this was unusual because the bears were starving and desperately swimming out to pack ice. Bears in places like the Hudson Bay where the ice always melts by July, the bears come ashore. They do not swim out to the middle of the bay.
The main bear prey in the Arctic is the ringed seal because it gives birth and nurses pups on fast-ice between April and May. The ~6 week nursing time is the only time where the seals spend less than 80% of their time out of the water, and thus easiest for polar bears to access. That unusually long ice-bound period, is the time the bears gorge themselves on ringed seal pups, often tripling and quadrupling their weight. Females and cubs time their emergence from their dens to coincide with ringed seal births. By July the ringed seals are no longer readily available and radio-telemetry studies show the seals become mostly pelagic, swimming 1000’s of km from their fast ice birthing sites. The melting ice opens up the shore for different ice intolerant species like the Harbor Seals and migrating Harp Seals. Analysis of fat tissue show that polar bears consume up to 15% Harbor Seals in the Hudson Bay, and that consumption happens most likely in the ice free seasons.
Spotted from a survey plane, there was no examination to determine cause of death. There was no way to determine place of death. So interpretation is a matter of who can tell the best story. However desperately swimming for food in September is the very most unlikely scenario, as September is not the season for hunting the long departed ringed seals. Alternative foods sources in the minimum ice periods are on land. So bears either go into a hibernation-like state or hunt for alternative prey from land such as the Harbor Seals ad walrus. From the last report by the Polar Bear Specialist Group, on Wrangel Island in September the bears wait on the shore for migrating walrus to come ashore at traditional haul outs areas. They aggregate their before the walrus arrive. They feast on weak walrus to supplement their ringed seal diet. No ice needed. Even when scared into the water by researchers, the bears returned to shore. The ones that leave Wrangel island do so only after the ice returns. All published accounts of polar bear life histories suggest “drowning while desperately looking for food” is the least parsimonious scenario of all and only makes sense from a global warming hysteria point of view.
The floating bears had to be fat enough to be floating, and they put on most of their fat by June. For that time of year when whaling is peaked, bears are commonly shot at flensing sitesin self defense. The storm simply swept them to sea. Base on all documented evidence that is a much more likely scenario.

David
July 29, 2011 9:13 am

Yeah – as dave38 points out – we in the UK have been getting WWF commercials for years inviting us to send £3 to ‘save the polar bears…’
Let me guess how that works then – a WWF guy sidles up to a polar bear and says: Here’s three quid – go and get yourself a nice fish supper…’
Anyway – back to the general point – how long, I wonder, before the politicians admit that they’ve been taken for the idiots they are, and dump all the ‘green’ taxes..? No – never, of course – because they’ll simply ‘rebrand’ the taxes as something else, because they are just TOO good to give up on…

Scott Covert
July 29, 2011 10:18 am

“Billy Liar says:
July 28, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Jeff Mitchell says:
July 28, 2011 at 10:30 am
When you say “where are the pictures of drowned polar bears”, its like suggesting to the environmental wackos that they go drown a few and take pictures to rebut the implication. …
I’d like to see an environmental wacko try to drown a bear!”
The environmental wackos don’t need to drown bears. They just talk to them till they do it themselves.
If polar bears could operate firearms, they would have found them on the ice.

bearhugger
July 30, 2011 12:25 pm

let us deflect any blame for the polar bear incident from Al Gore and his lies about global warming and consider who ‘owns’ WWF… Those “mineral” folks flying around up there are looking for good locations for oil wells for Al Gore and his Bush buddies, betcha… They have the same amt of conscience…another scapegoat gets the axe.

July 31, 2011 9:57 am

The simple mindedness of so much CAGW climatology is the reason that laypersons can make incisive comments and critiques of superior quality. This appears to be true of more than climatololgists these days. “Arctic biologists”, too are easy targets. It escapes Monnet and colleagues that the polar bear in warmer southern Hudsons Bay do entirely without ice for 4 or 5 months each year. The nearest ice to them is a couple of thousand kilometers away during the summer. This is what happens when you take, as a given, the CAGW hypothesis. It forces the scientist to fit square data into round holes that are easy pickings for even the unsophisticated amateur.

Dan
August 1, 2011 3:27 am

It seems the head of the agency involved (BOEMRE) has now come out and stated Monnet’s suspension has nothing to do with his scientific credibility or his paper on polar bears, odd you don’t seem to be adding that little detail to this story.
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/boemre-director-says-offshore-oil-agency-not-witch-hunt

August 1, 2011 3:46 am

Dan,
Thanks for adding that new nugget of information. But why would you state that it’s “odd” that it wasn’t mentioned, when it is new info?
For the record, I mentioned days ago that I didn’t think this had anything to do with polar bears. Where have you been?

Dan
August 5, 2011 12:58 am

Smokey,
New in what way, I posted my comment on 1 Aug, this thread was started on 28 Jul and 28 Jul is also the date of the clarification piece I posted the link for, so it was in fact about as old as the original story.

August 8, 2011 7:38 pm

Anyone who is interested in some interesting reading on the polar bear issue, see here: http://plf.typepad.com/.services/blog/6a00d8350ce4d753ef00e5526c83d58834/search?filter.q=polar+bear