Posted on February 19, 2021 | Comments Offon Fact: polar bears are thriving despite sea ice loss according to the scientific literature
Is Facebook now an expert on polar bear conservation status? Apparently they have decreed themselves the last word for online content. There is a plan afoot to label anything that says polar bears are not being harmed by recent sea ice declines as ‘disinformation’ – but on whose authority? Thanks to Josh for the cartoon below.
A new section of the Climate Science Information Center, launching alongside the labelling trial, debunks common myths such as the false claim that polar bear populations are not suffering due to global heating, or the widespread belief that excess carbon emissions help plant life. Facebook is working with climate communication experts from around the world, including at the University of Cambridge, to produce the content.
Ah, they’re consulting ‘climate communication experts‘! Those experts surely must be up on all the latest papers and not trusting the word of obviously biased conservations organizations like the WWF or PBI whose real reason for existence is the generation of as much money in donations as possible?
The peer reviewed literature supports the claim that polar bears are currently thriving despite recent ice declines – especially in the Chukchi and Barents Seas – regardless of what computer model predictions say about what might happen in the future. This is a fact, not a ‘myth’. See my paper from 2017 and my 2019 book for most of the citations (Crockford 2017, 2019) and others in the reference list below. Check them out yourself before you believe Facebook. Ask me for any paper you’d like to see via the ‘contact me’ form and I’ll send it along. Also, look for my State of the Polar Bear Report 2020 next week.
The polar bear has two features that mark it as a thriving species: it’s as wide-spread across the Arctic as it was hundreds of years ago and there has not been a sustained, statistically significant decline in numbers in any of the 19 official subpopulations. Modest declines in abundance for Western and Southern Hudson Bay documented in 2016 were not statistically significant and have almost certainly been reversed since then.
That’s because the last four years have been especially good for Hudson Bay bears: in 2020, most Western Hudson Bay bears left for the newly-formed ice as early in the autumn as they did in the 1980s – for the fourth year in a row – and sea ice breakup in spring was also like the 1980s for the second year in a row. Southern Hudson Bay bears experienced virtually identical conditions. The number of bear problems in Churchill, Manitoba, which self-identifies as the ‘Polar Bear Capital of the World’, were the lowest in years.
Bears that came ashore in mid-to-late August and left in November would have spent only three months on land – about one month less than most bears did in the 1980s and two months less than bears did in the early 2000s (Castro de la Guardia et al 2017). The last four years at least have been very similar – so it’s no wonder none of this information has been made available in the peer-reviewed literature.
It’s not just these Canadian bears that have been thriving: virtually all polar bears across the Arctic have been in excellent condition in recent years. Photos of fat bears are the ‘new normal’. They’ve had an abundance of fat seal pups to eat in the spring due in large part to increased primary productivity. According to NOAA scientists, summer growth of plankton in the Arctic has increased since 2002 because of longer ice-free periods, especially in the Russian Arctic, the Barents Sea and Hudson Bay. Due to especially low ice levels in 2020, plankton blooms hit records highs in August (see photo below). More abundant plankton benefits the entire Arctic food chain: more fish means fatter seal pups and well-fed polar bears. This goes a long way towards explaining why polar bears doing so well in areas like the Chukchi and Barents Seas where profound summer sea ice losses have occurred in recent years.
However, none of these recent facts were taken into account for the 2020 computer model that predicted the near-extinction of the species by 2100 and minimal cub survival for Southern Hudson Bay bears before 2030. This pessimistic model’s primary assumption was that historical data from Western Hudson Bay polar bears could be used as a proxy to predict how all other bear populations across the Arctic would respond to various predicted declines in summer ice coverage. Unfortunately, the model also depended upon the scientifically discredited and implausible ‘worst case’ climate scenario (‘RCP8.5’) to arrive at its dystopian vision of future sea ice conditions.
As a consequence, this new prediction of polar bear extinction is even less worthy of serious consideration than the failed prediction polar bear specialists developed in 2007. We now know that polar bears have generally benefitted from much less summer sea ice than was available in the 1980s and rather than declining continuously, September sea ice levels have been rather stable since 2007 (see graph below, from US NSIDC).
Sadly, the facts indicating that polar bears are thriving across the Arctic are routinely pushed aside in favour of an ominous prophetic narrative because it supports the ‘climate change emergency’ rhetoric. ‘Trust the science’ is meaningless if model outputs based on faulty assumptions are considered evidence and if scientists display obvious biases, as the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group does when it ignores a massive increase in population numbers that was not statistically significant, as they did for Barents Sea bears, but adopts the new number if it’s not statistically significant but shows a slight decline as they did for Western Hudson Bay.
This is why I do what I do – someone needs to keep the public abreast of recent literature and on-the-ground developments that don’t conform to the climate emergency narrative and to call out false statements made by polar bear specialists with an agenda. There is currently no climate emergency for polar bears, despite what computer models suggest might happen decades from now.
REFERENCES
Aars, J. 2018. Population changes in polar bears: protected, but quickly losing habitat. Fram Forum Newsletter 2018. Fram Centre, Tromso. Download pdf here (32 mb).
Atwood, T.C., Bromaghin, J.F., Patil, V.P., Durner, G.M., Douglas, D.C., and Simac, K.S., 2020. Analyses on subpopulation abundance and annual number of maternal dens for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2020-1087. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20201087. pdf here.
Castro de la Guardia, L., Myers, P.G., Derocher, A.E., Lunn, N.J., Terwisscha van Scheltinga, A.D. 2017. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspective. Marine Ecology Progress Series 564: 225–233. http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v564/p225-233/
Coupel, P., Michel, C. and Devred, E. 2019. Case study: The Ocean in Bloom. In State of Canada’s Arctic Seas, Niemi, A., Ferguson, S., Hedges, K., Melling, H., Michel, C., et al. 2019. Canadian Technical Report Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3344.
Crawford, J.A., Quakenbush, L.T. and Citta, J.J. 2015. A comparison of ringed and bearded seal diet, condition and productivity between historical (1975–1984) and recent (2003–2012) periods in the Alaskan Bering and Chukchi seas. Progress in Oceanography 136:133-150.
Crockford, S.J. 2017. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 19 January 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v1 Open access. https://peerj.com/preprints/2737/
Crockford, S.J. 2019. The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened. Global Warming Policy Foundation, London. Available in paperback and ebook formats. Crockford, S.J. 2020. State of the Polar Bear Report 2019. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report 39, London. pdf here.
Dyck, M., Regehr, E.V. and Ware, J.V. 2020. Assessment of Abundance for the Gulf of Boothia Polar Bear Subpopulation Using Genetic Mark-Recapture. Final Report, Government of Nunavut, Department of Environment, Iglulik. 12 June 2020. Pdf here.
Frey, K.E., Comiso, J.C., Cooper, L.W., Grebmeier, J.M. and Stock, L.V. 2020. Arctic Ocean primiary productivity: the response of marine algae to climate warming and sea ice decline. 2020 Arctic Report Card. NOAA. DOI: 10.25923/vtdn-2198 https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/900/Arctic-Ocean-Primary-Productivity-The-Response-of-Marine-Algae-to-Climate-Warming-and-Sea-Ice-Decline
George, J.C., Moore, S.E. and Thewissen, J.G.M. 2020. Bowhead whales: recent insights into their biology, status, and resilience. 2020 Arctic Report Card, NOAA. DOI: 10.25923/cppm-n265 https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/905/Bowhead-Whales-Recent-Insights-into-Their-Biology-Status-and-Resilience
Lippold, A., Bourgeon, S., Aars, J., Andersen, M., Polder, A., Lyche, J.L., Bytingsvik, J., Jenssen, B.M., Derocher, A.E., Welker, J.M. and Routti, H. 2019. Temporal trends of persistent organic pollutants in Barents Sea polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to changes in feeding habits and body condition. Environmental Science and Technology 53(2):984-995.
Lowry, L. 1985. “Pacific Walrus – Boom or Bust?” Alaska Fish & Game Magazine July/August: 2-5. pdf here.
MacCracken, J.G., Beatty, W.S., Garlich-Miller, J.L., Kissling, M.L and Snyder, J.A. 2017. Final Species Status Assessment for the Pacific Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens), May 2017 (Version 1.0). US Fish & Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK. Pdf here (8.6 mb).
Perovich, D., Meier, W., Tschudi, M., Hendricks, S., Petty, A.A., Divine, D., Farrell, S., Gerland, S., Haas, C., Kaleschke, L., Pavlova, O., Ricker, R., Tian-Kunze, X., Webster, M. and Wood, K. 2020. Sea ice. 2020 Arctic Report Card, NOAA. https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/891/Sea-Ice Pdf of entire Arctic Report Card here (12mb).
Regehr, E.V., Hostetter, N.J., Wilson, R.R., Rode, K.D., St. Martin, M., Converse, S.J. 2018. Integrated population modeling provides the first empirical estimates of vital rates and abundance for polar bears in the Chukchi Sea. Scientific Reports 8 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34824-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-34824-7
Rode, K.D., Regehr, E.V., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2014. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Global Change Biology 20(1):76-88. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12339/abstract
Rode, K. D., R. R. Wilson, D. C. Douglas, V. Muhlenbruch, T.C. Atwood, E. V. Regehr, E.S. Richardson, N.W. Pilfold, A.E. Derocher, G.M Durner, I. Stirling, S.C. Amstrup, M. S. Martin, A.M. Pagano, and K. Simac. 2018. Spring fasting behavior in a marine apex predator provides an index of ecosystem productivity. Global Change Biology http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13933/full
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Susan Crockford,
Good article but I am unhappy to learn that factual reporting and objective expert analysis by you is now banned by Facebook. Disgusting and subversive I contend.
So, Facebook is affraid to allow a factual discussion about mammal biology. This all so surreal.
I especially note your succinct explanation of primary productivity, ice extent and the arctic ecosystem including polar bear health and populations. Keep up the good work for truth and knowledge.
“Bill Rocks
So, Facebook is affraid to allow a factual discussion about mammal biology.”
About anything actually. Having factual discussions about climate change is one reason I got banned. Then they wanted a certified copy of my drivers license, birth certificate or passport to re-activate my account. It was time to forget it.
the only reason facebook or any of these social media sites have any power is because people use them. stop using them, delete them, and they will go the way of the dinosaur
That seems so simple, yet time and again, even on these pages I see people admitting to conforming so they won’t lose their access. I never trusted them from the start. I had no need to be in touch with everyone 24/7.
I use FB to follow a distant daughter and niece. I can’t imagine using it for news or factual information.
why not just email them instead?
Hmmm current Arctic ice extent is currently the highest it’s been in the last 6 years according to DMI. Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut (dmi.dk)
Ice thickness DMI Modelled ice thickness
Everything is down the Climate change. Britain’s Daily Telegraph:
“Biblical plague or manageable threat? Beating back swarms with Kenya’s locust hunters
Swarms of the pests, driven by climate change, are wreaking havoc on the food supply of a region regularly facing acute bouts of hunger”
They go on to say these were/are common (but not regular) occurances, even in biblical times but no, this time it’s all down to the dreaded climate change.
You read the Telegraph? You get the “news” you deserve!
So now that Coke has gone even further Woke and is advising its employees to be “less White”,will they stop abusing the polar bear’s image to sell their “product”?
As for face Book,if their customers have not realized the situation,then Facebook is free to gull them further.
For when it is a “free service” the odds are pretty good,you are the product.
Which has proven true with this outfit.
“All your datas are ours.”
Woke Coke! What about the peddlers of alcohol?
Rum & Liqueur For Sale| Bundaberg Rum| Web Store
When they’re not using poley bears to push drugs they’re pushing them off skyscrapers it seems. When will these outrageous practices ever end?
New look for Facebook
https://ibb.co/VB6XmKP
The walruses too benefit because their primary food source are the clams and mussels (mollusks) on the muddy seafloors of the shallow seas that typify their range. Their whiskers, tusks, and mouth parts are uniquely adapted for foraging the muddy bottoms, breaking up surface sea ice and probably rocks on the sea florr to get at individual mollusks, and then use their power tongue to literally suck the clam flesh out of the shell in one stroke.
The bivalve mollucks consume the phytoplankton they filter out of the water.
The walruses dredge the bivalves off the shallow sea floor and get nice and fat before hauling themselves out on the Arctic shorelines where polar bears can make them jump off cliffs to escape.
So primary productivity is essential across the entire arctic, both the marine mammals and the land dwellers around the coastlines. More Arctic primary productivity = more polar bears across all the sub-populations. The rest of the climate scams on the polar bears claims of pending doom are simply nonsense from rent-seeking carnival barkers.
Poland just voted a new law inflicting a $13.5 millions fine PER CASE to the Big Tech platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc… which would unjustly censor non mainstream, politically uncorrect, conservative, christian and libertarian opinions under their own rules unless they are also contravening to the Poland’s laws.
According to the Polish Justice Minister :“We see that when Big Tech decides to remove content for political purposes, it’s mostly content which praises traditional values or praises conservatism,” he said, “and it is deleted under their ‘hate speech policy’ when it has no legal right to do so.”
…/…”The removal of former U.S. President Donald Trump from social media platforms was just another example of Big Tech overreach and SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
“It’s very disturbing because if Big Tech sees themselves as an organization empowered enough to ban a sitting president of the U.S., it sends a message to the world –that they can ban anyone, whenever they want,” he added.
“Poland spent 45 years under communism, and that experience has taught the value of free speech and that when the country sees these disturbing new trends toward censorship, the red light goes on.”BOOM! Poland Will Fine Big Tech $13.5 Million Per Case For Removing Ideological Content: “Poland spent 45 years under Communism…It taught us the value of free speech” (thegatewaypundit.com)
“Poland spent 45 years under communism, and that experience has taught the value of free speech and that when the country sees these disturbing new trends toward censorship, the red light goes on.”
People need to understand the murderous history of Marxism in the 20th century. The fact that there are university professors who openly describe themselves as Marxists disgusts me beyond belief.
I’ve had talks with some of these “professors”.
They proclaim that what happened before wasn’t true Marxism.
Russian Marxism was betrayed by Stalin.
Chinese Marxism was betrayed by Mao.
Venezuelan and Cuban Marxism would have worked but they were sabotaged by the US.
Etc.
And this time it will work, because they are going to be the ones in charge.
“Facebook is working with climate communication experts…”
Mendacious partisans in league with biased incompetents.
I’m sure John Cook is one of their “climate communications experts.” He is an expert at torturing data to make it say what he wants and obscuring data that contradicts his scary stories. Exactly the kind of Leftist-endorsed “Truth” that the social media organs of the Democrat Party—Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram et al.—want to indoctrinate us with. I wonder if they’re taking lessons from Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping. They’re using the same tactics.
oh if only fkbk WOULD pull the pin and leave Aus!
I used to think “Ah well, in 10 years we will see how wrong the alarmists were” But now we have entered an age of censorship where the facts that prove them wrong are removed and declared “wrong speech”.
I have deep concerns about the future of Western Civilization.