Susan Crockford
All predictions of disaster aside, in fact the polar bear is no closer to extinction than it was in 2005 as Arctic sea ice again steadfastly resists slipping past a catastrophic ‘tipping point’ — or the ‘death spiral’, as some chicken-littles continue to call it.
In fact, the summer sea ice trend has been pretty much flat since 2007, with ice covering about 42% less area than it had done in 1979, yet polar bears in many regions are doing better now than they were in 2005, especially in Davis Strait, the Barents and Chukchi Seas and the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.
No ‘tipping point for Arctic summer sea ice
The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) identifies three periods in sea ice minimums: From 1979 to 1992, sea ice loss declined about 6% per decade. From 1993 to 2006, the decline accelerated to 13.3%. But from 2007 to 2020, the slope softened to just 4%. MongaBay News, 15 July 2021.
That flattish trend has only continued, as the graph below shows, modified from one published by the US Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in 2019 — see original here — showing the September average (not the minimum extent), so while we don’t have the figure yet for 2022 it is likely to be close to what it was in 2021:
Sea ice minimum at 2022
The NSIDC reported yesterday that Arctic sea ice reached its minimum extent on 19 September this year, covering 4.68mk2. The University of Bremen (see chart below) measured the extent at 4.87mk2 on this date but the slight difference is not really important: the shape and aerial extent of ice coverage at this date compared to 2005 are what I’m emphasizing here.
Sea ice minimum at 2005
The minimum extent of ice coverage was reached on 22 September in 2005 (U. Bremen):
Prediction based on 2005 sea ice conditions
Half of the predictions of future sea ice coverage (for 2050) were already exceeded by 2007 and the authors of the 2007 USGS conservation report on polar bears (Amstrup et al. 2007) stated: “This suggests our projections for the future status of polar bears may be conservative.” In other words, Amstrup and colleagues thought the future would probably be even worse than they predicted in their report: that even more than 2/3 of the world’s polar bears would be lost by 2050.
15 continuous years of 42% less summer sea ice
As the graph below from Stroeve and colleagues shows, the models of summer Arctic sea ice loss used to predict the dire future for polar bears were, by 2007, rapidly deviating from observations: it was indeed worse than they thought!
As it happened, the polar bear specialists were wrong (Crockford 2017, 2019): polar bears were more flexible and resilient than predicted and after 15 years of summer sea ice dropping to ‘catastrophic’ levels (about 42% less ice than in 1979 for at least 8 years out of 10), many subpopulations of the bears are better off than before. Davis Strait, Barents Sea and Chukchi Sea bears are doing very well: Barents Sea bears in particular are thriving despite by far the most sea ice loss of any Arctic region (e.g. Lippold et al. 2019; Peacock et al. 2013; Regehr et al. 2018; Rode et al. 2014). This was not what had been predicted.
Conclusion: Despite the Arctic warming four times as fast as the rest of the world with rising CO2 levels and about 42% less summer ice than there was in 1979, there is currently no ‘climate emergency’ for polar bears and the species is no closer to extinction than it was 15 years ago.
References
Amstrup, S.C., Marcot, B.G. & Douglas, D.C. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century. US Geological Survey. Reston, VA. Pdf here
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.
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.
Peacock, E., Taylor, M.K., Laake, J. & Stirling, I. 2013. Population ecology of polar bears in Davis Strait, Canada and Greenland. Journal of Wildlife Management 77:463–476.
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
Stroeve, J., Holland, M.M., Meier, W., Scambos, T. and Serreze, M. 2007. Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast. Geophysical Research Letters 34:L09501. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2007GL029703
How did the polar bear survive the Holocene climate OPTIMUM?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum
“The Holocene Climate Optimum warm event consisted of increases of up to 4 °C near the North Pole (in one study, winter warming of 3 to 9 °C and summer of 2 to 6 °C in northern central Siberia).
Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2–3 °C warmer than now.[9] Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now”
: How did polar bears survive the Holocene Climate Optimum? :
Good question.
My question is how did polar bears , seals, shellfish, etc survive swimming in an acidic ocean when the atmospheric CO2 ppm was more than 10 times the present value?
Is it not just remotely possible that the acidification of the ocean is just a nonsense scare story dreamed up by silly people in order to bamboozle the extremely gullible masses?
In a word – yes
Not only did the Arctic have less sea ice than now, the evidence indicates it was seasonally ice free for more than a thousand years during the Holocene optimum. link
So, if the polar bears need sea ice to survive, why do we still have polar bears?
Nobody is predicting the arctic will be completely ice free all year round. They are just predicting disaster for the polar bears if there is much less melt season ice than there is now.
Apparently bees can fly because they know nothing about aerodynamics. Similarly, polar bears survive because they know nothing about climate “science”.
Add the Eemian- the last interglacial- which was probably even warmer, with less ice than the Optimum. Maybe bears figured out the seals were ashore
if there was no/little sea ice for them to rest upon. Ya think?
The Eemian was 115,000 to about 130,000 years ago. I seem to recall that polar bears, as a species, underwent significant changes in dentition about 20,000 years ago. Mitochondrial studies suggest a split from brown bears 150,000 years ago. You pays your money and makes your choice.
Wasn’t 20,000 years ago pretty close to the start of the Holocene Optimum?
Wiki says the start of the Holocene was about 9,000 years ago.
There was still plenty of sea ice that formed in winter and melted in spring. The more open water in summer meant more seal pups in spring.
Polar bears just needed to scrounge enough food on land during summer to not lose weight before winter. A few weeks less hibernating was more beneficial than a few weeks less roaming for a snack.
Do you need to be an expert to not see this?
A good observer of things in things in this world observes what isn’t there, and if you Google “polar bear” and click on “news” the first 30 hits contains zero stories about the decreasing polar bear population. Ten years ago that would have been a nonstop parade of dead bears falling out of the sky:
Nov 25, 2009 YouTube
Quite disappointing. Earlier in the year I was hoping ice would bottom out above five Wadhams for the first time since 2007. But 4.68 is rather more than Prof Wadhams’ zero in 2013 et sequi. Has he apologized for frightening us?
No, no apology as yet but he has backtracked on his assertion that assassination teams are hunting down climate scientists and now says that he accepts that the deaths of 3 colleagues were accidents. He has even made an official complaint to the press complaints organisation, IPSO for the Times printing the story as it has ‘damaged his reputation’ and made him ‘sound like a crazy person’. His new assertion is that the story was run as a ‘concerted effort against climate scientists by Murdoch controlled media’ so definitely not a crazy person suffering from paranoia and delusions of victimisation then!
He’s not paranoid. It’s just that everyone is out to get him.
NSIDC is a known ‘Arctic ice death spiral’ bias source.
UoB tends to be a little more honest, and they “estimate” Arctic sea ice as 0.13mk₂ under 5mk₂.
> many subpopulations of the bears are better off than before. Davis Strait, Barents Sea and Chukchi Sea bears are doing very well: Barents Sea bears in particular are thriving despite by far the most sea ice loss of any Arctic region
Maybe they had problems with the higher summer sea ice levels of the LIA, and are now thriving again in the slightly warmer conditions and slightly less summer sea ice that they have experienced for most of the last 10,000 years. .
PBs hunt on the ice edge, that is where the baby seals are more likely to be found.
During the LIA and the late 1970s peak, they had a lot further to travel to get to that ice edge, if it occurred in spring/summer at all.
Perhaps the idea that PBs need more ice is just wrong. Perhaps warmer is better.
The alarmists failed to take into account 2nd and 3rd order effects of more warmth and less ice. Warmer ice free water is good for fish and krill. More fish and krill means more food for seals. More seals means more food for polar bears, even though their hunting methods may have to change somewhat.
Warmer waters also mean that both seals and polar bears need less energy in order to keep warm, so they don’t need to eat as much.
“their hunting methods may have to change”
A common assumption in warmist predictions is that the species under threat is too stupid to change. This, even though billions of years of evolution shows that conditions are always changing and the only species that survive are the ones that changed to meet the new conditions.
That’s probably because most warmists are themselves to stupid to change.
100% sea ice, all year, would make hunting extremely difficult for the PBs
I like my PB’s with jelly on white bread!
From Mike Maguire above:
During the LIA and into modern times, Arctic summer sea ice is greater than during the majority of the Holocene period.
Polar bears are doing very nicely, thank you.
Arctic sea ice had a tipping point during the LIA and another in 1979.
After extreme high levels, it recovered a small amount towards the Holocene norm.
Unfortunately, looks like that recovery has stalled at a level well above the 90th percentile of the last 10,000 years.
In fact, the average width of the troposphere drops sharply in winter. Above the 60th parallel, the average height of the troposphere is only 6 km. Therefore, the pattern of the stratospheric polar vortex determines winter weather. The blocking of the polar vortex over the Bering Strait can already be observed, which, combined with La Niña, will bring a harsh winter to the US.
Arctic sea ice extent looks like ending this season at 10th lowest in the record and in terms of age, volume and thickness it isn’t doing well.
the North West Passage was entirely ice free at the end of this season.
Nobody knows how most polar bear populations are doing because they aren’t surveyed.
I don’t know about the ice, but you seem to be getting thicker by the day.
If you say “sea ice” three times, Beetle Griff comes out.
That begs the question,Quiffy how did the doomsayers come up with the opposite observation?
Climate doomers don’t believe in observation.
It’s all models, all the way down.
Still waiting for the Arctic to be ice free in the summer.Only will happen when the sun gets so big it swallows the entire earth.
Has any out of the ordinary climate event happened as a result?
So the official satellite record begins in 1978 – 44 years worth and this is the tenth lowest, would it help if I was worried?
*Has any event out of ….
Ben Vorlich: “[…] would it help if I was worried?”
–
–
No. The only way to solve any problem is to raise taxes, stop eating meat, eliminate fossil fuels, and form a One World Government.
–
It’s the only solution. Wait up… maybe it’s The Final Solution.
Earlier “inconvenient” satellite data is ignored.
Earlier “inconvenient” non-satellite data is also ignored.
Just Stop Digging, griff
He’s on thin ice, any more digging and he’ll disappear into his own hole!
He’s got to stay warm some how.
Griff:
Please tell me you’re not going to go with that. If truly “nobody knows”, how can anyone make “high confidence” assertions that polar bears are endangered?
Somehow I don’t think Amstrup et al. are going to use your argument; they may be wrong but they ain’t that dumb.
It’s the polar bear equivalent to claiming that the missing heat is hiding in the deep oceans where it can’t be measured.
So what?
BTW, in 2012 we had the worst melt season evahhhhh at 3.4km3, today it’s 4.7km3.
Yet, CO2 continues to rise.
What does that tell you, mate?
“10th lowest” is not exactly the best way to read a nonlinear path now is it. I guess it’s the advocacy way of thinking and projecting onto the shallow thinkers lacking evidence or free time.
NOAA SST-NorthAtlantic GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979 With37monthRunningAverage.gif (880×481) (climate4you.com)
AMO GlobalAnnualIndexSince1856 With11yearRunningAverage.gif (880×471) (climate4you.com)
Speaking of peak cherry picking, here comes griff.
Let’s ignore the trend. Let’s ignore the fact that every polar bear population that is surveyed (and most of them are surveyed) is increasing.
Let’s find any “fact” that can be spun as looking bad and declare that it is the only one that matters.
BTW, griff, have you apologized to Dr. Crawford yet?
For “Volume” and “Thickness” we’re limited to the PIOMAS (model) output.
It’s your lucky day !
I was just looking at that (along with NSIDC and JAXA for the annual daily minimum for 2022).
Using the “Thickness” numbers as an example, the “death spiral” that started around 2011 can clearly be seen in the graph below …
… Oh ! … Wait …
Meanwhile you IGNORE the fact that Polar Bears are doing well and has increased population despite the significant decrease in summer ice cover since 2007 and the northwest passage is a red herring since it is IRRELEVANT to the Polar Bears.
Your chronic pessimism is a sign of a cultist believer refusing to see the big picture.
Yes, and the UK has the 10th highest absolute GDP if you ignore its decline. The same goes for its currency and the NHS.
Poor griff…. WRONG as always.
Arctic sea ice is in the top decile of extent for the last 10,000 years.
The extent is still VERY HIGH, just not as extreme as during the LIA and late 1970s.
Not fair, you are looking at all the data, not just the part that supports griff’s argument.
The ice in the central Arctic looks very good.
The Greenland surface conditions data have not been updating on the Polar Portal for the last couple of days. Radar maps show significant daily snowfall over Greenland. Does anyone know why the portal is not updating? The 2021-1922 melt season must be disappointing for some as it was short with less melt than average.
http://polarportal.dk/fileadmin/polarportal/surface/SMB_curves_LA_EN_20220919.png
Does snowfall interfere with the ice measurements?
2021-1922 ?? Say what!
Shh. Time travel – don’t make a big thing out of it but Doc Brown’s been helping him!
I’m retired so I’ll play the senility card on the 1922 date ;<)
The Polar Portal is updating again. The ’22/23 season is starting off strong. I hope Greenland doesn’t capsize and tip over into the ocean because of too much ice (didn’t Guam capsize?).
Healthy bears, a duff hurricane season; it’s not going so well for alarmism inc
”The headline of this article was amended on 17 June 2022. An earlier version described the polar bears as “thriving”. This has been changed to “surviving”.
Polar bears found to be surviving despite lack of sea ice offers hope for species”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/16/polar-bears-found-thriving-greenland-despite-lack-of-sea-ice-offer-hope-for-species
Oops
O/T
Just in:
Fracking ban lifted, government announces
🙂
Don’t tell Griff 🙂
I’m sure he’s already weeping into his tea.
If he dilutes it too much, I’m sure his mother will make him another cup.
The 2022 Article Ice Extent Summer Minimum was set yesterday at 4.7 million KM^2, which is 1.3 million KM^2 larger than the 2012 record minimum (which is about the size of Texas, California and Oregon combines)…
Hmmm.. Leftists predicted the Arctic Summer Ice Extent Minimum would be less than 1 million KM^2 from 2012…
Another Leftist prediction bites the dust.
Per the JAXA data N. H. ice cover reach its minimum on Sept 16th of 4,709,986 Sq km.
This Number is greater than ten other years since 2002.
A linear trend line shows the date of Min. ice has trended from Sept 16th 2002 to Sept 14th 2022.
This indicates an earlier Min or some slight cooling of the Arctic over the past 21 years.
The Minimum has a range of 15 days 9-09 to 9-24
Error
The Number 4,709.486 was yesterdays number.
The Minimum was on September 16th 4,527,435 per JAXA data
What are the consequences to planet earth if polar bears become extinct? –
The Greens lose their poster girl
We get overrun with seals….arf arf 🙂
Seals would increase, cold-water fish would decline, Omega−3 fatty acids would become scarce, and companies selling the mythical health supplement would go bankrupt. Retirement accounts would suffer devastating losses, and people would become despondent. You can take it from there.
So it’s worse than we though then 🙂
AHRRR…Thought not though.
The oldest polar bear fossil found is 130KY old, and from genetic study it is apparent that polar bears and their subfamily Ursinae have been around since long before the Pleistocene began 2.6 MYA, about 4.6 MYA.
Meaning polar bears have survived if not thrived throughout all two dozen major glaciation/interglacial cycles of the Pleistocene heading into the Holocene. Why on earth could any knowledgeable polar bear scientist believe that this hardy species could not survive a temperature change of one or two degrees C, or any of the massive changes in the extent of sea ice that have occurred repeatedly over the past 2.6 MY?
It’s simply nonsense to believe in polar bear “tipping points”.
Duane,
I find it amazing what some folk can believe – including Polar Bear ‘tipping points’! – when their job, cushy conference tickets, pension, even reputation, absolutely requires them to be of The One True Green Religion . . . .
Auto
I think most readers here know Climate Alarmists thought dwindling polar bear numbers would help sell their POV because the polar bear is a beautiful animal. Not only has ice levels stabilised, polar bear #s have increased and brought down the Alarmists ‘house of cards’ Not that they will admit it.
I believe the polar bear was actually much closer to extinction 18 years ago than it isnow
As Susan Crockford has pointed out multiple times, what matters is ice during the seal whelping period, when the bears are feeding. And what favors the seals is broken ice, as too complete coverage is worse than low ice.
The late summer minimums seem irrelevant to polar bear wellbeing.
As I have written multiple times, the AGW-CO2 idea has become an axiom of the UN, western-world politicians, main-stream media, and some teenagers. As an axiom it cannot be displaced by honest and well written papers such as Susan regularly does.
Redge (above) wrote “The Greens lose their poster girl”
It needs to be added – they just move on to something else. I can name a few, but why bother.
When a glacier pushes over the UN Building in NYC the axiom may go with it.
Thanks, again, to Dr. Crockford for this report and for her enduring intellect, knowledge and courage to “set the record straight”.
I have been rooting for the bears and am pleased to know that they are doing well.
Her two books – 1. the polar bear non-catastrophe; and 2. the walrus deception are recommended to anyone who may doubt the substance of her reports.
Darn it, you just can’t get the icons these days.
Don’t those Polar Bears know they are not supposed to get fat and numerous jeez!!?…..
The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA)
“Administration”
Even though the “experts” don’t understand Polar Bears, can we hold them to a high standard of pedantic expression?
Nice video.
Thanks Susan.
Obviously polar bears aren’t reading the “science” that says they should be dead. Maybe they don’t care if it is one degree warmer as long as there is food to eat and lots of bear sex.
who was it that said something like, there were 7000 polar bears in 1965 and today there are only 27,000 left?
I did not say that, but I have mentioned that hunting restrictions and other concerns regarding the polar bear population began back in the 1950s. The Soviet Union, for instance, banned polar bear hunting in 1956. Canada and Norway began protecting Polar Bears by establishing hunting quotas and regulations. The United States enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act in 1972.
The following site has one of the neatest photos of a cub you will ever see. It takes a while to get past the text, but worth the scrolling.
https://www.ialasia.org/projects/polar-bears-threats-and-conservation-efforts
I’m a bit lost as there’s so much information here. Can someone point me to resources to refute the claim that the recent “increase” in atmospheric CO2 levels have been “proven” to be caused by human activity using C14 dating? Seems like fossil fuel burning and volcano emissiones would be indistiguishable, since the C14 halflife is very small in geological terms – only 5K years.