scholarly journals 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)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals 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)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals 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)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals 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)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline have remained stable and at least one showed a marked increase in population size over the entire period. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected. This result indicates that the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were hasty generalizations that were scientifically unfounded, which suggests that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed, while the lack of a demonstrable ‘sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals Iñupiaq Knowledge of Polar Bears (Ursus maritimus) in the Southern Beaufort Sea, Alaska

ARCTIC ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-257
Author(s):  
Karyn D. Rode ◽  
Hannah Voorhees ◽  
Henry P. Huntington ◽  
George M. Durner
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Late Summer ◽  
Beaufort Sea ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Ice Breakup ◽  
Pack Ice

Successful wildlife management depends upon coordination and consultation with local communities. However, much of the research used to inform management is often derived solely from data collected directly from wildlife. Indigenous people living in the Arctic have a close connection to their environment, which provides unique opportunities to observe their environment and the ecology of Arctic species. Further, most northern Arctic communities occur within the range of polar bears (nanuq, Ursus maritimus) and have experienced significant climatic changes. Here, we used semi-structured interviews from 2017 to 2019 to document Iñupiaq knowledge of polar bears observed over four decades in four Alaskan communities in the range of the Southern Beaufort Sea polar bear subpopulation: Wainwright, Utqiaġvik, Nuiqsut, and Kaktovik. All but one of 47 participants described directional and notable changes in sea ice, including earlier ice breakup, later ice return, thinner ice, and less multiyear pack ice. These changes corresponded with observations of bears spending more time on land during the late summer and early fall in recent decades—observations consistent with scientific and Indigenous knowledge studies in Alaska, Canada, and Greenland. Participants noted that polar bear and seal body condition and local abundance either varied geographically or exhibited no patterns. However, participants described a recent phenomenon of bears being exhausted and lethargic when arriving on shore in the summer and fall after extensive swims from the pack ice. Further, several participants suggested that maternal denning is occurring more often on land than sea ice. Participants indicated that village and regional governments are increasingly challenged to obtain resources needed to keep their communities safe as polar bears spend more time on land, an issue that is likely to be exacerbated both in this region and elsewhere as sea ice loss continues. 

Using art to explore children’s perceptions of their Arctic community in a changing climate 

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lipson ◽  
Kim Reasor ◽  
Kååre Sikuaq Erickson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Marine Mammals ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
Arctic Sea Ice ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Subsistence Hunting ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

<p>In this project we analyze artwork and recorded statements of 5<sup>th</sup> grade students from the community of Utqiaġvik, Alaska, who participated in a science-art outreach activity. The team consisted of a scientist (Lipson), an artist (Reasor) and an outreach specialist (Erickson) of Inupiat heritage from a village in Alaska. We worked with four 5th grade classes of about 25 students each at Fred Ipalook Elementary. The predominantly Inupiat people of Utqiaġvik are among those who will be most impacted by climate change and the loss of Arctic sea ice in the near future. Subsistence hunting of marine mammals associated with sea ice is central to the Inupiat way of life. Furthermore, their coastal homes and infrastructure are increasingly subject to damage from increased wave action on ice-free Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. While the people of this region are among the most directly vulnerable to climate change, the teachers reported that the subject is not generally covered in the elementary school curriculum.</p><p>The scientist and the local outreach specialist gave a short presentation about sea ice and climate change in the Arctic, with emphasis on local impacts to hunting and infrastructure. We then showed the students a large poster of historical and projected sea ice decline, and asked the students to help us fill in the white space beneath the lines. The artist led the children in making small paintings that represent things that are important to their lives in Utqiaġvik (they were encouraged to paint animals, but they were free to do whatever they wanted). We returned to the class later that week and had each student briefly introduce themselves and their painting, and place it on the large graph of sea ice decline, which included the dire predictions of the RCP8.5 scenario. Then we added the more hopeful RCP2.6 scenario to end on a positive note.</p><p>Common themes expressed in the students’ artwork included subsistence hunting, other aspects of traditional Inupiat culture, nature and family. Modern themes such as sports and Pokémon were also common. The students reacted to the topic of climate change with pictures of whales, polar bears and other animals, and captions such as “Save the world/ice/animals.” There were several paintings showing unsuccessful hunts for whales or seals. Some students displayed an understanding of ecosystem science in their recorded statements. For example, a student who painted the sun and another who painted a krill both succinctly described energy flow in food webs that support the production of whales (for example, “I drew krill because without krill there wouldn’t be whales”). Some of the students described the consequences of sea ice loss to local wildlife with devastating succinctness (sea ice is disappearing and polar bears will go extinct). The overall sense was that the children had a strong grasp of the potential consequences of climate change to their region and way of life.</p>

Trichinella and polar bears: a limited risk for humans

2017 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 440-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Dupouy-Camet ◽  
P. Bourée ◽  
H. Yera
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
World War ◽  
Protected Species ◽  
Brown Bears ◽  
Limited Access ◽  
Human Trichinellosis

AbstractIn this review, we identified 63 cases reported since World War II of human trichinellosis linked to the consumption of parasitized polar bear (Ursus maritimus) meat. This low number contrasts to the numerous cases of human trichinellosis related to consumption of the meat of black (U. americanus) or brown bears (U. arctos). The prevalence of Trichinella infection is high in bears, but larval muscular burden is usually lower in polar bears compared to other bear species. Polar bears, therefore, seem to play a limited role in the transmission of trichinellosis to humans, as native residents living in the Arctic traditionally consume well-cooked bear meat, and travellers and foreign hunters have only limited access to this protected species due to the declining polar bear population.

Relationships between estimates of ringed seal (Phoca hispida) and polar bear (Ursus maritimus) populations in the Canadian Arctic

1995 ◽  
Vol 52 (12) ◽  
pp. 2594-2612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Stirling ◽  
Nils Are Øritsland
Keyword(s):  
Metabolic Rate ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Phoca Hispida ◽  
Ringed Seals ◽  
Reproductive Rates ◽  
The Relationship

Analysis of estimates of population size of ringed s,eals (Phoca hispida) and polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from several areas indicated that estimates of one predicted the range of expected population size of the other in areas where ringed seals constitute the primary prey. In some areas, the closeness of this relationship indicates where estimates of either seals or bears may be inaccurate. The number of seals required to support a population of polar bears of predetermined size was estimated independently using both behavioral and energetic data. Behavioral estimates of the number of seals killed may overestimate energetic requirements and vice versa. Predation and energy matrices indicated that high levels of predation on seals are sustainable only if most animals killed are young-of-the-year. The field metabolic rate of the polar bear appears to be about twice the basal metabolic rate. Densities of seals vary in response to overall productivity of the ecosystem in different areas, and fluctuations in their numbers and reproductive rates between years can be used to monitor changes in productivity of the ecosystem. These changes also cause variation in productivity of bears, which indicates the sensitivity, at the population level, of the relationship between ringed seals and polar bears.

Polar Bear tagging in Alaska, 1968

Polar Record ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 14 (91) ◽  
pp. 459-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. W. Lentfer
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Research Laboratory ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Information ◽  
Sport Fisheries

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game started marking Polar Bears (Ursus maritimus) in 1967 to obtain life history information (Lentfer, 1968), and continued in 1968 with the assistance of the US Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Special thanks for use of facilities are given to the Arctic Research Laboratory at Barrow and to the Tin City and Cape Lisburne Air Force stations. Participating biologists were J. W. Lentfer, L. H. Miller, S. H. Eide, and G. N. Bos of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and J. W. Brooks of the US Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

scholarly journals Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Behavior near Icebreaker Operations in the Chukchi Sea, 1991

ARCTIC ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mari A. Smultea ◽  
Jay Brueggeman ◽  
Frances Robertson ◽  
Dagmar Fertl ◽  
Cathy Bacon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Activity ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Chukchi Sea ◽  
Group Behavior ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Running Away ◽  
Significant Difference

Increasing interactions of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) with human activity, combined with impacts of climate change, are of critical concern for the conservation of the species. Our study quantifies and describes initial reactions and behaviors of polar bears observed from an icebreaker during summer 1991 at two exploratory drilling sites (near sites drilled in 2015) located in the Chukchi Sea 175 km and 312 km west of Barrow, Alaska. Polar bear behavior was described using continuous sampling of six predetermined focal group behavior states (walking, running, swimming, resting, feeding or foraging, unknown) and six behavioral reaction events (no reaction, walking away, running away, approaching, vigilance [i.e., watching], unknown). Forty-six bears in 34 groups were monitored from the Robert LeMeur (an Arctic Class 3 icebreaker) for periods of five minutes to 16.1 hours. Significantly more bear groups reacted to icebreaker presence (79%) than not (21%), but no relationship was found between their reactions and distance to or activity of the icebreaker. Reactions were generally brief; vigilance was the most commonly observed reaction, followed by walking or running away for short (< 5 minutes) periods and distances (< 500 m). Eleven percent of bear groups approached the vessel. No significant difference was found between reactions when cubs were present and those when cubs were absent. Despite the limited sample sizes, these findings are relevant to assessing potential impacts of resource development and shipping activities on polar bears, especially given the sparsity of such information in the face of growing human activity in the Arctic offshore areas. Overall, climate change is leading to longer and more extensive open-water seasons in the Arctic and therefore to increasing marine traffic—more vessels (including icebreakers) for a longer time each year over a wider area. 

scholarly journals Yes, they can: polar bears Ursus maritimus successfully hunt Svalbard reindeer Rangifer tarandus platyrhynchus

Polar Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lech Stempniewicz ◽  
Izabela Kulaszewicz ◽  
Jon Aars
Keyword(s):  
Polar Bear ◽  
Rangifer Tarandus ◽  
Terrestrial Ecosystem ◽  
Ice Cover ◽  
High Energy ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Attractive Potential ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Svalbard Reindeer

AbstractThe polar bear Ursus maritimus is one of the species most endangered by the rapidly declining sea–ice cover in the Arctic, which they use as a platform to hunt fatty, high-energy seals. In recent decades, more polar bears have been forced to remain longer on land, so their access to seals is limited. The importance of terrestrial food to polar bears is disputable, and more data are needed. Terrestrial ungulates could be an attractive substitute prey for them. Svalbard reindeer Rangifer tarandus platyrhynchus are prevalent and their distribution is completely within the range of polar bears. They constitute an attractive potential prey offering a significant energy return. Pre-2000 sources state that polar bears do not attack Svalbard reindeer. This report is the first description and documentation of the complete course of a polar bear hunt for adult reindeer in Hornsund, SW Spitsbergen, and also of the bear’s hunting behaviour and the reindeer’s response. Further, we report several other recent instances of bear–reindeer interactions in Svalbard, suggesting that polar bears now hunt reindeer more frequently than they used to. This increase in hunting is probably linked to the reduced ice cover, with bears spending more time on land, and a growing reindeer population. This study adds to earlier papers on how polar bears in Svalbard have increasingly shifted to a more terrestrial diet, and indicates that they may have an enhanced role as an apex predator in the terrestrial ecosystem.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document