Earth Talk | Polar bears
Dear EarthTalk: Some say that polar bears are going to disappear in 50 years, but Alaskan officials insist their populations are recovering. What’s the real story?
- Harper Howe, San Francisco, Calif.
There is no doubt that polar bears are in serious trouble. Already on the ropes due to other human threats, their numbers are falling faster than ever as a result of retreating ice due to global warming. The nonprofit International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which added the polar bear to its “Red List” of the world’s most imperiled wildlife back in 2006, predicts a 30 percent decline in population for the great white rulers of the Arctic within three generations (about 45 years).
The nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity presents an even more pessimistic forecast. If current warming trends continue, they say, two-thirds of all polar bears—including all of Alaska’s polar bears—will be extinct by 2050. Both organizations agree that the species as a whole will likely be wiped out completely within 100 years unless humans can get global warming in check.
The erroneous notion that Alaska wildlife officials don’t believe the polar bear is in trouble was put forth by Alaska governor Sarah Palin when she initiated a suit against the federal government in hopes of overturning its decision to include the polar bear under the umbrella of endangered species protection. “I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time,” Palin wrote in a January 2008 New York Times Op Ed piece. “My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts.”
The real story is that affording the polar bear endangered species protection would bring further regulations capping greenhouse gas emissions, a threat to Alaska’s main economic driver: oil revenues. Alaska professor Rick Steiner uncovered the misinformation in Palin’s claims when he found evidence that the state’s top wildlife officials agreed with federal findings that polar bears are headed toward extinction: “So, here you have the state’s marine mammal experts, three or four of them, very reputable scientists, agreeing with the federal proposed rule to list polar bears and with the USGS [United States Geological Survey] studies showing that polar bears are in serious trouble,” said Steiner.
A solid link between global warming and polar bear mortality emerged in 2004 when researchers were surprised to find four drowned bears in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s North Slope. The meltdown of sea ice—the polar ice cap had retreated a record 160 miles to the north—forced the bears to swim unusually long distances to find solid ice, which they depend on as hunting and fishing platforms and for rest and recuperation. And more recently, USGS researcher Steven Amstrup published findings that polar bears are “stalking, killing and eating other polar bears” as competition for scarcer food heats up.
Beyond global warming, other risks to polar bear populations include toxic contaminants in the surrounding environment as well as in the fatty tissue of the prey they rely on, conflicts with shipping, stresses from recreational polar-bear watching, oil and gas exploration and development, and overharvesting through legal and illegal hunting.
CONTACTS: International Union for the Conservation of Nature, www.iucn.org; Center for Biological Diversity, www.biologicaldiversity.org.
GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
Related posts:
- Earth Talk | I want to start an environmental club Dear EarthTalk: I’m thinking about starting an environmental club in my middle school. Can you give me some ideas about how to start? Can you...
- Earth Talk | Do cats have to be carnivores? Dear EarthTalk: I don’t eat meat, for a variety of ethical and environmental reasons, and I’d rather not feed it to my cat, either. Do...
- Special Commentary: Palin-haters? Special Commentary by Chris Graham freepress2@ntelos.net “Sarah Palin represents everything they hate,” conservative radio host Laura Ingraham told an audience at the Republican National Convention...
- The absolutely fabulous list of the greatest Alternative Lifestyle movies ever made on planet earth Carly at the Movies column by Carl Larsen Sometimes watching a lousy movie can lead you down an interesting primrose path. Like the other day,...
- Hyrdogenmania! Earth Talk From the editors of E/The Environmental Magazine Dear EarthTalk: How is it that hydrogen can replace oil to run our cars? There seems...
This column is BS, unadulterated, 100% pure pasture-patty BS.
A few polar bears drown every year, possibly from stated causes or other causes not listed.
Polar ice is recovering nicely and expanding back into areas it had retreated from.
Illegal hunting – could be an important cause of a lowering of the bear population, but where is the proof that it exists. I don’t deny that it probably doesn’t happen, but you need proven cases to state a case for this being a “cause” of declining bear populations. If it is illegal, jail the SOBs.
Where is the “proof” that contaminants are found in the food that the bears eat, or in them? For animals that eat other dead animals, including decaying flesh, it takes a lot to kill a large bear. Too many Big Macs might, if they eat them by the ton.
“Unless humans can get global warming in check.” – The biggest lie of them all. If the sun is the main element in global warming, then what can man do about it? Sue the sun? Yes, there are some John Edwards-type slip and fall lawyers who would do it, but they belong in the same class as those Napoleons in insane asylums who are still plotting their Moscow campaigns.
An Alaskan volcano just exploded the other day, releasing hot gases and matter high into the atmosphere. Will someone sue it for air pollution? The only other thing on earth that puts out that much hot air and gas is Al Gore.
How stupid do the IUCN believe the American people are? On second thought, after the last elections, that might not be the right question to ask.
Demonstratrive science (i.e. facts) is what is needed in this debate over the Polar Bear, not fearmongering based on fantasies and delusions.
The sun is the sun. It is hot, very hot, and it will do damned well what it wants to regardless of the wishes of puny humans.
If it gets hotter, we have global warming. If it gets cooler, we have Ice Ages. That’s the way it has been for millions of years, despite the IUCN wishes.
We can cut down on some hot air emissions, but that is only a very small fraction of what the sun does every second of every day.
Let’s cut out the leftist PC BS and get down to facts.
The above comment is BS. Italy and Switzerland, which are nowhere near the polar ice caps, for the record, are having to adjust their international borders because of glacier melt in the Alps. We could do without the politics here, thanks.