Don’t Blame Melting Ice For Polar Bear Attacks. Blame A Bear Baby Boom

Some scientists still think it’s OK to mislead the public to promote climate change alarm

27th is International Polar Bear Day, and what
interesting timing it happens to be this year. In recent weeks the media have
been all over the news that the Russian village of Belushaya Guba, on the
Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the southern Barents Sea had declared a state of
emergency because more than 50 aggressive and fearless polar bears had invaded
the community. Protected status for the bears meant deadly force was not an
option for terrified residents, yet non-lethal efforts to get the bears to
leave had been futile.

the blame was immediately put on sea-ice loss due to climate change — not by a
scientist but by a Norwegian journalist who initially reported the story,
adding in his own homemade, unscientific analysis. Pundits came out of the gate
later, to add further layers of hyperbole, even after the original journalist
followed up with another story recanting his original theories, headlined “Well-fed polar bears are not necessarily stuck at Novaya Zemlya
due to climate change, experts say.”

primary problem was, in fact, the village’s garbage, with too many bears being
a close second. There had been ice enough in late November to allow the bears
to leave Novaya Zemlya as they usually do in the fall but they did not. Dozens
of fat bears chose to stay for the winter because of easy access to stores of
food and an open-air garbage dump.

few days after military personnel arrived and got serious about running the
chubby troublemakers out of town, the bears took to the ice. But a week later,
CNN was still pushing the imminent climate-change catastrophe meme using video
footage of fat, healthy bears.

story was reminiscent of the trouble that Churchill, Man. had with polar bears
in the late 1960s, when bear numbers were burgeoning because of new
restrictions on hunting them. As polar bear specialist Ian Stirling and
colleagues described in a 1977 Canadian Wildlife Service report, increasing
numbers of fearless bears wandered the streets of Churchill, which had three
open-air dumps that bears frequented day and night:

“…in November 1968, up to 40 polar bears at any one time could be
seen in the vicinity of the Fort Churchill dump, and 60 to 80 bears were
estimated to be frequenting the settlements.

attacked residents on a regular basis and a young Inuit man was killed. They
broke into houses, killed dogs, and frightened people out of their wits. But at
least when the ice came in the fall, Churchill bears left of their own accord.

now has its garbage under control and a Polar Bear Alert Program that is the
envy of the Arctic. But it was expensive and took years to achieve such
exemplary results. Few communities can muster those kinds of resources to deal
with problem bears, especially Inuit hamlets in Canada and Greenland. In
Nunavut, many residents of these small towns are terrified by the number of recent
fatal attacks and close calls.

young Inuk men — one from Arviat, the other from Naujaat — were mauled to death
last summer after years of Nunavut residents complaining that polar bear
problems were spiralling out of control. Residents insist the spike is due to
increased numbers of bears and that the bears they see (like those on Novaya
Zemlya) are fat and healthy.

biologists insist polar bear numbers are declining, especially in Western
Hudson Bay, and that bears invade communities because sea-ice loss has deprived
them of hunting habitat. Inuit say bears are not starving and numbers are up
virtually everywhere, including Western Hudson Bay. A draft management plan released by the Nunavut
government in November said, “Inuit believe there are now so many bears that
public safety has become a major concern.”

I reported in the 2018 State of the Polar Bear Report, the latest survey
and research results suggest that polar bears probably number about 29,500
across the Arctic, with a wide margin of potential error. That’s up since 2005,
when the count was about 24,500, despite low summer sea ice since 2007. Polar
bears have proven to be more flexible in their habits and more capable in open
water than scientists assumed. Long-term trends in sea ice cannot be used to
explain individual events, like the mauling deaths this summer in Nunavut or
the invasion of fat bears on Novaya Zemlya.

scientists who support the use of polar-bear tragedy porn by media and
conservation activists to promote climate-change hysteria don’t do themselves
any favours. Two years ago, biologist Steven Amstrup from Polar Bears
International condoned the use of a now infamous starving polar bear video to
spread climate alarmism: National Geographic later had to apologize for the
misrepresentation. But University of Alberta biologist Andrew Derocher’s recent
online comment about the Belushaya Guba bears (“it may not be climate change
but it’s consistent with the predicted impacts of climate change”) suggests
that some scientists still think it’s OK to mislead the public about polar
bears when promoting climate change alarm.

problems with polar bears across the Arctic in all seasons are not what climate
change looks like. They’re a sign of ever-increasing numbers of polar bears.

Susan Crockford is a zoologist and adjunct professor at the University of Victoria. She blogs about polar bears at

Full post & comments

The post Don’t Blame Melting Ice For Polar Bear Attacks. Blame A Bear Baby Boom appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

February 27, 2019 at 06:17AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: