With Barents Sea ice way above average this summer, Polar Bear Specialist Group biologist Ian Stirling now claims the old polar bear that he said died of climate change last year on Svalbard was “in his prime” and still blames the bear’s death on lack of sea ice — despite all evidence to the contrary.
UPDATE Sept. 19, 2014 typo fixed in Fig. 1 caption [sea ice low for 2012 was 3.41 m2km, not 4.1, see here.]
Figure 1. The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) says the September minimum for 2014 is “imminent” and suggests the low may come in at 5.1 million square kilometers (far short of the
4.1 3.41 m2km low reached in 2012. About the much larger than average amount of ice around Svalbard and Franz Josef Land, they said only: “As was the case for the beginning of the month, extent remains below average in all sectors of the Arctic except for a region in the Barents Sea, east of Svalbard.”
Posted in Advocacy, Life History, Sea ice habitat
Tagged AMO, annual summer minimum, Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, Barents Sea, Franz Josef Land, Hopen Island, minimum ice extent, Mult, NSIDC, polar bear that died of climate change, Polar Bears International, sea ice extent, starving polar bear, Stirling, Svalbard
One aspect of the recently published study on Chukchi Sea polar bears (Rode et al.2014 [now in print]
2013; see here and here) has not been stressed enough: their finding that the differences in overall condition between bears in the Chukchi and Southern Beaufort Seas came down to disparities in spring feeding opportunities and therefore, the condition of spring sea ice.
The fact that spring — not summer — is the most critical period for polar bears is something I’ve pointed out before (see here and here, for example) but it’s worth repeating at this time of year, when all eyes are on the annual ice minimum. It is often treated as a given that the decline in extent of summer sea ice in the Arctic since 1979 has been detrimental to polar bears. However, this is an assumption that we can now say is not supported by scientific evidence (see summary of that evidence here).
The results published by Rode et al. (2014
2013) not only add further support to the conclusion that declines in summer sea ice have not harmed polar bears, but should put the matter to rest – unless new evidence to the contrary is produced.
Chukchi bears, the report tells us, had more food available in the spring than Southern Beaufort bears (see map below) and this was the primary reason that bears were doing very well in the Chukchi and not quite as well in the Southern Beaufort. And because the polar bears for this study were captured and measured in mid-March to early May, from 2008 to 2011, they reflect spring-time conditions for 2008-2011 as well as year-round conditions from 2007 through 2010.
This means that the annual low ice extent for 2007 (record-breaking at the time), in the fall before this study began, had no discernible negative effect on either Chukchi or Southern Beaufort polar bears – and neither did similarly low annual minimums in two of the three remaining years of the study (Fig 1).
Posted in Conservation Status, Life History, Sea ice habitat
Tagged annual summer minimum, arctic sea ice, Beaufort Sea, body condition, Cherry, Chukchi, declining sea ice, Eastern Beaufort, good news, heavy sea ice, Hudson Bay, ice-free Arctic, litter size, loss of summer ice, Pilfold, polar bear, record low, Regehr, ringed seals, Rode, sea ice extent, Southern Beaufort, Stirling, summer ice minimum, summer sea ice, thick spring ice
You must be logged in to post a comment.