Tag Archives: western hudson bay

Experts talk of their bleak future, W Hudson Bay polar bears get earliest freezeup in decades

It seems that Churchill residents and visitors woke up this morning to find most local polar bears had left to go hunting — on the sea ice that supposedly doesn’t exist. Right in the middle of the Polar Bear Week campaign devised by Polar Bears International to drum up donation dollars and public sympathy for polar bear conservation!

Polar bear on the sea ice_Churchill_8 Nov 2017_Explore dot org cam my photo 2Frigid temperatures and north winds last night helped the process along, but this early freeze-up has been in the works for almost a week. From what I can ascertain, it appeared the only bears around onshore today were a mother with her young cub moving out towards the ice (females with cubs are usually the last to move offshore, probably to reduce the risk of encounters with adult males who might kill the cubs).

Tundra Buggy cams at Explore.org have been showing markedly fewer bears today and those that have been seen were on the ice (see above and below) or heading out to it.

The chart below is for yesterday (7 November), before the cold and north winds hit the region. It shows the concentration of ice that’s >15 cm thick.

Hudson Bay North 2017 concentration Nov 7

The chart for 8 November is below, after the storm.

Hudson Bay North daily ice concentration 2017_Nov 8

This is ice thick and extensive enough for polar bears to go hunting. Some bears almost certainly left shore yesterday, with the rest following quickly on their heals today. There are sure to be some stragglers left ashore that will leave over the next few days but the fact remains: there is sea ice to be had for those polar bear willing to start hunting.

Watch polar bear on the WHB sea ice below (screen caps below – and one above – were taken the afternoon of 8 November, from the Tundra Buggy Cam live feed near Churchill).

Polar bear on the sea ice_Churchill_8 Nov 2017_Explore dot org cam my photo 3

Keep in mind that in the 1980s, bears left for the ice on 8 November, on average. That means we’re back to a 1980s freeze-up scenario, at least for this year.

Funny how no one bothered to mention the potential for an early freeze-up to the media last week, when scientist were so eager to talk about the imminent demise of WHB bears. And funny that Polar Bears International hasn’t tweeted a word today about the famous Churchill bears having enough sea ice to go hunting, smack in the middle of Polar Bear Week.

Yes, the “Save Our Sea Ice” PBI rallying cry sounds a bit hollow with sea ice as far as the eye can see off Churchill today. But will anyone in the mainstream media point out the irony?

See charts below for years back to 2004, on this date (2005 missing for some reason), to compare to the above 8 November image (2004 is as far back as the archive goes).

Continue reading

Problem bear report for Churchill might be second-last one this year

Good news for Western Hudson Bay polar bears that have been getting into trouble in Churchill, Manitoba: the seasons looks to be almost over.  Only a few more days of “Polar Bear Week” likely remain, as sea ice will build along the shoreline in response to severe cold and the north winds expected later today.

Churchill PB reports_week 17_30 Oct- Nov 5_2017_week 10 and 13 missing

This morning near Churchill, from one of the tundra buggies, post at Explore.org:

Churchill on 7 Nov 2017_Explore dot org

Churchill weather 2017 Nov 7

Sea ice at 7 November, will be updated so check back:

Sea ice Canada 2017 Nov 7

Ice forming all the way into James Bay (Southern Hudson Bay), as shown by the daily ice concentration charts for 7 November 2017 (Northern and Southern Hudson Bay) of ice thicker than 15 cm:

Hudson Bay North daily ice concentration 2017_Nov 7

Hudson Bay South daily ice concentration 2017_Nov 7 greater than 15 cm

Continue reading

Scientists and media continue to spread misinformation about polar bears & walrus

“Lies” might be a better word to characterize the misinformation that scientists and the media have been busy spreading to the public over the last few weeks. The information is either known to be false (by scientists whose job it is to relay facts honestly) or is easily shown to be false (by journalists whose job it is to fact-check their stories).

Churchill polar bear and walrus 2017

Continue reading

Early freeze-up in progress on Hudson Bay – what a difference a year makes

In contrast to 2016, when freeze-up along Western Hudson Bay was about as late as its ever been (early December), ice is already forming along the shore of northern Hudson Bay. There is much more ice than usual for this date, indicated by the dark blue in the latest weekly ice chart below:

Hudson Bay weekly departure from normal 2017 Oct 30

The ice is still thin, as the chart below indicates, but that’s how freeze-up starts. As long as strong winds don’t blow the ice away (as it sometimes does at this stage), the ice gets thicker day by day — and advances further and further off shore. Polar bears get out on the ice as soon as they are physically able, when the ice is about 3-4 inches thick (about 10 cm) or less.

Hudson Bay North daily ice stage of development 2017_Nov 1

Below is a video of a bear traversing that thin ice yesterday (1 November 2017), near Churchill. Is this a portend of a freeze-up date as early as occurred in the 1980s?
Continue reading

Breaking: 2016 W. Hudson Bay polar bear survey shows the population is still stable

A just-released report on the most recent (2016) survey shows Western Hudson Bay polar bear numbers were still stable despite predictions that this subpopulation would be wiped out completely (reduced to zero) due to low Arctic sea ice.

Churchill_Polar_Bear_2004-11-15 Wikipedia

The authors of the report on the August 2016 aerial survey of the Western Hudson Bay polar bear subpopulation (Dyck et al. 2017) state clearly that the only trends they could find were that the number of adult males increased somewhat over 2011 estimates and the number of females either declined or remained stable. The overall population estimate was a bit lower (11% less) compared to the 2011 survey but the difference is not statistically significant. Therefore, the population status must be stable.

2011 estimate: 949 bears (using comparable data, range 618-1280), litter size 1.43

2016 estimate: 842 bears (using comparable data, range 562-1121), litter size 1.63

[cf. Foxe Basin [stable], from 2009-2010 survey (Stapleton et al. 2016) litter size was 1.54]

An 11% decline in WH numbers since 2011 is most definitely NOT the decline to ZERO (extirpation) we were told to expect with Arctic sea ice as low as it has been since 2007 (Crockford 2017, see list of annual minimum extents 2007-2017 here).

Note: The percentage decline from 2011 to 2016 for Western Hudson Bay polar bears is 11%, NOT 18% as claimed recently by Andrew Derocher on twitter: it is not appropriate to compare the official 2011 estimate of 1030 (Stapleton 2014) to the 2016 estimate of 842 because the methods used to generate the estimates were different (Dyck et al. 2017). The authors of the report state that the estimate for 2011 that’s comparable to 2016 is 949.

An 11% decline from 1030 would be 917 bears, a statistically insignificant decline that is also biologically insignificant and therefore, so slight as to indicate a stable population.

Predicted sea ice at 2050 and 2080 shown below (see Crockford 2017 for details):

Crockford 2017 sea ice graphic

Quotes, map, and table from the Dyck et al. 2017 report (pdf here) are copied below.

Continue reading

Problem polar bears in Churchill at this date show 2017 less than 2016 and 2015

Comparing Churchill problem bear statistics over a few years provides some critical perspective: this year, the bears are causing much fewer problems.

This 2nd week in September is no exception, being the 9th week ashore in all cases: 2017 (4-10 September, where I think “total number of polar bear occurrence reports to date” should be 64, not 53, see week 7 report here), 2016 (5-11 September), 2015 (7-13 September), where there were about 1/2 the number of bears in “jail” this year compared to the last two years (i. e., 6 vs. 11 and 12) and slightly more than 1/2 the number of occurrence reports in 2017 than in 2016 and 2015 (64 vs. 107 and 99):

2017 week 9 Sept 4-11 may be typo

2016-sept-5-11_week-9.jpg

2015 Sept 7-13_at Sept 14

 

 

Problem bear reports confirm Churchill polar bears are in excellent condition

Now that all bears are ashore for the season, the folks at the Polar Bear Alert program in Churchill note in their report for week 7 (21-27 August, 2017) that the bears ashore are in excellent condition (confirming reports on the first bears ashore in July):

Churchill PB reports_week 7_ Aug 21-27_2017_Aug 28

Rather marked contrast to the pessimistic spin on conditions from the field a few months ago:

[yes, a few bears fail to make it through the winter, especially young bears; but that has always been the case — it’s not a sign of human-caused global warming catastrophe]

Last week’s problem bear report also confirmed news from the Churchill Polar Bears website a few weeks ago that showed several images of very fat bears:

Churchill_PolarBears_FAT bear post_21 Aug 2017

See below for last year’s report for week 7 and this year’s report for week 8 (28 August-3 September). Western Hudson Bay polar bears that come ashore near Churchill, Manitoba are starting their third month on land this week, out of the five months or so they have spent ashore in recent years (about 3 weeks more than in the 1980s, no longer than they did in 2004 — conditions have not been getting worse).

Continuereading