Ursine of the Times

U.S. study says two-thirds of polar bears will be gone by 2050

Posted at 6:52 AM on 10 Sep 2007

The U.S. Geological Survey released a grim study of polar bears on Friday, concluding that two-thirds of the world's polar bears will be gone by 2050. Polar bears in Alaska and other areas outside the very far north will be most out of luck, according to the study; it forecasts that precisely zero polar bears will be left in Alaska by 2050. "Sea ice conditions would have to be substantially better than even the most conservative computer simulations of warming and sea ice" for the bears to avoid the forecasted steep drop in population, the report said. For those desperately seeking an upside to all this, the survey team said the polar bears' fate was likely only 84 percent linked to the extent of sea ice, which means the remaining bears will only theoretically be 84 percent screwed when all of it disappears from the Arctic. Phew! Meanwhile, for just $35,000 or so, kick-'em-while-they're-down types can pay to go on polar-bear safari and bag a trophy kill. But hey, for an extra $100,000, we know a guy who can arrange a cage match with a polar bear and your own remote-controlled robot. Just let us know.

sources: The New York Times, Associated Press, The Independent

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (7 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

NRA at work

There was an amendment this year, S. 1406 & H.R. 2327, to the Marine Mammal Protection Act to repeal the provision allowing the import of polar bear trophies into the United States from Canada. Though the Senate Committee on Appropriations approved it, the amendment never made it out of the full Senate. It also passed a House committee, but was defeated in the full House because of lobbying by "sportsmen" and the NRA. Very disappointing that so many of our legislators value an American hunter's "right" to a polar bear rug more than the future of the species. Also disappointing that the Canadian government gives out so many permits to kill polar bears. Unfortunately too few legislators or groups speak out for fear of offending the Inuit and the hunting lobby.

by amc89 at 8:46 AM on 11 Sep 2007

Eureeka! The key to post-ice bear conservation!

"for an extra $100,000, we know a guy who can arrange a cage match with a polar bear and your own remote-controlled robot."

Best. Conservation. Idea. Ever.

Captive breeding for the arena! With robots! Market-based conservation anyone?

All we need are some corrupt gaming officials in Nevada, and a multi-million dollar contract with HBO and the Discovery Channel.

by generic at 10:59 AM on 11 Sep 2007

"offending the Inuit"

OK, AMC, but it should be clear that the Inuit themselves do not have much power. In both the US and Canada, they certainly have a few friends with concerns for social justice and the fair treatment of Native peoples; but those friends do not necessarily have much power either. In Ottawa, one might surmise that Inuit would want to form a coalition with groups interested in unregulated hunting and fishing, and with other First Peoples who themselves have no special interest in hunting, only in favorable treatment of any of the First Peoples in any matter. And needless to say, that would be a regrettable development.

Of course, in Nunavut itself, the Inuit can decide pretty much what may and may not happen locally.

In any case, it will be neither just nor effective for us bear-friends to treat the Inuit simply as foes, as little as we like their promoting of trophy hunting. They have to be part of the solution, and they have to derive some benefit somehow.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 12:31 PM on 11 Sep 2007

This may sound crazy...

It is my wife's idea after all, but she says she gets her crazy from me. Anyway, I think it's pretty good.
If global warming results in the polar bears losing the ice mass that sustains them, and if they can't speed-evolve into water bears, why not send them to Antarctica, where there is an actual land mass? You have seen "March of the Penguins," right? Talk about a sweet deal for the bears - waddling buffets! Look, I know it's a terrible idea to introduce non indigenous species to a new environmental niche (damn buffle grass!) but I'd do it in this case because I really dig polar bears, and besides that, those scientists down at McMurdo need a little more excitement in their lives.
In regards to the native peoples argument - they aren't going to be any happier than the rest of us if the polar bears go extinct. Over countless generations a system of balance with the natural world has developed among all such communities - even more directly with those that did not develop agriculture. Loss or significant population decline of any usable animal resource will have a major impact on native lifestyles. I would think the Inuit would be in favor of conservation.

by SevenLegs at 7:06 PM on 11 Sep 2007

more info on polar bear hunting in Canada

For those that may not be familiar with the issue, Inuit hunters kill polar bears for subsistence, and they also sell a significant number of their subsistence tags to foreign sport hunters, mostly Americans. Two years ago, the government of Nunavut announced that they would be increasing hunting quotas for polar bears by as much as 28 percent.

I don't think anybody is trying to stop genuine subsistence hunting, but when polar bear numbers are decreasing and the ice is melting, a policy of selling permits to American and European trophy hunters makes absolutely no sense.

The trophy hunters offer large cash payments to the Inuit for killing the polar bears. Yes, there are many problems facing the Inuit, but there has to be a better way to help them economically than polar bear trophy hunting and the Canadian and Nunavut governments should be addressing this. And we in American can do our part by passing legislation that would ban our hunters from taking back polar bear hides.

by amc89 at 9:06 AM on 12 Sep 2007

looking for a better way

Thanks, AMC, for explaining how the trophy hunting in Nunavut works. I entirely agree with what you say needs to be done. Unfortunately, the people of Nunavut do not seem to be very resourceful, and the Canadians for the most part, save for some enlightened exceptions, do not seem to care much.

I sort of recall an odd situation last year in which a US hunter in the Northwest Territories had killed a grizzly/polar bear hybrid, and was prohibited from bringing it back to the US with him because there is a ban on importing grizzly body parts. Does that sound right? One might think it would be very easy to extend the ban to include polar bear parts.

Do you have any information on polar bear hunting in Greenland and Russia? I know nothing about that.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 1:34 PM on 12 Sep 2007

Russia

There's an article about polar bear hunting in Russia at:

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30D1FFC3 ...

by amc89 at 10:52 AM on 17 Sep 2007

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?