ah yes the poster child of climate change the polar bear
we have international polar bear day stamps and all kinds of organizations making money on raising awareness about this soon to be extinct animal
all of these bears have a habitat about twice the size of the continental us
the biggest threat of the polar bear came in the 60s with indiscriminate hunting which is why we enacted regulations to help slow that decline
since the 60s polar bears have more than doubled in numbers and that includes during the whole time they have been claiming they are becoming extinct
most of the people who made the claim of polar bear extinction like al gore and british media quit once the polar bear specialist group began counting them
but today the biggest threat to the polar bear remains hunters who still kill about 900 a year not climate change
current climate promises from the paris agreement are expected to reduce temperatures by less than 0.4 degree Fahrenheit by the end of the century, according to u n climate models
but please by all means believe the new york times most recent article because they have showed themeselves to be reporters of the truth these past few years
the media really is concerned about enlightning you to their political views err i mean the news

hey, I love polar bears. Little bit of history... Turns out scientists have discovered polar bears can trace their family tree to Ireland. Genetic evidence shows they are descended from Irish brown bears that lived during the last ice age. Polar Bears came about around 115,000 years ago as an adaptation to the Ice Age, but, the Irish Brown Bear is extinct but, it is known that polar bears can bread with brown (grizzly) bears since they are just an adaptation of the brown bear.

The adaptations that separate it from the other brown bears are: large amounts of fat stored, its fur is white, it can close its nose when under water and it doesn't hibernate.

Around 600 or 3% of the Canadian Polar Bear population are killed in Canada annually under a limited hunt, mostly by native Inuit hunters. Quotas are established for each management unit designed to keep harvests at levels the bear population can sustain. Hunting is prohibited in units experiencing or threatened with population declines.

The Native people of the north have long hunted Polar Bears. For the Inuit and many northern communities, polar bears are especially significant culturally, spiritually and economically. Polar Bear hunting plays a central role in long-held traditions and also provides food and fiber for traditional lifestyles. Hunted bears are fully utilized. Canada’s indigenous Inuit people also argue trade in Polar Bear pelts is one of their few economic resources.

In Canada the hunting and harvest of Polar Bears is restricted to Aboriginal people or sport hunters guided by Aboriginal people who harvest by traditional means and in accordance with sound conservation practices based on the best available scientific data.

Polar Bears are mainly hunted by residents of the north. Each village gets a number of tags allowing hunters residing there to take the number of bears the population can sustain. In some regions, local people can choose to “sell” some tags to sport hunters. That is, they guide a non-resident hunter out on the ice to hunt bears and they allow that non-resident to shoot the bear they might have otherwise shot. Typically, such “sport” hunting results in the take of fewer bears because the sport hunters are normally not as successful as the local hunters. This practice provides added economic benefit to local economies obtained through non-resident hunters.

Since 1976, management has been coordinated internationally under the Agreement on Conservation of Polar Bears, which was signed by the federal government as well as by the four other countries where Polar Bears are found (Greenland, Norway, the United States, and Russia). This agreement prohibits unregulated sport hunting of Polar Bears and obliges each signatory to conduct research on the conservation and management of the species and to convey the findings to the other member nations.

A system of sustainable harvest management has been in place in Canada since the 1970s. Harvest quotas are established by the governments of the jurisdictions together with wildlife management boards established under Land Claims Agreements. Local quotas are established for the purpose of long-term conservation of Polar Bears. Canadian quotas include all human caused mortalities: subsistence harvest, non-resident hunting, known illegal take, and take in defence of life and property. Reporting of all take to jurisdictional conservation officers is required.

For now, some populations may still be safely hunted.

In Manitoba, Polar Bears have been protected under the provincial Endangered Species Act as of 2008, and hunting or trapping of bears is not permitted.

In Ontario, the Polar Bear has been protected under the province’s Endangered Species Act since 2009. Only First Nations hunters residing along the Hudson Bay and James Bay coast can harvest Polar Bears. There is a permissible limit of no more than 30 bears per year.

In Québec, the Polar Bear has been listed as Vulnérable under the Loi sur les Espèces Menacées ou Vulnérable since 2009. The James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement (1975) restricts the taking of Polar Bears to Aboriginal peoples and ensures that they have exclusive access to a Guaranteed Harvest Level of a maximum of 62 bears per year, or less, dependent on sustainable use estimates.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, the Polar Bear has been listed as Vulnerable under the Endangered Species Act since 2002. Labrador Inuit having exclusive rights to harvest 6 bears/year (males and females without cubs) under a quota system along the Labrador coast.

In the Northwest Territories, the Polar Bear was listed as a species of Special Concern in 2014 and a management plan is currently in development.

In Nunavut and the Yukon the Polar Bear is not listed, but comprehensive and responsive management systems are in place.

Polar bear fur is not actually coloured white. It is transparent. Its skin is black. It just looks white to us. Close up, it looks more yellow than white.

Predatory migratory species tend to have large territories. Polar bears roam widely, their habitat does not support prey in widespread numbers. The loss of Arctic ice cover is a strong limit on polar bear poulations both surviving and thriving. It is driving larger numbers into territories they would otherwise naturally avoid.

Making comparisons to the total landmass of a region can be erroneous. It's not just down to acres, its specific habitats within that landmass that support species best. Kinda why you don't find many Florida alligators in the fabled New Jersey swamplands.

Again, polar bears, like a vast number of other species, have benefited from human intervention to enable their survival. Far more have not. The cuddly cute iconic ones do best because they are easiest to raise funds for.

That some species are not under the same level of threat they once were is not a reason to assume they never were under threat. Its because we intervened to give them a chance to survive a bit longer, but as a whole, benign human intervention has a long way to go to rebalance the harms done by careless human intervention. The list of species that we have actively wiped out far exceed the few we have saved.

Most Lee Harmless wrote:Polar bear fur is not actually coloured white. It is transparent. Its skin is black. It just looks white to us. Close up, it looks more yellow than white.

Predatory migratory species tend to have large territories. Polar bears roam widely, their habitat does not support prey in widespread numbers. The loss of Arctic ice cover is a strong limit on polar bear poulations both surviving and thriving. It is driving larger numbers into territories they would otherwise naturally avoid.

Making comparisons to the total landmass of a region can be erroneous. It's not just down to acres, its specific habitats within that landmass that support species best. Kinda why you don't find many Florida alligators in the fabled New Jersey swamplands.

Again, polar bears, like a vast number of other species, have benefited from human intervention to enable their survival. Far more have not. The cuddly cute iconic ones do best because they are easiest to raise funds for.

That some species are not under the same level of threat they once were is not a reason to assume they never were under threat. Its because we intervened to give them a chance to survive a bit longer, but as a whole, benign human intervention has a long way to go to rebalance the harms done by careless human intervention. The list of species that we have actively wiped out far exceed the few we have saved.

my reason for mentioning landmass was to illustrate the amount of land needed to traverse to get an accurate count
which until the group i mentioned began counting numbers were assigned by geniuses doing math on paper and not actually going out to get a full count
climate change is not killing the polar bear

Dmanwuzhere wrote:climate change is not killing the polar bear

Of course not . It is the lack of sea ice that hampers the bears ability to hunt for food.
These bears are dying of starvation, not climate change.

No! They are dying because they are too stupid to understand that everything is fine and there is no need for them to go look for food somewhere else when Uber-eats can deliver it for free!

Stan Rogers wrote:

Dmanwuzhere wrote:climate change is not killing the polar bear

Of course not . It is the lack of sea ice that hampers the bears ability to hunt for food.
These bears are dying of starvation, not climate change.

if you feel that way list the number of polar bears killed per year and cause of death
go ahead ill wait
i guess the seals went extinct too huh?

Dmanwuzhere wrote:

Stan Rogers wrote:

Dmanwuzhere wrote:climate change is not killing the polar bear

Of course not . It is the lack of sea ice that hampers the bears ability to hunt for food.
These bears are dying of starvation, not climate change.

if you feel that way list the number of polar bears killed per year and cause of death
go ahead ill wait
i guess the seals went extinct too huh?

Don't hold your breath waiting. I have no intent on trying to educate a keyboard warrior with no practical experience on the subject

and you on the other hand are a studied polar bear conservationist and not a keyboard warrior
plenty of things you can bring into scope that affect polar bears like pollution oil and gas industry over harvesting or even tourism
but without data to support it i understand you are an expert on polar bears and studied just as hard and have the credentials to claim climate change yeah i get it you are not a keyboard warrior