One of the things a smart bunny learns is to listen to those who know better about an issue. So following White Beard's advice Eli went and looked at the link to the IG Report on the matter of Charles Monnett. Frankly it was auditing at the best, and, yes at one point the ears fell over the eyes, but something did seem a bit funny about the estimate of white bears in the Arctic, but Eli and his ilk were not employed in the polar bear census, still EEGO,
This was not cool, as White Beard notes in the comments
At the bottom of MS page 37, Division Chief, Anchorage office of FWS’ [Fish and Wildlife Service] Marine Mammals Management’s “Meehan said that the polar bear was designated as a threatened, rather than endangered, species because at the time of MMM’s evaluation, the polar bear population was estimated to be around 200,000...” This eight (oh dear, mustn’t ever UNDERSTATE these things) ten fold OVERSTATED quantity by the IG has the worlds entire economy attremble on the edge of the abyss.Given that the population of Alaska is about 722,000 that is less than 1 bear per 4 people and at that rate even including the north of Canada, there would be considerably fewer people as the bears munched through the population. But wait, there is more. Look at the next paragraph
Meehan said that informal interviews conducted with scientists and subject experts on modeling revealed that the evidence pointed mainly to the change in the ecosystem and its correlation to the polar bears losing prey, losing weight, and other issues.Eli would bet that those changes in the ecosystem are dominated by the loss of summer ice. After all, it is the position of the USGS that
The main threat to polar bears now is thought to be the unidirectional decline of habit as a result of climate warming. Other impacts are human-caused mortality, contaminants and development in the Arctic.Eli plans to get around to writing to the IG on the matter. Send the dear a postcard.