There was some discussion earlier this year at this blog about polar bear numbers. We couldn't seem to agree whether numbers were increasing or decreasing and what would happen to bears if all the sea ice melted.
Well according to Dr. Mitch Taylor, a polar bear biologist who has just completed a three-year survey, polar bear populations along the Davis Strait are healthy and their numbers increasing.
According to Stephanie McDonald writing for The Northern News Service:
"Taylor and co-worker Dr. Lily Peacock have been working for the past three years on a polar bear inventory in the Davis Strait, the first in the area in 20 years. The Davis Strait encompasses the area from Cape Dyer on the eastern side of Baffin Island, through Cumberland Sound, and continues on to the area surrounding Kimmirut.
"Parts of Ungava Bay in Quebec and sections of Labrador are also included in the Davis Strait.
"The results of their study have yet to be released, but Taylor revealed last week that the numbers would be contrary to those released by the U.S. Geological Survey.
"Results will confirm hunters' impressions, that the polar bear population is productive," Taylor said.
Last year 841 polar bears were counted in the survey area and halfway through this year's survey, approximately 600 have been counted. Taylor estimates that this year's number could be as high as 1,000.
"When he started working for the Department of Environment 12 years ago, Sowdlooapik said that only one or two polar bears would wander through Pangnirtung in a year. Now, he receives almost daily reports of polar bears in popular camping sites, in outpost camps, and in the vicinity of the community.
"We could be looking at the possibility of increasing (hunting) quotas," Taylor said. "We are seeing high densities of bears in great shape."
Hi Patty,
Probably no one is still reading this but whatever 😉
"Completely unverifiable rhetoric.. providing a platform for the snipping, ad hom finish at myself and Adele.. smear tactics are something George likes to accuse others of and claims to strongly dissapprove of.. yet once again the rules do not apply to George.. even in a post he has specifically written to attack my ad homs!...
I used to be a big supporter of Monsanto, Exxon Mobile, free market globalisation and international commercial whaling but I have had to re-evaluate because of the affiliations they have and what they do.. and no longer support a number of corporations that I previously did in any shape or form - nice work George..
See, its easy to say.. and completely meaningless except as a propaganda tool to imply bad things about the organisations and politics involved without having to provide any kind of evidence to back it up.. "
Which evidence would you like?
I can certainly document any and all dealings with the organisations I mention and also my serverance of any dealings with them - How would you like it? Should i email the lot to jennifer and have her decide?... no problemo 😉
As to the Adele comment, also documented - including screenshots of the before and after - I certianly will not wste my time debating with someone who changes their posts after the fact -
" My 'nym is the same one I have used since starting to post on forums years ago.. my 'nym on this blog links to my blog, which not only details my affiliations but even lists the films, books and music I like..
George regularly reminds people on this blog what my RL name is.. and I have never made a secret of the fact that I work in the IT industry, a fact George has also given an airing more than once.. So George attempting to suggest that I would be treated any differently if I posted under my RL name is completely false.. George of course has no problem with anti-Greenies posting using 'nyms.."
Patty me lad - you´ve never given your real name out - you were outed sonny 😉
and which nym would that be? I´ve seen you using at least 3 boyo
"I have to shake my head George - you monitored your blog to see if I would visit it and then publicised the fact that I had, on this blog implying it was some sort of crime, despite the fact that all I had done was view the pictures.. and you are on record as fearing the attentions of AR 'fanatics'.. yet you imply others are paranoid???"
Dear oh dear patty... once again old fruit?
I monitor ALL the visits to my website - as I have already pointed out before, most publishing houses use Macs - and looking up who the visitor is/was has resulted in some very tasty business when contacting them direct at times ...
In your case Patty, it was simply to see if the IP I gave was yours and of course - you fell for it being the predictable lad u are ... your IP then went onto my IP banlist ...
I´m on record as having had the attentions of AR fanatics Patty me lad - not fearing them - but hey, you´re also on record as having supplied info etc to AR fanatics Patty..... so it all evens up really :p
cya in the next life boyo
Where abouts do you reside IceClass, and if you don't mind me asking, what sort of work do you do?
Ann:"Well, the tradition with dog teams has hardly anything to do with polar bear hunts since it's practised all around the northern parts of the Northern hemisphere, there are lots of sports dog sledge competitions everywhere...."
A racing sled dog and a dog trained to be a bear dog is a totally different thing Ann. Both physically and by way of training and disposition.
You couldn't take a team from the Iditarod and take them bear hunting.
You'd end up with a dead dog team and no bear.
Bear hunting huskys have to be able to track a bear and are then released to encircle the bear and keep him confused until he can be dispatched with a spear or rifle shot.
Generally speaking, most racing teams you see in the North are leaner, mutts built for speed. Real husky's tend to be stocky and muscular with extreme endurance abilities. They have amazing senses, are smart (for dogs) and have ridiculous amounts of patience.
I've lived with dogs all my life and Huskys are just the best.
One of my two (pet) husky's comes with me whenever I'm hiking and camping in bear country. There is no better bear alarm and more than once she's seen off a bear before they got too close to camp and became a problem (and had to be killed).
Ann:"As for the dog teams they are fed mostly with whale meat and blubber as I have understood..."
They are fed all sorts of things. If they are getting whale meat and blubber they are lucky and obviously living in a coastal area.
Dog teams in my area seem to be split between those who ship in bags of high calorie dog kibble and those (mainly Inuit) who feed their dogs seals and meat scraps.
Keeping a team of fifteen to twenty dogs is a serious commitment of both time and resources.
It costs a lot to buy bags of kibble or to hunt the number of seals required to keep a team fed.
Polar Bear sports hunts are one of the few activities that can cover both the time and cost involved.
Without that, most families who would wish to continue keeping dogs just wouldn't be able.
'I know that George has provided photographies to WWF, Greenpeace and RSPCA...' - Ann
With the greatest respect Ann, selling photographs is what George does for a living and who he sells them to is not a political statement.. quite the opposite as George himself has commented on this blog.
" Completely unverifiable rhetoric.. " - Lamna
I know that George has provided photographies to WWF, Greenpeace and RSPCA...
'Thanks for proving my point Patrick' - George
George you have deliberately failed to address the issue that this is not just a tactic you use against me but regularly against green opponents and have done so on a number of forums.. or the issue that you also frequently post comments agreeing with and praising such attacks when made by others who share your point of view.. Instead you chose to imply that an editorial statement that epithets will not be tolerated is the same as censoring entire posts.. Thanks for proving my point George.
'Patrick - I`ve asked you more than once to drop the ad hom and personal attack crap ...' - George
Incorrect George, you tell people what you want them to do to benefit your debating position; as amply demonstrated earlier in this thread where your rhetoric had reached the spectacular heights of you having a circular discussion with me within your own post, speaking for me as well as for yourself..
On the odd occasion in the past when I have taken George at his word, George continued to use epithets like 'idiot' and 'moron'.. I certainly do not play George's mind games using his rules.. which change as the debate progresses.. and which strangely never apply to George...
I also do not intend to pussy foot around with any anti-greenie with history of posting ad homs, just so that they can land the first punch for free to prove some ridiculously one sided point about sportsmanship...
'I know I certainly have anyway ... and no longer support a number of NGO`s that I previously did in any shape or form - nice work Pat' - George
Completely unverifiable rhetoric.. providing a platform for the snipping, ad hom finish at myself and Adele.. smear tactics are something George likes to accuse others of and claims to strongly dissapprove of.. yet once again the rules do not apply to George.. even in a post he has specifically written to attack my ad homs!...
I used to be a big supporter of Monsanto, Exxon Mobile, free market globalisation and international commercial whaling but I have had to re-evaluate because of the affiliations they have and what they do.. and no longer support a number of corporations that I previously did in any shape or form - nice work George..
See, its easy to say.. and completely meaningless except as a propaganda tool to imply bad things about the organisations and politics involved without having to provide any kind of evidence to back it up..
'My affiliations and what I do is posted on this blog Pat - we note that yours are not..' - George
My 'nym is the same one I have used since starting to post on forums years ago.. my 'nym on this blog links to my blog, which not only details my affiliations but even lists the films, books and music I like..
George regularly reminds people on this blog what my RL name is.. and I have never made a secret of the fact that I work in the IT industry, a fact George has also given an airing more than once.. So George attempting to suggest that I would be treated any differently if I posted under my RL name is completely false.. George of course has no problem with anti-Greenies posting using 'nyms..
'makes you appear paranoid' - George
I have to shake my head George - you monitored your blog to see if I would visit it and then publicised the fact that I had, on this blog implying it was some sort of crime, despite the fact that all I had done was view the pictures.. and you are on record as fearing the attentions of AR 'fanatics'.. yet you imply others are paranoid???
I (as I`m sure others do as well) try and leave as small an ecological footprint as possible in my doings ... George however has often poo poo'd this.. it`s a low tactic and does those who make the effort to live a small footprint life a disservice..
I treat George in the same manner as I have watched him treat others over the last few years.. hey, you reap what you sow George .. stop whining...
George - drop the epithets, personal attacks and Ad homs and you certainly won`t hear a single epithet from me - continue with it, and I`ll treat you as you treat me and others...
PS..
Disingenuous, straw man rhetoric, selective quoting, smear tactics, laughable, ridiculous, dissembling, weaseling, meaningless, propaganda, economical with the truth, etc are not epithets.. Moron, idiot, dipsh*t, scumbag, etc are.
PS..
You`ll have to excuse me if I don`t reply to any post directed to me for a while - I have a few planes to catch and other things to do... later...
"It doesn't appear to have occurred to you George that my blog's editorial statement refers to comments such as 'Moron', 'Idiot', 'Dipsh*t' and 'Lowlife Scum' (to mention just a few recent examples from this blog, of epithets you have been kind enough to level at me over the years on various forums) not being tolerated as 'debate' on my blog.. which is very, very different from censoring entire posts..."
Thanks for proving my point Patrick, I`ve given you AMPLE opportunity over the years to cut the personal ad hom and personal attack bullcrap ...If neccessary, I could even document the timeline but to be frank, I cannot be arsed..
"George, I have seen you in action on more than one forum and although you are perfectly capable of holding your own in a discussion without resorting to personal attacks and ad hom tactics, you frequently indulge in the exact kind of personal attacks on those you disagree with, that you claim to find so reprehensible in others"
Patrick - I`ve asked you more than once to drop the ad hom and personal attack crap ...
so if I now treat you in the same manner as you have treated others consistantly over the last few years ( albeit leveling my personal opinion of your cowardly tactics ).. hey, you reap what you sow patrick .. stop whining
"It is in no small part because I so regularly encounter anti-Green individuals and organisations claiming to be 'honest brokers' "
My affiliations and what I do is posted on this blog Pat - we note that yours are not..
As for the anti green individuals comment, I have to shake my head Pat - I ( as I`m sure others do as well ) try and leave as small an ecological footprint as possible in my doings ... you however, (at least until now ) poo poo this as you claim I am part of the Pro international commercial whaling faction ( whatever that is when its at home ) .. it`s a low tactic, makes you appear paranoid and does those who make the effort to live a small footprint life a disservice.. in fact, it even encourages them to re evaluate the affiliations they have and what they do ..
I know I certainly have anyway ... and no longer support a number of NGO`s that I previously did in any shape or form - nice work Pat ( and Adele )
PAT- drop the personal attacks and Ad hom bullcrap and you certainly won`t hear a single " epithet" from me - continue with it, and I`ll treat you as you treat me and others... I`ve told you this before
'pretty much the kind of personal attack you use on all posters you disagree with....' George
George, I have seen you in action on more than one forum and although you are perfectly capable of holding your own in a discussion without resorting to personal attacks and ad hom tactics, you frequently indulge in the exact kind of personal attacks on those you disagree with, that you claim to find so reprehensible in others (as does D@T).
You also frequently post comments agreeing with and praising such attacks when made by others who share your point of view.
There is absolutely no reason why I should be bound by 'rules' that others have demonstrably no intention of respecting.
It is in no small part because I so regularly encounter anti-Green individuals and organisations claiming to be 'honest brokers' whose only interest is to provide 'balance', which on further investigation prove to be nothing of the sort, that makes me so intensely cynical about the anti-Greenie movement.
'"The right to free speech is recognised, the 'right' to abuse others and behave like a muppet is not. I will edit offensive material.
Moderator's judgement is final! :o)" - Lamna
It doesn't appear to have occurred to you George that my blog's editorial statement refers to comments such as 'Moron', 'Idiot', 'Dipsh*t' and 'Lowlife Scum' (to mention just a few recent examples from this blog, of epithets you have been kind enough to level at me over the years on various forums) not being tolerated as 'debate' on my blog.. which is very, very different from censoring entire posts...
Posts that needlessly make me subject are likey to be deleted. Martin Livermore is the only person at the Scientific Alliance that I have had any contact with. The SA are the only scientific organisation in the UK that offer an alternative view on issues such as climate change, which is why I support them:
"Formed in 2001, the Scientific Alliance is a non-profit membership-based organisation, now based in Cambridge. The Alliance brings together both scientists and non-scientists committed to rational discussion and debate on the challenges facing the environment today.
Members of the Scientific Alliance are concerned about the many ways in which science is often misinterpreted, and at times misrepresented, within both policy circles and in the media. The Alliance thus works to overcome this misunderstanding by aiming to:
Promote sound science in the environmental debate;
Ensure that scientific arguments remain prominent throughout the policy making process;
Facilitate an informed dialogue between all stakeholders involved in the environmental debate through events and publications.
The Scientific Alliance is led by a Scientific Advisory Forum comprised of respected scientists and experts from many different fields. They set the Scientific Alliance’s general policies and together with other members of the Scientific Alliance, act as spokespeople for the organisation. The Alliance's director is Martin Livermore.
As a membership-based campaign organisation, the Alliance welcomes donations from individuals, scientific and academic institutions, societies, trusts, companies, trade associations and other organisations. Donations and support are crucial to enable the Alliance to carry out its work, but they are only accepted if made without conditions and afford no influence on the policies of the Scientific Alliance."
That's my last word on the SA, save for posting any of their newsletters that are of interest to me, for discussion.