Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Canada ignoring bear essentials of species survival

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 8:01 AM EST 27/11/07

'The fate of polar bears, to a large extent, rests on what Canadians do to protect them,' report warns ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Will Scarlett from Luxembourg writes: Wasn't there an article lately which stated that the polar bear population in Canada was at an all-time high? And this fact was apparently gleaned from the Inuit who should know better than the great Suzuki. You know, the one with the huge house and polluting bus telling everyone else to be environmentally responsible.
  2. Michael Powers from Canada writes: My flying instructor had a sign in the cockpit that said 'DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO'.
    I think of that sign everytime David Suzuki opens his mouth to preach to us poor mortals. It fits him so well.
  3. Cynthia Nurse from St. Thomas, Canada writes: Let us not forget the increase in water vessels traveling through their environment. The polar bears will have take to land, and find their way to the dumps just as the rest of the bear clan have done.
  4. Stephie O from Ontario, Canada writes: Nope. lAbsolutely not at an all time high.

    http://www.wwf.ca/polarbears/home.html

    http://www.thestar.com/Arctic%20In%20Peril/article/279817

    Go Suzuki, Go!
  5. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: It is not clear to me what this much publicized situation is all about. On one hand we read the polar bear population is actually increasing. This, mostly from people who live and hunt in the areas in which the animals live. On the other hand we read they are an endangered species, primarily due to the arguable, phantom climate change. A third, but seldom heard comment would be a pragmatic: Either way, what's the big deal? If they adapt to change and survive, as a many species, including mankind have done over the ages, that would be fine. If they don't, they will eventually become history as so many species have over the ages. What would be the loss? They are hunted, under a govenrment controlled quota system to basically provide a trophy to wealthy tourists. A handfull of natives make a few bucks in the process and that is good. However, I am quite sure the costs of administrating the controls far outweigh the income benefits and could be paid to compensate the natives to compensate for loss. Polar bears are seldom used for food among the native people as they are fraught with trichinosis, which requires a great deal of care in preparing the meat before eating. The native people are known for eating uncooked meat and fish. The liver is inedible to the point of being deadly. The hide is not suitable for clothing or much of anything else, beyond being a rug. They are dangerous to man and they consume their prime dietary source: the ever valuable native food, the seal. The fewer the bears the more the seal population would thrive. They are also a nuisance in places like Churchill, Manitoba where a great deal of government money is spent on controlling them. More money that could be better used elsewhere in the North. I have spent many year working and travelling throughout the Arctic and have seen, and even photographed (from a discrete distance) many bears so I believe I know what I am talking about. If I am wrong, I would like to know where.
  6. Harry Wart of Annon from Canada writes: You are right guys. We should not care what so ever. Lets not even examine the subject. Why should we care anyways? Its not like polar bears are important to people. So what do they matter? I'll just continue putting my head in the sand, preaching about how dumb that Suzuki guy is. Global warming doesn't really exist anyways, so its not worth a closer look.
  7. Hugh Albert from Canada writes: There is no problem! There is no problem! There is no problem! There is no gobal warming! There is no gobal warming! There is no gobal warming! That's right, just keep sticking our heads in the ice.
  8. Greg Calgary from Canada writes: OK Harry and Hugh as you both seem to agree there is a problem what do you propose we do ? Do you guys drive to work ? Heat your homes ? Watch TV with the light on ?
    What do you want us to do ? As long as the US, China and India spew out massive amounts of green house gases there is nothing Canada can do to help slow down global warming and reverse its effects on the arctic.
    We could stop every car, truck, plane, train and ship. Shut every single one down and it would not change a single thing as far as the arctic was concerned.
    What was it Clown Dion wanted to do ? Right, he was going to spend billions on kyoto credits from other countries. Good plan.
    Bottom line is the world has to get the big green house gas countries on line if we have any chance to fix out mistakes. Anything less than this and we're just throwing money down the drain so we can all feel better.
  9. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: Why use polar bears as the example. There are lots of bears could be why the are not listed as endangered right?

    The polar bear is a magnificient animal and we should help it. If seals get scarce let's feed them ecotourists and environmentalists starting with Dr. Drosophilia.
  10. Alain Chicoine from Halifax, Canada writes: Gerry, you seem to be an educated man. If you'd like to know where you may have gone wrong, do some research on what happens when you eliminate the species at the top of the food chain.
  11. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: Joh Waddell: Your ignorance is exceeded only by your usually stupid insults and vacuous opinions.
  12. Neiland Bob from Canada writes: Well, here is another banner item the Liberals can add to their platform:

    Liberal Platform 2008
    ===============
    - Fund non-existent child poverty in overwhelmingly strong economy.
    - Fund Giant Deep Freeze for Polar Bear Habitat.
    - Rollback laws that persecute criminals.
    - Transfer $6.4B to China as Kyoto Carbon Credit Purchase.
    - Repress Conservative Hidden Agenda (a.k.a. 'no boon-doggle' agenda)
    - Return Power to Canada's Natural Governing Party
    - Send Mulroney to the Can.
  13. CD W from Canada writes: There are lots of polar bears in the nordic regions, things are fine. There just might not be any future jobs for bear crybabies. Ever thus.
  14. edwardo plazinski from maple ridge, Canada writes: Before getting into a blinding panic about Polar Bears it might be a good idea to check and see if they have had to deal with vanishing sea ice in the past. The possibility that they have is pretty good.
  15. John MacDougall from Iqaluit, Canada writes: Personally, I put a lot of stock in what Suzuki and his group says. There are no polar bears in Greenland because they've been hunted to extinction. Greenlandic Inuit cross over to Nunavut to do their polar bear hunting. What if the polar bear was re-introduced into Greenland subject to strict controls on hunting? I know the ice is melting in Greenland, too, but it will take a lot longer for it to totally melt a way in Greenland's Arctic climes than it wil in, say, Hudson Bay, which is expected to be ice-free as early 2012.
  16. Peter Walker from Calgary, Canada writes: 'only two provinces - Ontario and Newfoundland - have listed the bears under endangered-species legislation'

    There are none in the wild in BC. Alberta, Sask. Nova Scotia or PEI.

    So that statement is quite a bit misleading, as is generally the case when dealing with the Suzuki Foundation.

    The climate is changing, animals will adapt and evolve - as they have for millions of years. Nothing we can do will save something that fails to adapt - except put them in Zoo's or Parks - in the warm areas!! for our grandchildren to look at and wonder at the animals that used to populate the earth.
  17. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: Alain Chicoine: Yes, I am. So I ask you; when did the polar bear become designated as being at the 'top of the food chain'? Man who is, is not on the verge of elimination (opinions of the environmental 'experts' notwithstanding). You are right: Some research is needed, but not by me.
  18. J Law from Canada writes: If we say they are endangered will Sukkie go away? And if we do say they are endangered what will that do? Will it increase the population?
  19. Linda P from foothills of the rocky mountains, Canada writes: David Suzuki Foundation has reliable information on the effect of global warming related to the polar bear. Someone suggests moving the polar bear to Greenland to re-populate where they have been hunted to extinction; great if the bears stayed there. What would stop them from swimming back to where they came from? Kind of sounds like the re-settlement of aboriginal people. The nay sayers, are not even accepting the reality of global warming. --------- People on this planet have created a problem they can not fix. The extinction of species has not been a high priority in the past, why should it be now any different? Some day the future generations will hang their heads with the shame that we have passed on to them. In our constant hurry to the future we have eliminated species of plants, animals and anything else in our way.
  20. Jason Mote from Toronto, writes: I love how Climate Change Deniers always resort to firing out insults and talking about the imminent demise of the economy whenever anyone brings up the damage we are going to the environment.
    What good is all the money in the world if you can't breathe the air. A crap environment is bad business and it's time to get over our hewers of wood, drawers of oil mentality in this country.
  21. Beleaguered Middle-Class from Canada writes: I have a compromise for the enviro-weenies. I will give up my car, IF, I can saddle a polar bear and fuel it with baby seals........
  22. b mac from Canada writes: David Suzuki Foundation has lost all their credibility with their rant on Global Warming. This may be more about fund raising & cheap politics rather then science in my humble opinion. .......................................................................................................... Czech President Calls Man-Made Global Warming a Myth, Questions Al Gore’s Sanity By Noel Sheppard | February 12, 2007 - 11:30 ET As the media, the left, and the United Nations become more and more strident about a supposed scientific consensus surrounding anthropogenic global warming, more and more dissenters speak out against the junk science involved in this mythology. The most recent was Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic. In an interview with 'Hospodárské noviny,' a Czech economics daily, Klaus made the following observations (emphasis mine throughout): Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.
  23. John Collier from South Africa writes: I used to work in the Arctic. Areas where I used to walk on six feet of ice were open water this September. Polar bears cannot live there. I used to carry a rifle in case they got to close.

    Most animals, when conditions change, go extinct. This has happened over and over, and is part of nature. The current warming is unnatural and unprecedented. Humans, of course, can also go extinct. Most of our close relatives already have or are close to it. But I think we will survive, albeit in smaller numbers.

    Polar bears, on the other hand. I really don't know what we can do. Gigantic refrigerators in the Arctic? Zoos? Perhaps the latter. Probably some will survive for a long time, but not if native hunting is allowed. They kill far more than they can land. This is as it has always been, but there are now more Inuit, they use guns, and there are fewer bears in some areas already, as some have noted.

    Why save them? Poetry in motion. I've watch them run at 35 mph from a small plane, and watched them from 100 m on land (not my choice, believe me). They are stunningly beautiful.
  24. Greg Calgary from Canada writes: Linda P from foothills of the rocky mountains, Canada writes: David Suzuki Foundation has reliable information on the effect of global warming related to the polar bear. Someone suggests moving the polar bear to Greenland to re-populate where they have been hunted to extinction; great if the bears stayed there. What would stop them from swimming back to where they came from?

    Gee I don't know, maybe 1000 miles of open water.
  25. John Waddell from Canada writes: Mr. Pankhurst: If you want to be scathing and witty, you really should pay more attention to your spelling and grammar. If you are well educated, it certainly doesn't show through in your postings here. I won't trouble you with any future postings on this site so you don't have to respond.
  26. b mac from Canada writes: The earth is billions of years old and it is constantly changing from hot to cold to hot and back and foth it goes. They had pine beetles, forest fires & meltinmg snow in the 1700's 1800,s 1900,s 2000's and they will have then turn on and off for many centuries to come.
  27. J Lee from North Vancouver, Canada writes: So if only Ottawa would do 'something' then 'everything' would be alright with the bears. Well we know that Ottawa isn't going to do anything (see the latest Commonwealth conference for the most recent confirmation). And by reading the comments here you can see why. Lots of people still don't believe that global warming is happening or that it may have some serious effects. And in our democracy our leaders follow very precisely our lack of consensus. But if the cute polar bears don't get you thinking about global warming then what will? To me that is the really worrying part - that nothing will enable us to come to a consensus that global warming is worth dealing with. Maybe not even until after it is too late.
  28. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: b mac: One of my specialties is the environment and agriculture in 19th-century western Canada. I know a great deal about the Rocky Mountain Locust that destroyed agriculture from time-to-time, then was itself wiped out by agriculture. But I have never heard of pine bettles in Alberta until a year or so ago. Please tell me about the pine bettle in the 19th century.
  29. martha stewart from Canada writes: 'says the David Suzuki Foundation' ... says it all.

    Google 'taylor polar bear' for papers and information from the government biologists who know most about this, and follow more links from there.

    Stephie O from Ontario, Canada writes: 'Nope. lAbsolutely not at an all time high.

    http://www.wwf.ca/polarbears/home.html

    http://www.thestar.com/Arctic%20In%20Peril/article/279817'

    Note Stephie's sources! The WWF! LOL.

    The polar bear population is at all time historic highs simply because they are not hunted heavily anymore, and haven't been for decades. ALL historic accounts from early explorers in the Arctic found them to be very, very rare, as one might expect when they were both food and problems for the Innuit (who hunted them using first dogs, then spears and bows and arrows). Interestingly enough, the only account of any numbers of polar bears is from David Thompson who saw them on shore near Churchill where they are still found now.
  30. martha stewart from Canada writes: J Lee from North Vancouver writes: 'But if the cute polar bears don't get you thinking about global warming then what will?'

    That's exactly why we are constantly hearing about them. They are the poster child. And that is also why the state of their population is so falsely portrayed.

    Bob Beal - If you look at historic photos you will see why the mountain pine beetle could not have been a significant problem in the past. Because of fires (set primiarily by indigenous people) there was relatively little mature lodgepole pine forest and that is what those beetles need... same for BC. No large expanses of mature pine, no pine beetle epidemics, no matter what the climate is doing.
  31. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: John Collier: If I understood you correctly you said you walked on six feet of ice in some other September that was open water this September. I'm curious; where was that, what were the intervening years and what authority did you have to carry a rifle?

    For your information I have seen, with my own eyes, the remains of a petrified forest on Axel Hyberg Island, if you know where that is. I also was running a project buidling the cross runway in Resolute Bay, in the 1970s, where we unearthed the skeleton of a whale, over 100 feet above sea level. We sent a rib to Mcgill University for analysis and carbon date timing. I have forgotted the result but it was a hell of a long time between when it died and we found it.

    What do these things tell you about the so called climate change, as to whether or not it is a current phenominon?
  32. martha stewart from Canada writes: Greg Calgary writes: 'Linda P from foothills of the rocky mountains, Canada writes... Someone suggests moving the polar bear to Greenland to re-populate where they have been hunted to extinction; great if the bears stayed there. What would stop them from swimming back to where they came from?'

    Should ask the people of Greenland who would have to live with those 'cute' bears about this idea first. Why do you suppose they are not there now?

    Once again the very scary word 'extinction' is used when the scientifically accurate word is 'extirpation.' Extirpation is NOT necessarily forever. The white-tailed deer and Canada goose were once extirpated from most of southern Ontarion, and now are over abundant.
  33. Stephie O from Ontario, Canada writes: I kind of like what the WWF has to say about Polar Bears Martha, whether you consider them a reliable source or not. I actually prefer books that have a reference section when collecting research, but that's not what I'm doing today.

    Long live the Polar Bear! Save the whales!

    I also like Greenpeace, Al Gore, and David Suzuki.
  34. Greg Calgary from Canada writes: Cross breed them with rabbits. There would be lots more of them and they'd be cute and cuddly.
  35. martha stewart from Canada writes: Stephie O - Glad you 'like' what the WWF says. But that doesn't mean that it is true.

    You like books? Try any journal of Arctic exploration. For example, from 1836-1839 an expedition led by HBC Chief factor Dease explored the entire Arctic coastline from Point Barrow Alaska east to the Boothia Peninsula in Nunavut. On August 2, 1839 they found 'an Esquimaux camp... with several pieces of the Skin & bones of a polar Bear,' and named this spot Whitebear Point. 'This was the only polar bear, alive or dead, that the expedition encountered' - in THREE YEARS.

    This book is ISBN 0-7735-2253-0 from McGill-Queen's University Press.

    All the other high Arctic explorers similarly saw none or almost none. Now with highly regulated hunting for the past 4 decades at least, and the Innuit concentrated in settlements, today's populations are at all time highs.
  36. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: Martha: What you said about lodgepole pine might have been true for part of the 20th century, but it certainly was not true for most of the 19th century. And, there were no pine beetles in Alberta in the 19th century. This is a very small point, and does not prove very much. I was just replying to a person who claimed knowledge of the pine beetle.

    Neither can you prove very much from picking bits and pieces from explorers' journals, as you know. You have to be extremely careful about generalizing from those specifics. As an easy example (I am due to be elsewhere at the moment), when Edgar Dewdney became Indian Commissioner for western Canada in 1879, he saw a good-sized buffalo herd northeast of the Cypress Hills. He reported to Ottawa that, therefore, while the buffalo were obviously diminishing, they were good for still a few years yet. What Dewdney did not know was that he had witnessed the very last of the great buffalo herds in the wild north of the 49th parallel.
  37. Canada First and Always from Canada writes: What a pathetic bunch of posters here (not all, but certainly many). You are so entirely dumbed down now that you do not realize that a diverse world (or diversity of any kind) only serves to strengthen a species, like the human species. Shrinking diversity = increasing sameness, less tolerance (which has already started, it seems, with some of these naked apes posting here), increasing detachment from nature and increasingly boring and mind-numbing & shallow 'consumers' (are they still a species?). Do you really think most people want a world without wildlife at all (that is what will eventually happen if we allow it to), a world with those wonderfully humane concentration camps housing the only animals we allow to survive just to be slaughtered for our consumption, or supplied to us as pets until we tire of them and toss them into dumps, or those lucky animals that get to be bred just to be tortured for experiments, both medical and cosmetic?

    Having lived 'in the bush' for over 20 years, and understanding the tenuous but necessary link between 'mankind' (oxymoron) and the other species, urban creatures should no more have a say over the wild as should the wild have say over urban dwellers.
  38. Stephie O from Ontario, Canada writes: Martha - I found a little info about an explorer named Willem Barent discovering Bear Island in 1596 because that's where he killed the polar bear. A few litho etchings of Barent on a U.K. site - 'explorers killing a bear', 'explorers in their boats killing a bear..', '...and explorers hunting bears'. But that's neither here nor there.

    Do you really think the polar bear population will stay at all time highs if indeed that is the case? With melting ice, I don't think it's possible that they will become over abundant.....and what about the Inuit people when their world turns to slush?

    What's your point anyways? That there is no global warming? That it's just a natural phenomenon and we're blameless? That it would happen anyways? That's an easy out.
  39. Open Mike from Vancouver, Canada writes: Well, after reading all the comments it's clear that whatever stresses the polar bear population may or may not be experiencing, the population of trolls is in no danger at all.
  40. martha stewart from Canada writes: Bob Beal - Seems you are not up with the latest research on fire history and the indigenous people's constant use of it. We cannot say that there were no mountain pine beetles in Alberta in the 19th century but fire history tells us that there could not have been any epidemics of the size now occuring because there was not enough habitat - mature lodgepole pine forests - to support them.

    My point about polar bear rarity in explorer's journals is not based on any casual or selective glance but on a systematic review of ALL of the ones which I have been able to track down - which is most of the ones that have been published. I only provided but one example. I invite you to look further into this and discover it for yourself. Bottom line, how do you imagine the traditional Innuit and polar bears coexisting?

    We have already discussed the bison story earlier and, if you recall, we reached the same conclusions based on the same available records - and on a review of the available journals that provided that context. So I'm not sure why your point is relevant.
  41. martha stewart from Canada writes: Stephie O from Ontario - Do you think they would have named it Bear island if seeing polar bears was a common occurence? I have not seen Barent's journals but I would predict that all those references refer to the same bear killed. Or maybe they saw two? ----- You asked: 'Do you really think the polar bear population will stay at all time highs if indeed that is the case? With melting ice...' ----- No I don't. Less habitat means less bears. The question is how much less ice will there be. This is not the first time that ice has melted back yet polar bears survived those earlier warm periods despite much more intense hunting pressure from indigenous people. ----- You ask: 'What's your point anyways? That there is no global warming? That it's just a natural phenomenon and we're blameless? That it would happen anyways? That's an easy out.' ---- My point here is simply that the polar bear population in North America is at historic highs. The rest of your question is more about how the polar bear has become a symbol for global warming, and how global warming has become a collosal guilt trip used by social engineers masquerading as environmentalists. ------ P.S. The polar bear population in Hudson's Bay, the most southerly one in the world, is the one most impacted by any warming. When looking at anything about this species, it is always critical to look at which population they are talking about.
  42. Canada First and Always from Canada writes: Hudson Bay is the name of the body of water.

    Hudson's Bay is the name of the store now just called 'the Bay'. This was the first lesson you were taught when you went to work for 'The Hudson's Bay' - to get the difference between the two right. Common mistake.
  43. Stephie O from Canada writes: Martha writes: 'The rest of your question is more about how the polar bear has become a symbol for global warming, and how global warming has become a collosal guilt trip used by social engineers masquerading as environmentalists.'

    These 'social engineers' could all be old hippies for all I know. And there's nothing wrong with that either. Should have listened to them in the first place. There's no harm done in trying to clean up the environment and save a few species. Not just polar bears - maybe coral reefs as well. No harm in that.

    And if this is a guilt trip - maybe it should be.
  44. James McGillawee from Oshawa, Canada writes: For those who deny Global Warming, how do you explain the following verifiable observations:
    -the Athabasca Glacier on the Alberta/B.C. Rocky Mountain Continental Divide has been in constant recession ever since it was first discovered in 1843 and is a mere shadow of its former size
    -Africa once had 14 glaciers and now only has 6, plus the most famous one on Mount Kilimanjaro is less than half of its original size
    -the ice cap on Baffin Island lost a full two feet of thickness this summer alone
    -the receding ice cap on Greenland has exposed some hither to unknown off shore rocky islands
    From my point of observation, I believe that Global Warming was in place before the recent current upswing in 'Greenhouse Gas' emissions. Therefore these gases are only accelerating what was underway anyway. What is needed is better, more extensive monitoring and measuring of ALL factors that are contributing to said mean(average) temperature increases. Not the least of which is human overpopulation of this third rock from the Sun.
    What measurements can be taken to calculate what the total energy emissions of the Sun have and are taking place plus how can we measure the intervening opacisity of space that this arm of the Milky Way Galaxy has and is now occupying? Further how do we as a species design our modern economies to switch to a Hydrogen based energy system from a Carbon based one? We can't even decide how to get along over what rules to use in deciding how to deal with noxious chemicals never mind noxious people!
  45. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: I contend you are simply wrong. If you can point me to a reliable source that says differently, I will look at it.

    From the famous work of John Macoun (the expert of the day) in 1882:

    'Above Edmonton, on the Brazeau and all the upper tributaries of it and the north Saskatchewan, are fine forests of Spruce, Tamarac, and Balsam Popular. Here a large area will be found, well suited for lumbering purposes, as it is protected from fire by numerous marshes, and up to the present has remained in a primitive state.'

    The people who know what they are talking about all say that the pine beetle has now crossed the mountains because of Global Warming. This has caused a huge problem that is now sapping our economy and that will continue to do so for at least some time.
  46. Mike McFae from Canada writes: I can't believe that people actually believe there are no Polar Bears in Greenland especially John MacDougal from Iqualit . This reminds me of Rick Mercer's ' Talking to Americans ' because it would cause Greenlandic people to laugh in the aisles. John , for god's sake check your facts because some people really want to believe there are no bears in Greenland because it adds credence to their strong GW beliefs. I've been to both Baffin Island and Greenland many times and I can assure you there are many polar bears in both places although their population needs to be closely monitored. ( Martha, you fell for those unfounded statements too which is not typical for you :-)
  47. Canada's conscience from Vancouver, Canada writes: People are losing sight of a very important point. We -- the polar bears, the Inuit, the truck drivers, the Chinese labourer making our stuff, and the newborn child that was born while writing this at your local hospital -- are all connected. Until we pull our heads out of the excel spreadsheets to calculate the assets and liabilities for next quarter, and realize the consequences of our actions on the finite resources and commodities this planet has to offer, we increase the chances of exploiting ourselves to death. Until then, the polar bears will just have to learn how to swim better...
  48. Paul Thompson from Canada writes: Excellent posting Canada first, in marked contrast to the rambling brain farts of b mac, among others.
  49. Darrin Duell from Winnipeg, Canada writes: LIFE is interconnected.. agreed with Canada (thanks for your comment), deciding to pick and chose what has value in the natural world is a slippery slope. It shouldn't matter if its polar bears, coral reefs or severely mutated frogs what matters is that these are symptoms that we need to reassess the value we place on a world that can supports LIFE.
  50. martha stewart from Canada writes: Bob Beal - Your Macoun quote... didn't you just warn me about the selective use of anecdotes? In any case, these are not PINE forests. The Brazeau was the rare exception. Minimal indigenous use. That is also why it was one of the last areas where native elk were found in the Alberta foothills, and the upper Brazeau held one of the largest remnant populations of bighorn sheep.

    Once again, no mature pine forests, no mt pine beetle epidemics. Now, after the Smoky the Bear era, there are/were vast areas of even-aged mature pine forest and, yes, recent warm winters have enabled the beetle to overwinter and spread in Alberta. But for all we know, it may have been in Alberta in earlier warm periods. When not at epidemic levels the beetle infests what mature trees are available and is not conspicuous enough for your average fur trade journalist to notice or record.

    The people 'who know what they're talking about' seldom explain mt pine beetle ecology when they focus on the warming aspect.
  51. martha stewart from Canada writes: Mike McFae - Greenland... yes, that just slipped by my BS detector!!! Thanks for reminding everyone that polar bears live there too.
  52. Offshore Directional Driller from Phuket, Thailand writes: This devastating news. However there is hope. If we round up all the junkies in Vancouver and drop them out of helicopters close to where the remaining bears are we should be able to keep the population stable or actually increase it by the year 2080.
  53. Canada First and Always from Canada writes: Offshore Directional Driller from Phuket, Thailand writes: This devastating news. However there is hope. If we round up all the junkies in Vancouver and drop them out of helicopters close to where the remaining bears are we should be able to keep the population stable or actually increase it by the year 2080.
    _________

    Funny, we were thinking along the same lines, but in our case we want to round up all the major sickos in Thailand who shamelessly throw poor little Thai girls under the age of 10 into boxing rings to beat each other up for the pleasure and betting of these sickos.
  54. Rudy H from Winnipeg, Canada writes: We should send up a bunch of ice cube makers. Big industrial ones.
  55. Pat Lind from Ottawa, Canada writes: How Canadian that so many would choose to do nothing or marginalize the threat in the face of what in all likelihood is an impending disaster. Appalling.
  56. Alan Burke from Ottawa, Canada writes: I have set up a website which contains graphs of data gleaned from original sources (not models) and including information on temperature changes, rates of change, atmospheric CO2, sunspots, Arctic ice-pack and atmospheric nuclear weapons testing.

    My intention is to provide a graphical source of credible data relevant to the issue of climate change and soon, I hope, to create a moderated forum for discussion on the issue.

    It's at http://climatechange.dynalias.com

    Please visit and come back occasionally to take advantage of recent information and, perhaps, to join in rational and objective discussion once I have enable the discussion forum.

    Alan

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top