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.”
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
I heard that PB numbers are stable in the Gold Coast zoo too. Apparently they can also thrive in cold regions on human refuse.
In relation to the full range of human and environmental pressures and their the probable risks, potential threats and severity of impact of on long-term survival of PB’s, what do these isolated claims prove?
Do you plan to extrapolate and make any broader claims? Shall we revisit the piece you wrote for the IPA glossy magazine which has a journalistic policy of no references ROTFLMAO!! and then defended on the basis of ownership of good scientific evidence? No, let’s not spin. Let’s follow good science and not even imply any rash conclusions.
Pinxi, So do you think polar bear numbers are increasing in the Davis strait?
From NOAA : ” ..these increased Arctic polar bear sightings are probably related to retreating sea ice triggered by climate warning and not due to population increases as some may believe”.
http://www.physorg.com/news77378053.html
As for the statement that the Inuits claim more polar bear sightings , this has to do with the hunting policy, they just want to hunt more polar bears ,especially they want to expand the tourist hunting.
Ann, So do you think polar bear numbers are decreasing in the Davis strait?
” “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. ”
This Inuit seems to claim that the polar bear popolation increases due to more sightings but other Inuits claim ” close encounters of the bear kind are still a rarity in northern Quebec and Labrador. Yet many Inuit see it as a harbinger of what could be in store as melting galciers, cracking ice, shifting winds and warming currents toss the ecological salad”.
In short , there will be a habitat loss for polar bears so of course IMO the trend seems to be negative for the polar bears.
“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.
Would it not be reasonable to consider that a reduction ice area would cause movements in the bears’ distribution; and initially the ice breakup would present more hunting opportunties?
Would one think a change in the ice pack would have no implications at all?
Longer term – well we’re probably going to find out eh?
So how about some considered ecological interpretation of the changes.
Luke,
But first, what are the “changes” that you refer to?
Are numbers of polar bears increasing or decreasing in the Davis strait?
What are you saying Luke, disregard the stats?
Read what I said – why are they increasing?
(a) population is going gang busters – survival, food supply and reproduction up – thye’ve neve rhad it sooo good
or
(b) population is moving due to ice breakup and concentrating observations
(c) food supply improved in the short term as more gaps in ice to capture seals
(d) what happens when ice break up is continuous and open sea occurs – less hunting opportunities
The fact that we have divergent reports coming in makes me suspect that we’re measuring differnet effects depending on where the location is and what stage the ice breakup is at.
Also some vested interests at work so what numbers and anaimal health reports are you going to trust.
It’s not where we are now – it’s where the situation is headed.
Like most denialist style rebuttals – you guys seem you guys expect INSTANT disaster. Trends and understanding the data are really important. Assuming the AGW science is correct you’ll observe a ongoing reduction in ice cover that will go on for decades. But the effect will also ebb and flow a afir bit too. WHY?
WE ALSO KNOW that in Arctic environment there are significant decadal signals which will sometime seem to accelerate the trend and at other times reverse it. If ya gonna get a bit sophistamuckated (which is asking a lot given the quality of AGW debate here on blog) you need to model these effects with critical factors for the bears survival – breeding dens, hunting habitat, seal population dynamics.
Observing is one thing – seeing is another.
{I know nurseries are a long way from natural systems Rog – you’ll find stats supports conclusions in scientific research – it doesn’t drive them – indeed data dredging is frowned upon – ask Davey}
Incidentally and slightly off topic but a philosophical protest – such interest in the northern hemisphere’s baars ! but little interest in the fate of our sub-Antarctic islands – our Australian Territories and the stand-off between Tassie and the Feds on nuking the rats, mice and rabbits chomping our way through unique flora and creating soil erosion.
World Heritage and all that !
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/2007/s2025046.htm
http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/macquarie/rabbitsfaq.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200607/s1687413.htm
Where’s the AEF !!!
Luke,
Back to the issue of polar bears… can you give me a straight answer… Are numbers of polar bears currently increasing in the Davis Strait?
Here goes Jen with the entrapment which is all that gets reported – like the “more trees than ever” line – Well Jen your lead article asserts they are increasing.
Personally I don’t know – alas I haven’t recently surveyed them. So I have no recourse except to accept the information on face value.
interesting that an AGW poster child issue is fascinating but not own own backyard. Oh well.
So why are the numbers increasing Jen?
Polar Bears have survived the several previous warm periods, the most recent being the MWP when both the Northwest and NorthEast passages were likely open.
Polar Bear extinction is just another lie designed to prop up a computer modelled climate catastrophe from the multi-billion dollar global warming industry.
Nice sea ice animation here for 1981 to 2007:
http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaiceminimum/images/20070822_oldice.gif
I have read the Viking stories from Greenland and Canada. According to the stories northern Greenland was cold as well as northern Canada, in contrast to southern Greenland and New Foundland.
Luke,
I am interested in first establishing whether numbers are, or are not, increasing.
I was quoting Mitch Taylor – thus the title of this post.
Ann, Luke, Pinxi,
Does anyone have any other information/contrary information regarding this population of polar bears and inparticular whether numbers are increasing or not?
Given that this is where the NW passage is just opening up, it sounds like an area where the sea ice has only just started opening up. With the restrictions on hunting, the population is booming, with the ice about to start retreating in this area, that is likely to change soon. Other areas where the sea ice started retreating earlier apparently have underweight bears.
” Polar Bears have survived the several previous warm periods, the most recent being the MWP when both the Northwest and NorthEast passages were likely open.”- Paul
The polar bears are not only suffering from habitat loss due to decreasing sea ice. A major threat is contamination.
As we know , or as it is reported, many polar bears suffer from starvation . This means that the contaminants in the fatty tissue will be released into the bloodsream and making the polar bear’s health even worse.
The Norwegian Polar Institute is carrying out studies of this.
The contamination issue is quite new and has nothing to do with adaption or to previous warming periods.
http://npweb.npolar.no/prosjekter/deterioration_of_sea_ice
As is reported by Dr. Mitch Taylor, polar bear populations are increasing, but we know as well that the same Dr. Taylor is working for an Inuit community that wants to expand hunting. His report is NOT neutral.
Ann,
Most of the contamination scare is coming from NGO’s looking to attract members! People who want to save animals — like you.
What is the case for ‘contamination’ reducing PB numbers when numbers of PBs are increasing?
Oh de ja vu!! From the very beginning then:
Jennifer, do you think polar bear numbers are increasing in the Davis strait?
I’m happy to agree with your decided opinion should you actually declare it for once. (You would know best, having the highest standards of scientific evidence etc.)
Jennifer, do you think polar bear numbers are increasing in the Davis strait?
Hi Denis,
I doubt that in the near future the OVERALL PB numbers will increase. The trend is not very positive. Now we are talking about PB subpopulations, they are 21, with different population dynamics.
As re contaminants, the Russian and Norwegian PBs are more polluted that the Canadian ones. Contaminants affect the reproduction system.
50 years ago the PB were overhunted and some subpopulations near extinction. Now , in almost all places ( except for Inuit hunting) there is a hunting ban, that’s why the population has increased.
Correction: there are 19 PB subpopulations.
Jennifer,
From the IUCN 2006 Polar bear specialist Group proceeding.
Davis Strait : data deficient
Estimated risk of decline in 10 years : Lower
Pinx,
Yes I think polar bear numbers are increasing in the Davis strait.
So that appears to make five of us – you, me, SJT, Denis and Luke?
Ann,
I know there are many polar bear populations. In January we focused in on the Churchill population.
Now we are focusing on the Davis Strait population and you initially suggested (above thread) the population in the Davis Strait must be declining. Are you now suggesting that we don’t know?
I hear the polar bears are getting motor boat licences to cope with increasing areas of open water. They’ll be able to cross from one side of the Artic to the other soon enough.
Trends in Canadian polar bear populations.
(extracted from IUCN 2006, Polar Bear Specialist Group Proceedings from 2005 meeting). Much of the data in the IUCN Proceedings were provided by the Government of Nunavut which participated fully in the production of the status report.
To summarize the above table:
Of the 13 Canadian polar bear populations, the current trends for the 11 populations not known to be severely reduced from historic levels are:
five populations declining,
five populations stable and
one population is data deficient.
In the next 10 years, five polar bear populations have an estimated high/very high risk of decline, six have a low/very low risk and there is currently no estimate for two populations.
So, Taylor’s research is incomplete but he is already forecasting the result and his research is not linked to population movement merely the numbers in one area?…
“We could be looking at the possibility of increasing (hunting) quotas” Taylor said.’
Shill scientist singing for his supper…
I see. Now we’ve established Polar Bears survived the Neolithic, Bronze Age, Roman, and Medieval warm periods – and enjoyed Dark Age cooling and the LIA, we’ve moved on to Polar Bears contaminated by PCBs.
“As is reported by Dr. Mitch Taylor, polar bear populations are increasing, but we know as well that the same Dr. Taylor is working for an Inuit community that wants to expand hunting. His report is NOT neutral.”
There is a constant refrain from Ann and co here that Polar Bear sports hunts and the revenue derived are driving quotas upwards (and it seems to be impuned that the hunting is unsustainable).
As a guy that actually lives among these hunters and the bears, I have to ask you to qualify these remarks.
So, would you mind explaining what evidence any of you have for these statements and whose “vested interests” are we talking about here?
I have written here before why I do not share that view and backed it up with a few facts that Ann seems to ignore.
Lamna: “”We could be looking at the possibility of increasing (hunting) quotas” Taylor said.’
Shill scientist singing for his supper…”
Please provide your explanations for your cheap vilification and explain how you think such comments provide for anything positive.
BTW, the quotas have been lowered for the Churchill populations as the Nunavut Government surveys have been completed.
Not a popular decision in the communities affected at all.
The other thing that doesn’t get discussed here is the frequency of these population surveys. They are I think about ten years apart for each sub-population.
The Davis Strait numbers were in the pipeline for a long time and from scientific observations and local knowledge were expected to be up.
There is much feeling that the AGW crowd moved fast to ensure that the bear hysteria bandwagon got going BEFORE any “good” numbers came out officially.
Ann, Mitch Taylor’s reports are from a world reknowned scientist.
If you have some issues with his science, please share.
If not all you guys seem hell bent on is cheap character assasination.
People up here love their Polar Bears just as much as you do Ann. They actually share their space with them and occasionally are attacked by them.
They’re not just long distance armchair critics.
I might add that this tone and angle of attack seems to be the “organized” approach from the animal protest industry.
Has anyone read the recent editorial in the UK’s Independant on Sunday where they announce their “campaign” to save the polar bear from “rich” American sports hunters?
It was quite disgusting and underhanded stuff not to mention factually wrong.
They even state that they realise that stopping the import of pelts into the US won’t save the Polar Bear from extinction from AGW but that we needed to “save” the bears as a “symbol”.
Once again, like back in the 70-80s with the anti-trapping and sealing campaigns northerners’ basic rights are being trampled by people trying to use charismatic wildife to raise funds and push political agendas.
It seems odd to me that the part of the world’s popuilation with all the money and power-not to mention education- is the part that cannot be galvanised into action by facts, figures and argument but still relies on symbolism (and hype).
In sum, it’s so much easier to invent a bad guy and a victim.
Whatever this is, it is not environmentaslism and is a hurdle to moving forward, not a tool.
BTW, if someone bothers to go and read the IOS’s save the bear editorials, I would love to hear of folks think this kind of editorial stance actually helps to sell newspapers.
While we’re on the subject of vested interests n’all.
An additional note: it seems that they have the UK environment Minister is now floating the idea of a ban on Polar Bear parts import into the UK and it can only be a matter of time until such a proposal is pushed at the EU level by Caroline Lucas the “green” MEP for Brighton.
As Inuit are the only beneficiaries of bear hunting, it seems to me that this can only be construed as an attack on Inuit, their economy as well as their wildlife management regime which- at least as far as bears are concerned – is a standout success.
It’s no secret that the Animal Protest Industry have always considered Inuit to be “unfinished business” after the sealing and fur campaigns of twenty years ago.
The quota system on bears is immensely unpopular here for a variety of reasons – practical as well as historical- but it *IS* scrupulously respected.
There is no bear poaching here.
Zero.
This campaign is immoral…not to mention UNenvironmental.
>Most of the contamination scare is coming from NGO’s looking to attract members! People who want to save animals — like you.
What is the case for ‘contamination’ reducing PB numbers when numbers of PBs are increasing?
Go read some peer-reviewed papers by scientists who are not associated with greens or NGOs. You might learn something.
IceClass, your view is as biased as those you are criticising.
This post is highlighting work in one area where polar bears occur, and finishes by talks of increasing hunting quotas. What is happening to the seals in the area – the food of these animals? Does one area that is showing signs of recovery mean that all is rosy in the world of the polar bear?
‘Please provide your explanations’ – IceClass
Scientists are not normally in the habit of broadcasting predictions about their study before completing that study or conducting a study on population dynamics in a species known to migrate over a considerable distances in search of food that ignores other local population dynamics and conclude their press release with a commercial hunting forecast.. Shills on the other hand….
As Ann pointed out –
Trends in Canadian polar bear populations.
(extracted from IUCN 2006, Polar Bear Specialist Group Proceedings from 2005 meeting). Much of the data in the IUCN Proceedings were provided by the Government of Nunavut which participated fully in the production of the status report.
To summarize the above table:
Of the 13 Canadian polar bear populations, the current trends for the 11 populations not known to be severely reduced from historic levels are:
five populations declining,
five populations stable and
one population is data deficient.
In the next 10 years, five polar bear populations have an estimated high/very high risk of decline, six have a low/very low risk and there is currently no estimate for two populations.
‘The other thing that doesn’t get discussed here is the frequency of these population surveys.’ – IceClass
Who pays for those surveys?.. and how long does it take for Nanuk to mature and succesfully raise at least two offspring?…
‘the quotas have been lowered for the Churchill populations as the Nunavut Government surveys have been completed.
Not a popular decision in the communities affected at all. – IceClass
Lowered you say? Was that because there were fewer bears?..
‘It’s no secret that the Animal Protest Industry have always considered Inuit to be “unfinished business” after the sealing and fur campaigns of twenty years ago.’ – IceClass
Jingoistic, disingenuous piffle.. As well you know IceClass, the major part of the Canadian seal hunt is NOT indigenous and has a completely separate quota from the indigenous quota.
The value of the pelts would be much, much higher for the Inuit if the market did not include the non Aboriginal hunt.. Supply and demand economics…
In sum, it’s so much easier to invent a bad guy and a victim….
Luke says “Personally I don’t know” which doesnt stop him from prattling on about anything and everything – up the librium Doctor.
I thought that was your domain Rog.
” ‘the quotas have been lowered for the Churchill populations as the Nunavut Government surveys have been completed.
Not a popular decision in the communities affected at all. – IceClass
Lowered you say? Was that because there were fewer bears?..Lamna
W. Hudson Bay polar bears Current trend : Declining
Estimated risk of decline in next 10 years : Very high
S. Hudson Bay Current trend : Lower*
Estimated risk of decline in next 10 years : Lower
* Very recent Ontario Government research shows that polar bears in this population are now experiencing significant declines in body condition since the mid-1980s, which, when combined with satellite data on sea ice reductions, suggests that population declines may follow (Obbard et al. 2006).
Obbard, M.E. 2006. Temporal trends in the Body Condition of Southern Hudson Bay Polar Bears. Climate Change Research Information Note Number 3. Government of Ontario, Applied Research and Development Branch. Pp. 8.
Hudson Bay = Churchill
Jennifer: This report is quite sus as presented. The first step in a modern head count is get a bum on some light aircraft and use the camera. Alternatively, Google earth shows Arabs on camels today. Why not swing it through the Strait?
Counting tourists on a beach, this way is easy. For instance, I participated in a tip to tip aerial survey of Northern Tasmania to assess the needs of individuals on holiday recreation in coastal reserves. As a result, state authorities could count every tent, surfer and game of cricket. I normally hired a local pilot to privately survey coastlines, forestry and mining projects etc.
Later on, I chatted frequently via the www with a commercial pilot based in Alaska. Wildlife and wilderness there was normally accessed initially by plane. Last night on ABC we had the Caribou documentary. It too clearly showed how numbers of animals massed in migrations could be assessed scientifically by dot counts of animals down on the plains.
After all, striking out bug colonies in a glass dish from an incubator is our first line of defense in the food industry. Growth and distribution of pests in the whole food chain is likewise covered by smaller samples.
Given the availability of light aircraft in recent decades and the frequency of photographic excursions, I am surprised that there is any doubt about bear numbers going one way or another in a particular area. My guess is on a possible distortion they have learned to love people’s leftovers.
‘W. Hudson Bay polar bears Current trend : Declining
Estimated risk of decline in next 10 years : Very high
S. Hudson Bay Current trend : Lower*
Estimated risk of decline in next 10 years: Lower’ – Ann
Thanks for the extra data Ann.
“There is a constant refrain from Ann and co here that Polar Bear sports hunts and the revenue derived are driving quotas upwards (and it seems to be impuned that the hunting is unsustainable).
As a guy that actually lives among these hunters and the bears, I have to ask you to qualify these remarks.
So, would you mind explaining what evidence any of you have for these statements and whose “vested interests” are we talking about here?
I have written here before why I do not share that view and backed it up with a few facts that Ann seems to ignore” – IceClass
Mark A York wrote at January 12, 2007 3:07 AM :
“For example, the Polar Bear Specialist Group, made up of polar bear scientists and wildlife managers from around the circumpolar world, claim the Baffin Bay and western Hudson Bay populations are each in decline.
As for Davis Strait, they say there’s not enough information about that population to make an informed estimate.
So in January of 2005, when Nunavut increased annual polar bear hunting quotas from 398 to 507 bears, the decision provoked an immediate backlash from a majority of polar bear scientists.
The minutes of the Polar Bear Specialist Group, who met in Seattle in 2005, say many scientists had “a definite high level of uneasiness” with GN population estimates based on traditional Inuit knowledge, as well as with Nunavut’s big increase in hunting quotas.”
Looks like selectively cooked data to support hunting revenue to me, and to the consensus of polar bear scientists worldwide. Self-interest is easy to spot.”
I share his opinion on this.
” It’s no secret that the Animal Protest Industry have always considered Inuit to be “unfinished business” after the sealing and fur campaigns of twenty years ago.” – IceClass
You’r really full of bull IceClass. Everybody knows that the Inuits are treated with silken gloves nowadays and nobody dares to complain about Inuit hunting, it’s clear when it comes to whaling and furry animals.
I have read it’s very difficult in Canada to put furry animals on the endangered species list thanks to there are so many hunters in Canada.
“Once again, like back in the 70-80s with the anti-trapping and sealing campaigns northerners’ basic rights are being trampled by people trying to use charismatic wildife to raise funds and push political agendas”
I’m fully opposed to the seal hunt that not seems to be about furs but about seal penises to the Asian market. Hopefully the manufacture of Viagra can put an end to this business.
Where’s the evidence to support the accusations of”vested Interests” Ann?
If Inuit wanted more Polar Bears to sell off to sports hunters they could just take them from the already allocated hunting quotas.
Around 100 of 600 bear tags are sold to hunters.
The rest Inuit keep for themselves for food, pelts. whatever.
Where’s the vested interest, Ann?
As for your comments about kid gloves, the level of sheer ignorance is now off the scale.
Are you saying that the campaigns against sealing and fur trapping never happened?
Are you saying that they never had serious social and economic ramifications here?
Are you perhaps saying that Inuit somehow have the power to dictate how they are referred to in the western media?
What planet do you live on, Ann?
You’re in Lala land.
The recent attacks on their culture and economy through the Kerry Bill to ban bear imports into the US and campaigns like thbose of the UK Independant on Sunday should make it clear that they are hardly treated with kid gloves.
The UK Independant also strangely enough regularly refer to an “inuit dominated government” in their Polar bear stories.
Strangely enough, renewable resource decisions made by a EU government for example would never so easily be written off as unreliable due to it being the decision of a “German dominated” government.
The whole idea is just unfair, racist and plain wrong.
You’ve made a lot of bunk assertions so far Ann.
We know you care less about animals than the catharthis you achieve from seeing yourself as being an “animal defender” and an arbiter of how people should interact with THEIR environment.
When are you handing control of your backyard to the Inuit Ann?
Instead of indulging in armchair vilification, why don’t you formulate your questions regarding Polar Bear management to the Nunavut Government. You can find a link to the dept of Environment staff at http://www.gov.nu.ca including a phone number for Mitch Taylor himself.
So, instead of contributing to the info-pollution and endlessly burying us in your “feelings” about everyone else’s ecological footprint but your own, why don’t you take your accusations of cooked books to support hunting revenue to the Government directly.
I promise you that if you pose them valid questions and fail to get an answer, I will go rattle cages on your behalf and report back to you.
Please bear in mind though that people eat Polar Bears here and they are managed with a view to killing and eating a sustainable take.
If your angle is that no bears should be taken, none sold to sports hunters etc then obviously your questions aren’t going to be taken seriously.
At least not until you’ve managed to shut down all land use for food production in your own area.
Anything less would be hypocritical.
” We know you care less about animals than the catharthis you achieve from seeing yourself as being an “animal defender” and an arbiter of how people should interact with THEIR environment”
OK, OK , IceClass Bye Bye You ‘re of course completely right!
‘It’s no secret that the Animal Protest Industry have always considered Inuit to be “unfinished business” after the sealing and fur campaigns of twenty years ago.’ – IceClass
“Jingoistic, disingenuous piffle.. As well you know IceClass, the major part of the Canadian seal hunt is NOT indigenous and has a completely separate quota from the indigenous quota.
The value of the pelts would be much, much higher for the Inuit if the market did not include the non Aboriginal hunt.. Supply and demand economics…”
Talking of disingenious, please explain how the inuit pelts are distinguishable from non-inuit pelts in a market place besieged by marketing campaigns designed to vilify “seal hunting”.
The anti-sealing campaigns make no distinction between the two.
Besides, the historical record shows the drop in income that went into Inuit communities in the 80’s and triggered social problems they’re still dealing with today.
So, sorry but you’re full of crap.
And, I might refer you to Brian Davies’ book “Red Ice” for his views on the unfinished nature of the business of Inuit.
Very last closing paragraphs if I remember right.
Still, old Brian retired a millionaire, the Feds got Inuit land cheap when their economy tanked and the non-renewable resource companies are in full swing.
The Inuit land Claims co recently just completely reversed a ban on uranium mining on their lands. It’s an unpopular move and many are scared witless about the environmental impacts of the mining process but next to no one is prepared to speak up.
With massive unemployment and cloying poverty no one wants to get in the way of jobs and be labeled a “GreenPisser”.
Yeah, thanks my compassionate and caring friends.
Where would we be without you.
BTW, when you’ve finished getting all hot and sweaty over your perceptions of how we poke and prod our furry critters, d’ya think you might spend a little moment of your omnipotence and draw some attention to the actual real environmental issues up here?
Almost every community is built on a toxic waste dump from the cold war. Old exploration sites, closed down mines and military dumps are every where.
The people have very high rates of cancer everywhere.
…and all you silly sods care about is if Bambi went “ouch” before we ate his ass.
If the arguments over AGW are considered heated, it ain’t nothing compared to the arguments we’re going to be rolled up in when it comes to implementing solutions.
What this whole Polar Bear farce tells me is that if you’re a small minority at the edges of economic and social power, you’d better watch out because you’re going to have your rights trampled and your situation misrepresented and exploited by every politician and agenda driver looking for an issue to soap box on that comes with no costs attached for either them or their constituents.
It really is time that you just dealt with the fact that there are no independent parties, only groups of stakeholders.
The way forward is from cooperation, trust and agreement.
The “Budgies For Budha Inc.” and their acolytes are an obstacle to a sustainable future not a tool.
Gavin,
your comments about Google Earth etc just shows the dangers of arm chair conservationists.
Have you any idea of the size of territory we have here?
Once again, Ann, please demonstrate the correlation between the increase in Polar Bear quotas and revenue from Polar Bear sports hunting.
People here are doing a pretty good job of managing their wildlife and how they interact with it.
Certainly a better job than I ever experienced anywhere I lived in Europe.
I think they deserve an answer from you after your underhanded assertions and vilification, if not a retraction and an apology.
Luke wrote:”Also some vested interests at work so what numbers and animal health reports are you going to trust.”
And you keep ducking Jennifer’s question about whether or not you think numbers for the Davies Strait population are going up.
Do you actually have some numbers you think are cooked?
Then show us how. Let’s take them to the Nunavut Government PB biologist and get some answers.
If all you’re doing is sticking to your line of how any Inuit or Nunavut government biologists are Exxon sponsored sons of Beelzebub and unreliable, it seems a tad disingenious and convenient to me.
No IceClass, this time I’m not going to answer….maybe the Internet is not the best way to communicate! I’m far from a saint myself but I’m quite tired of all the insults that I get , except from a few Aussie gentlemen!!!
“No IceClass, this time I’m not going to answer….maybe the Internet is not the best way to communicate!”
Aw, poor compassionate Ann. Someone hurt her “feelings” by asking some inconvenient questions.
Your inability to back up your unsubstantiated and underhanded (and not a little insulting) assertions is duly noted.
If you ever decide to start dealing in facts and put aside your “feelings” for a while, let me know how you get on in your dealings with the Nunavut Government .
That’s if you even bother to ask them anything.
Iceclass, or whatever your name actually is, for a start you have continually shown yourself to be a misogynistic moron, so if Ann doesn’t want to engage in your CaveMan hair pulling, she has a right not to. She has provided plenty of facts and figures here, and if anyone is being overly emotive (now that’s scary), it’s you. Your bias in this issue is very obvious, not to mention your own level of insulting assertions.
As for Luke not answering Jennifer’s question, it was a stupid one to begin with.
IceClass: “Have you any idea of the size of territory we have here”
Mate: I would be surprised if your bit of coastline was much bigger than Oz.
Downunder we are constantly assessing what’s left of our forests after settlement, agriculture, forestry mining etc.
A young IT scientist here started his tree-counting career by designing methods to find the remnants of isolated marsupial populations hidden on densely covered steeper slopes, ie cliffs. His primary resource was satellite land cover data and my old Nikon.
Systems grow from humble beginnings. Although national resources have been wide open to interpretation, modern methods such as the one above are at hand. I think they all depend on modest sampling. Another young chap at the same uni was constantly employed finding commercial quantities of gold in old data. The size of the territory covered can be as big as you like.
I hope associated groups here will continue to look at other country’s resources, like commercial forestry, coral reefs and fish stocks, which I’m sure they have all moved on to without 35 mm backup.
IceClass may not be amused; a GIS type system now tracks the flow of public funds in remote communities.
Gavin,
Google earth’s pictures are pretty low res, are well delayed and our area is very poorly covered. While I’m not at all discounting the use of such tech in the future, we just aren’t there yet.
I was however rather taken with a project I heard of in the Kalahari where hunters gather data by means of Palm like devices storing animal observations to share with the scientists.
Sounds like good community based management to me.
We already get some information from satellite such as ice coverage (which is well accessed by local hunters) and there is substantial GPS tagging going on but budgets are generally really tight for the geography that has to be covered.
Say, d’ya think the Budgies For Buddha Inc. would chip in some dough to count some bears?
Nah, that would be much to useful and might encourage the housewives to cut out the animal protest industry middlemen and put there monies directly into their concerns.
Worried about the poor fluffy Polar Bears? Sod funding the IFAW send the Nunavut Government your twenty quid!
Gavin:”IceClass may not be amused; a GIS type system now tracks the flow of public funds in remote communities.”
On the contrary, Gavin, I’m amused but I’m not yet convinced that it will be of much benefit to the communities.
Time will tell.
Gavin,
Google earth’s pictures are pretty low res, are well delayed and our area is very poorly covered. While I’m not at all discounting the use of such tech in the future, we just aren’t there yet.
I was however rather taken with a project I heard of in the Kalahari where hunters gather data by means of Palm like devices storing animal observations to share with the scientists.
Sounds like good community based management to me.
We already get some information from satellite such as ice coverage (which is well accessed by local hunters) and there is substantial GPS tagging going on but budgets are generally really tight for the geography that has to be covered.
Say, d’ya think the Budgies For Buddha Inc. would chip in some dough to count some bears?
Nah, that would be much to useful and might encourage the housewives to cut out the animal protest industry middlemen and put there monies directly into their concerns.
Worried about the poor fluffy Polar Bears? Sod funding the IFAW send the Nunavut Government your twenty quid!
Gavin:”IceClass may not be amused; a GIS type system now tracks the flow of public funds in remote communities.”
On the contrary, Gavin, I’m amused but I’m not yet convinced that it will be of much benefit to the communities.
Time will tell.
Libby:
Ann hasn’t answered a single question.
She has failed to demonstrate the correlation between the increase in Polar Bear quotas and revenue from Polar Bear sports hunting despite numerous requests to do so from me and numerous attempts on her behalf to underhandedly make the connection.
She has failed to show any cooked numbers and hasn’t bothered to raise the issue with the Nunavut Government and come back to us with any unsatisfactory response.
My offer to assist in getting answers to any genuine and properly articulated concerns still stands and your tawdry efforts at masking the lack of content in your predictably caustic response is again, duly noted.
So, go ahead, show me how Polar Bear quotas were increased to expand the sports hunts.
I challenge you.
But I won’t hold my breath.
Too much like facts and not enough “feeling” no doubt.
“…you have continually shown yourself to be a misogynistic moron”…
Well the women in my life disagree but then they’re all meat eating fur wearers.
🙂
http://www.blogher.org/can-you-be-feminist-and-support-petas-marketing-strategies
‘please explain how the inuit pelts are distinguishable from non-inuit pelts’ – IceClass
Stop being snowed by non-indigenous corporate interests pretending to be your friend with one hand and stealing your heritage and your resources with the other…
I have absolutely no problem with sustainable, aboriginal commercial hunting rights, using humane methods under independent scientific monitoring which excludes the rapacious industrialised processing of wild resources by non-indigenous commerce.
If there was no non-indigenous seal hunt there would be no problem identifying Inuit pelts…
I am fully aware of the finite resources available to First Nation citizens in the Arctic and I want to see them protected for the commercial benefit of First Nation citizens.. which also means that if Nanuk’s numbers are down in certain areas your responsibilty is to ensure that hunting quotas reflect sustainability.. not make popular political decisions for the community based on avarice..
‘the Feds got Inuit land cheap when their economy tanked ‘ – IceClass
Why are you blaming others if you carried out a firesale?.. Mineral rights are mineral rights and do not change their value based on Inuit unemployment..
If you think you bargain from a position of weakness then you create a self-fulfilling prophesy.. stop being a victim on behalf of corporate greed and start living up to your proud heritage.
If Inuit men fear being labeled a “GreenPisser” for requiring any Uranium mining on Inuit land to be conducted under the most stringent environmental controls, then it is ONLY Inuit women who are meat eating fur wearers.
” The quota increases announced for Davis Strait would remain until a three-year study is completed.
The January decision increased the hunt quota to more than 500 bears, angering the international scientific community and environmentalists, but winning praise from hunters and Inuit organizations ” – CBS News
“The status of polar bears is currently under review by COSEWIC, the Committee on Status of Endangered Species of Wildlife in Canada. Stirling says Canada needs to move quickly on over-harvesting, being mindful to apply “the precautionary principle. If we’re not certain of some details, give the resource the benefit of the doubt, something that did not happen with Atlantic cod which became a victim of over estimation of existing population.”
So IceClass your despised polar bear scientist Ian Sterling , that is not associated to any NGOs , Greens or heart-bleeding IFAW housewives continues:
” Scientists and Inuit have a long history of working together, which is facilitated through the Polar Bear Technical Committee, which meets once a year, has direct Inuit participation, and all polar bear research is shared.
However, Stirling says differences of opinion may arise over “interpretations of local ecological knowledge,” such as interpreting increasing sightings of bears in the community.” – The Epoch Times
” Sod funding the IFAW send the Nunavut Government your twenty quid!” – IceClass
Well, I would rather say if the trophy hunters would like to support the Inuit community they could donate the money to the Nunavut Gov’t and get a fake pelt with a certificate as a proof and not depleting natural resources to impress their friends!
According to IceClass the Inuits are living more or less in poverty .
So is polar bear hunting for tourists the solution to solve the poverty?
To me it seems a vey bad solution to depend on American tourists and the resources might just be depleted very soon.
I read as well another sad story about the Inuits in Greenland for some days ago. According to the police they have real problems with Inuit children stealing and begging money from tourists in Greenland. How can such things happen to a country that is under the home rule of Denmark???
The Inuits in Greenland also increase their wildlife quotas year after year. Does this improve their economy , or is something more radical needed???
” So, go ahead, show me how Polar Bear quotas were increased to expand the sports hunts.
I challenge you.
But I won’t hold my breath.
Too much like facts and not enough “feeling” no doubt.” – IceClass
Dear IceClass,
I have already posted my response. The pro hunting lobby is very strong in countries such as Canada. The decision to increase quotas in Davis Strait was certainly affected by pro hunters.
As for my opinion, it really doesn’t mean much, but can you tell me since when was sport killing a part of Inuit culture ?
To IceClass,
Before responding to the comments I suggest that you have a BIG COCKTAIL and calm down a little…
As for a choice of cocktail I would recommend a ” Green Devil” !
Ann:”To me it seems a vey bad solution to depend on American tourists and the resources might just be depleted very soon.”
Well, that’s your opinion but then again you’re full of opinions, feelings and decontextualized quotes that amount to very little.
Sports hunts are just one tool of many. It seems to me that people need more sustainable options, not less.
Have you also considered that as the animal protest industry destroys individual components of the traditional economy such as sealing or bears it might have a knock-on impact on other species such as Narwal or Walrus?
Lamna: “…if Nanuk’s numbers are down in certain areas your responsibilty is to ensure that hunting quotas reflect sustainability.. not make popular political decisions for the community based on avarice..”
Quotas are constantly being revised as information becomes available, as they just did with the southern Hudsons Bay population recently. The wildlife management regime has made unpopular quota decisions many times in the past.
So what’s your problem?
Ann:Well, I would rather say if the trophy hunters would like to support the Inuit community they could donate the money to the Nunavut Gov’t and get a fake pelt with a certificate as a proof and not depleting natural resources to impress their friends!”
Fake pelts? Certificates?? What planet are you from? No one is buying fake bear pelts and no one cares for a certificate.
They pay to be guided and to hunt.
Why do you want to make Inuit dependent on your charity when they already have a sustainable source of income in bears?
And, once again, Ann, Sports hunts or Inuit hunts are not depleting the resource. The bears are doing well and the management system in place is constantly watching and readjusting.
I think it should be allowed to do so in peace without the interference of folks like you, Lamna and Libby breathing down there necks from a thousand miles away and with no knowledge of the local ecology, social structures, politics etc.
That strikes me as dangerous.
All the more so since lamna’s comments just show a complete and total appreciation for any reality in the current situation and prefers to take refuge in racist cultural attacks (as does Ann).
The issue here isn’t culture it’s basic human rights.
Ann:”So is polar bear hunting for tourists the solution to solve the poverty?”
You’re playing disingenuous games again Ann. Hunting is one tool and another option in an area that has few.
No one says it is “the” solution, just a component.
It is amazing how your arguments constantly reflect the tired old cliches of the animal protest industry.
Ann:”.. real problems with Inuit children stealing and begging money from tourists in Greenland. How can such things happen to a country that is under the home rule of Denmark???”
And this little nugget is relevant how exactly?
Last time I was in Copenhagen, I saw Danish beggars.
What’s your point? Do you have one or are you just pulling on that old cultural red herring again?
Ann:”As for my opinion, it really doesn’t mean much, but can you tell me since when was sport killing a part of Inuit culture ?”
Ah, there’s my answer. You’re pulling on the old culture red herring again!
Sports hunts obviously are not a traditional part of Inuit culture but you already know that. It is in fact an economic adaptation that allows for the continuation of Inuit culture and brings in a cash component.
Those bears are going to be killed and eaten regardless of whether the sports hunter is part of the picture. The additional ecological impact of the hunter is negligeable. It simply means that someone else pulls the triger.
On top of that it pays for hunters to keep their skills, keep their dog teams, it provides employment that THEY consider culturally relevant (even if you don’t)and provides a whole bunch of benefits that THEY seem to value (even if you don’t).
“I have already posted my response. The pro hunting lobby is very strong in countries such as Canada. The decision to increase quotas in Davis Strait was certainly affected by pro hunters.”
Once again Ann you have failed to back up your underhanded and dishonest assertions about Polar Bear hunting quotas being increased due to sports hunts.
You have not taken your concerns to the Nunavut Government and you plainly ignore any evidence that doesn’t back up your own narrow prejudice.
…and on top of that you offer no solutions only complications.
So, Ann for the sake of reciprocity and basic human respect, when are you turning over management of your back yard to the Inuit?
For the record, I am not Inuit, I do not hunt bears and I have no interest financial or otherwise in sports hunting so please don’t bother trying to waste our time asserting otherwise or using any other rhetorical diversions.
Ann:”Before responding to the comments I suggest that you have a BIG COCKTAIL and calm down a little…”
I do not use alcohol in that way and I find the recommendation to combat stress with alcohol a bit dodgy myself.
If you’re interested, when I feel the need, I go for a walk, or better yet, I go hunting.
Then again, you’re not stressing just depressing.
Now, Ann, if you’re going to continue making up lies and unfounded accusations, don’t be surprised if you get called on it.
” I think it should be allowed to do so in peace without the interference of folks like you, Lamna and Libby breathing down there necks from a thousand miles away and with no knowledge of the local ecology, social structures, politics etc.”
I don’t understand anything, you’re the strangest guy I have ever ” met ” on the Internet!!!!
You have asked me about six times to respond to your comments and when doing so you ask why we interfere in your domestic politics!!!
I give up now….
‘take refuge in racist cultural attacks’ – IceClass
Hmmm.. ‘racist’ eh? –
‘Stop being snowed by non-indigenous corporate interests pretending to be your friend with one hand and stealing your heritage and your resources with the other…
I have absolutely no problem with sustainable, aboriginal commercial hunting rights, using humane methods under independent scientific monitoring which excludes the rapacious industrialised processing of wild resources by non-indigenous commerce.
If there was no non-indigenous seal hunt there would be no problem identifying Inuit pelts…
I am fully aware of the finite resources available to First Nation citizens in the Arctic and I want to see them protected for the commercial benefit of First Nation citizens…
If you think you bargain from a position of weakness then you create a self-fulfilling prophesy.. stop being a victim on behalf of corporate greed and start living up to your proud heritage…’ – Lamna
Nope, no ‘racist attacks’ there, quite the contrary.. Did you mean the bit where I called you a wimp?.. Except being called a wimp isn’t racist either…
‘For the record, I am not Inuit’ – IceClass
I am dual national, British and Canadian, so stop disingenuously playing the race card..
‘I do not hunt bears and I have no interest financial or otherwise in sports hunting’ – IceClass
For someone who doesn’t hunt bears and has NO interest in sports hunting, you sure are spending a lot of time posting hunting polemic…
‘I go hunting’ – IceClass
Make your mind up IceClass.. I find your recommendation to combat stress by killing wildlife a bit dodgy…
>Sports hunts obviously are not a traditional part of Inuit culture but you already know that. It is in fact an economic adaptation that allows for the continuation of Inuit culture and brings in a cash component.
How is sports hunting a ‘continuation’ of culture IceMan? Because a local can drive out with a dog team and a rich westerner, point him to a polar bear and advise him when to pull the trigger?
>On top of that it pays for hunters to keep their skills, keep their dog teams, it provides employment that THEY consider culturally relevant (even if you don’t)and provides a whole bunch of benefits that THEY seem to value (even if you don’t).
Yeah, and some Pakistani families carry out honour killings as they value it too, even if the west doesn’t. So continue to truck out the culture banner even when the culture has become as tainted by other cultures as the rest of the world’s. I expect a ‘racist’ label from you for this, but if you cared to see the hypocrisy of you arguments for a moment…
What about the ivory trinkets for sale courtesy of the walrus and narwhal hunts? These little cultural items (which you tried to make out were kept in homes not shops on a previous thread) are sold for huge prices. Sure the culture is kept in the killing, but the carvings change hands for huge sums and get put on bookshelves – probably in the homes of those gullible Euro housewives.
IceMan wrote:
>I do not use alcohol in that way and I find the recommendation to combat stress with alcohol a bit dodgy myself.
IceMan wrote:
>’I do not hunt bears and I have no interest financial or otherwise in sports hunting’
If you’re interested, when I feel the need, I go for a walk, or better yet, I go hunting.
Note to hypocrisy comment above. I don’t think you are sure which planet you are from.
IceClass: I make these comments not to an Inuit but to a culture in transition. I was going to head up with thoughts on “plastic” bears but first a confession or two.
I was a collector, angler, hunter and woodcutter. I willingly crushed the skulls of squawking fat chicks dragged from burrows on remote islands etc but what I regret most was my inadequate documentation of things important. Sailing ketches, the local wooden hulled fishing fleet, and intimate forestry all disappeared under my nose. In the end, I even lost access to family records, photos and tradition.
Today I am a bear collector, vintage Stieff, Shuco, Herman, German whatever to Jakas. Sure, there are live big brown bears in the Zoo down the road but I can’t possess them.
A trophy hunter survives adequately on the contents of garage sales. Good private collections can start another museum. This week we have an unrestored Cobb & Co stagecoach displayed at the National. Now that was sustainable transport!
Back to the numbers: In working for industry I started to use manual measurements but it was a long time before we started to redesign the systems to suit new ventures like tourism. Early on, I got others to write articles and books on changing culture including grazing the high country, sand mining and so on. On reflection, properly mapping the asset it seems came last.
Direct visual sightings are the basis of all manual methods. After a while, it was easy to employ a pilot with local knowledge to fly a strip between two fixed points and have a couple of observers photograph everything that moved. Circling the targets with your face and cameras hanging for ages in the slipstream was the only hard part.
There were some tricks like tossing a roll of toilet paper out over interesting scrub for ground parties to find later. We can also build imaginary grids similar to search and rescue missions. Recording activities and ground parties from the air this way is also revealing.
Building a reference library with photography is rewarding. This eventually becomes the greatest asset for grounding all the stories in books. We have then made another transition.
Please: No plastic bears after ice on the marsh!
More red herrings and personal attacks from the arbiter of world culture, Travis; but not surprisingly nothing to back up assertions that sports hunts are pushing Bear quotas upwards and endangering the population.
I’m still waiting for Ann to back up her underhanded lies and distortions n’all as well as for Libby to show me how whale teeth are creating a run on the international market and endangering whales.
Travis, I’m sure a Rolls Royce sells for a lot of money but no one is stupid enough to make out that the assembly line workers are millionaires because of it.
Your comments on the Arctic economy are as ignorant and as daft as Lamna’s comments on native land claims and resources.
It’s a sure sign of a paucity of argument if you’re down to making cultural attacks and belittlements.
It’s obvious that our hypocritical bunny huggers here can’t make an environmental case so they have to resort to some pretty low stuff.
It’s very telling and fits the historical record over and over again.
Gavin, have you researched how they count Polar bears, they fly grids too.
” So, go ahead, show me how Polar Bear quotas were increased to expand the sports hunts.
I challenge you.
But I won’t hold my breath.
Too much like facts and not enough “feeling” no doubt.” – IceClass
As I live in a hunting nation myself I’m actually quite familiar with the policy that drives increased quotas of bears and other predators.
One very common argument is there are more sightings and more human wildlife encounters which leads to conflicts. The usual arguments are often very emotive, such as the predators are threatening the children.
As for the correlation between increased quotas and increased quotas for sports hunting, a Canadian paper wrote that increased polar bear quotas meant as well increased sport hunt quotas.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/01/10/polar-bear-hunt050110.html
Travis:”I expect a ‘racist’ label from you for this, but if you cared to see the hypocrisy of you arguments for a moment…”
Yes, Travis, your comments and position are indeed, fundementaly racist and you fail to demonstrate hypocrisy on my behalf.
Travis:”These little cultural items (which you tried to make out were kept in homes not shops on a previous thread)…”
These “little cultural items” are what we call Art and please stop lying to make your (very poor) arguments i did not say that we keep walrus teeth in homes and not in shops, I said that walrus teeth are available if anyone wanted them, that I have a family member carve them for me and that I do not sell them.
It was just to show that walrus teeth are indeed available and are not causing some inevitable slippery slope of dangerous trade as Libby seems to make out.
Just as, I might add, Polar bears can be worth a lot of money but as I’ve mentioned many times here, not all bears are sold for money. Only a small fraction and we have no poaching.
Kinda blows all those convenient slippery slope arguments out the window don’t it?
🙂
BTW, it was reported this week that two bears were killed during the Davies Strait bear count. Sounds like they were darted from a helicopter prior to being tagged and leapt back into the water before the drug took effect. They then drowned.
As a result, the community of Pangnirtung have had two bear tags removed from their quota and as per procedure, the Nunavut Government pays the community Hunters and Trappers organisation a fee of $5000 per bear.
Community members are obviously unhappy and this just adds to the existing tensions between community and wildlife management agencies.
On a good note, the Canadian Government has decided to take it’s complaint with Belgium and the Netherlands regressive ban on seal products to the WTO.
Good news!
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2007/09/26/sealwto.html
“Beware poisoned chalices, TTD is the least important of the arguments concerning commercial whaling and the one most easily subverted by pro international commercial whaling pundits… ‘Cultural tradition’ is a favorite war cry of the pro-commercial whaling faction but ‘tradition’ requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats….. They cannot have it both ways and if aboriginal whaling is ‘modernised’, the pro commercial whaling lobby will say: ‘See how they are whaling exactly like us, it is not an ‘aboriginal’ hunt at all! How dare the USA lecture us at the IWC! Hypocrisy! Hypocrisy!’… ‘Time to death of your food critter is NOT an environmental issue.’ – Posted by: IceClass at August 22, 2007 11:44 PM
Beware poisoned chalices….
” ‘Cultural tradition’ is a favorite war cry of the pro-commercial whaling faction but ‘tradition’ requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats….. They cannot have it both ways ”
Posted by: Lamna nasus at August 25, 2007 06:31
PM ”
“I have absolutely no problem with sustainable, aboriginal commercial hunting rights, using humane methods under independent scientific monitoring which excludes the rapacious industrialised processing of wild resources by non-indigenous commerce.”
Posted by: Lamna nasus at September 27, 2007 03:53 AM
Huh?
So tradition requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats and you have no problem with humane methods being used – a hand held harpoon is more humane compared to a penthricite grenade is it?
Make up your mind …
” They cannot have it both ways ”
but you can huh?
…and what the hell is “non-indigenous commerce”??
Good news on another front the UK’s Environment Minister Hilary Benn was challenged on his comments to the Independent on Sunday where he came out in support of a ban.
He’s now backpeddling and is no longer in support of such a ban.
I suppose really, that the Inuit should just put a bloody great fence around the north and call it a free range and organic farm then they should just move to displace wildlife with a few chemical factories and Honda assembly plants that way they’d fit the cultural norms that Ann, Travis and co find so acceptable.
To follow behind George’s comments: discussions around indigenous hunting always end up going off on dissections of the hunters culture (never the culture of those raising the objections) and more often than not the accusers use tools and implements as their baromoter of culture.
A couple of weeks ago, a local hunter got himself a brand new Sea-Doo jetski and announced his intention to use it as a hunting platform.
There was initially a lot of fears from other local hunters but the young guy took off one afternoon and came back with a whale.
He was able to use the speed of the jet ski to get on top of the whale and could then use his toggle head harpoon attached to a jerry can as a float.
So, in this case the technology allows the use of a harpoon again and even though this means the animal’s TTD may be longer than an animal that was shot, the harpoon helps ensure that the animal is not lost.
Of course, those with no local knowledge and stuck in the usual cataclysm mode will be picturing hordes of blood thirsty Eskimos tearing a cross the waters in fleets of Jet propelled rocket launching sea-doos the reality on the ground is different.
Culture is important here not as an excuse to defend their hunting practices but as an illustration of what actually takes place on the ground and what good and long term conservation planning needs to take into account in order to be successful.
Methinks you suffer from some schizoaffective disease, IceClass!
Ann: “As for the correlation between increased quotas and increased quotas for sports hunting, a Canadian paper wrote that increased polar bear quotas meant as well increased sport hunt quotas.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/01/10/polar-bear-hunt050110.html“
Ann, that article in no way shows any correlation between revenue from sports hunts and the quota increase.
As I’ve pointed out many times before, no one needs to increase quotas to increase bears available to sports hunters.
Out of a quota of around six hundred bears, there’s only a hundred or so going to sports hunts.
This leaves another 500 plus to draw from WITHOUT any increase in quotas being needed.
I really don’t know how to make this any simpler for you.
Hi Iceclass,
There tends to be a condecending attitude that a culture cannot / is not “allowed ” adapt or evolve….
Maybe it does´nt fit with a “romantic ” ideal of ” traditional ” Inuit hunting ( whatever that originally was / is ) one man and his canoe alone in nature against the elements and all that crap…. beats me – I´ve never understood it…
Cultures, be they Inuit or otherwise, evolve in many ways, some traditions/ methods are kept, others discarded over time … to deny a culture the right to choose what traditions they keep / adapt/ modify/ discard is the worst kind of arrogant cultural imperialism..
Here´s an interesting paper on the introduction of penthrite grenades in Alaskan Inuit hunts ( published 1995 )
http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic48-2-177.pdf
“as well as for Libby to show me how whale teeth are creating a run on the international market and endangering whales.”
“and are not causing some inevitable slippery slope of dangerous trade as Libby seems to make out.”
Please don’t misrepresent and change what I wrote to suit your arguments IceClass. Any “caustic response” from me is as a result of such tactics.
“to deny a culture the right to choose what traditions they keep / adapt/ modify/ discard is the worst kind of arrogant cultural imperialism..”
In Utopia George, this would be true, but the word has changed and become smaller due to travel and technology. Outside influences infiltrate just about every corner of the globe. People nowadays can feel that hey should have a say on global issues such as human rights, education and conservation. Whilst some attempts at change may be seen as “cultural imperialism’ (something humans have carried out throughout their entire existence), hanging on to some traditional practices (particularly when they have become hybridized with outsider ways) may not be seen in the best interests (socially and more) of a global community. As I said, the world has changed.
Iceclass: Since we have established grids and bear counts exist, there can be no official doubt about numbers going one way or another. What is the true situation?
I bet the B/S exists only for the hunting lobby.
In a declining bear population, zoom lens shots are worth more in the long run than high powered rifle shots. In a rising people population tourism is ultimately worth more than bear hunting or have I really got the bull by the tail on this lot?
BTW: The idea of a highly motivated Inuit hunting a big rogue male with a hand held harpoon today greatly amuses me.
Georgie’s straw man rhetoric is as full of holes as ever.. the Inuit do not hunt bears with harpoons and boats or penthrite grenades.. McAhab has spent too long on whaling threads.. shoddy attempt at thread hijacking Georgie, you missing me again?
” Ann, that article in no way shows any correlation between revenue from sports hunts and the quota increase.” – IceClass
Nowhere have I made that statement so please stop putting words in my mouth that I have never said..
What I have said is that the Inuits want to expand hunting quotas as well as sports hunting quotas!!!! Exactly what the article stated…
As for solutions to bring in revenues to the community whitout killing polar bears for tourist , you can follow the Norwegian example.
They are going to arrange non lethal polar bear safaris to tourists in Svalbard from next summer.
They are going to be very exclusive and expensive , a cruiser will bring the tourist to Svalbard then a local guide takes over…
Seems as a good way to make revenues from polar bears!
You are so full of blah , blah… you mentioned the hunters needed the hunts to keep their hunting skills up to date , but the next thing you say that the quota tourist is minimal compared to the aboriginal one!!!
As for your argument that the animal protest industry wants to ban sealing and bear hunting. First of all the animal protest industry is NOT against aboriginal hunting.
Secondly, your argument that banning sealing and bear hunting will have a knock-off impact on narwhals and walrus’s populations is AN VERY OLD TIRED CLICHE that most industries express.
It is well known from the fisheries , if conservationists want to put some endangered species under moratoria then the industry responds that this will have the mentioned knock off impact on other fish species. Try with something new please!
Re the seal hunt. In Norway nowadays the seal hunt seems more or less only be symbolic to keep traditions alive and to kill seals to save fisheries.
Only 5 sealing boats participate in the hunt , which is subsidized with 15 million NOK.
In an article I read that Norwegians want to sell seal products to Canada!! Yes, it’s true…so IceClass can figure out from this how big and realistic the seal product market really !
Correction: “….figure out how big and realistsic the seal product market really is”.
” .. the Inuit do not hunt bears with harpoons and boats or penthrite grenades ”
Glad you noticed —- your statement was
”
I have absolutely no problem with sustainable, aboriginal commercial hunting rights, using humane methods ”
which of course includes all animals hunted – it´s noted that you attempted to squirm out of your condesention – rather disengenious but wtf.. what else is new?
care to answer the question? or should i rephrase that to:
“So tradition requires spears and you have no problem with humane methods being used – a hand held spear is more humane compared to a high powered rifle is it?”
After all, spears are traditional Patrick, Right?
So which is it it Batty? tradition or humane? ( or Patricks third way – squirm out of a direct answer )
” I suppose really, that the Inuit should just put a bloody great fence around the north and call it a free range and organic farm then they should just move to displace wildlife with a few chemical factories and Honda assembly plants that way they’d fit the cultural norms that Ann, Travis and co find so acceptable” – IceClass
As always IceClass is totally out of proportions but to shock IceClass and maybe some environmentalists I do think that something radical is needed for the Inuit communities that suffer from a social breakdown, high suicde rates, high unemployment rates etc.
So perhaps what is really needed is that some national small scale industries out sources some small scale industries to Inuit country to bring down the social misery?????
I think a lot of the coments being made are based on peoples lack of knowlage about hunting in the arctic and propoganda spread by anti hunting groups.
The belief that a hunter goes hunting just to get a trophy is wrong. For the majoriy of hunters the trophy is a reminder of the experiance, the trophy is not the main concideration and I dont think anyone would purchase a replica trophy instead of doing the real thing. Polar bear hunters must use traditional dog teams for the hunt and also camp out in a very dificult environment. Most hunters who have paid their $50,000 for their hunt also want to get a large bear and will always only shoot a male. I have heard of many who would rather go home without shooting a bear than get anything other than a large one, as it is the experiance of the hunt and dificulty which gives the experiance satisfaction.
Trophy hunting of large males also increases the survival of cubs as male bears are a major preditor of bear cubs.
The Australian government is very anti hunting and does not respect other counturies managment of their animal resourses. They dont allow import of any polar bear parts.
The elephant situation in Africa is similar. Counturies where hunting is regulated are having trouble with overpopulation due the income recieved from hunters controling poaching. Countries like Kenya have had 70% decline in wildlife in the last 30 years due to a hunting bann causing a poaching epidemic, while Souh Africa and Zimbarbwe have had both hunting and large wildlife increases in number. I read recently that the large number of elephants are deforestating areas critical to some species of vulture for nesting and may cause their extinction. The Aus govennment still has a bann on the import of elephant parts as well.
Banning polar bear hunting would just mean Inuit comunities would loose large parts of their income and drive uncontroled poaching.
Hi Goodoo,
Thanks for your interesting comment.
Yes, in trophy hunting , hunters are keen on big , male animals.
Unfortunately , the animals are the alpha males that are the most important ones for the genetics . This means often that the species lose their best breeding animals.
As for wildlife in Zimbabwe , you are totally wrong. There is a big depletion of wildlife in national parks and reseves due to the political instability in the country.
As for my support for a ban of polar bear trophy hunting this has to do with
1) Polar bear populations are not doing very well according to IUCN
2) Encourage sports or trophy hunting will as well give the wrong signals to collectors that might start collect tiger, leopard pelts, yoou name it…
3) The alpha males are killed
Hi Libs,
“In Utopia George, this would be true, but the word has changed and become smaller due to travel and technology. Outside influences infiltrate just about every corner of the globe. People nowadays can feel that hey should have a say on global issues such as human rights, education and conservation. Whilst some attempts at change may be seen as “cultural imperialism’ (something humans have carried out throughout their entire existence), hanging on to some traditional practices (particularly when they have become hybridized with outsider ways) may not be seen in the best interests (socially and more) of a global community. As I said, the world has changed.”
in particular :
“People nowadays can feel that hey should have a say on global issues such as human rights, education and conservation.”
People nowdays can feel all they want Libs, still does´nt give them the right to deny a culture ( in this case, of the inuit ) the ability to modify or adapt their traditional hunt whilst still maintaining their traditional spiritual aspect…
Sure, the world is constantly changing Libs, but denying the inuit the right to modify or adapt their culture as they see fit, especially in view of producing a more humane kill of whichever species being hunted is quite simply wrong..
Feel free to disagee of course 😉
So IceClass, I’m just curious since I have contradicting information about polar bear hunts and dog teams and snow mobiles. Some reports say that snow mobiles are prefered to dog teams, so what’s right???
” ..I dont think anyone would purchase a replica trophy instead of doing the real thing” -Goodoo
Well, my suggestion to produce fake polar bear pelts stands ( they must be very natural with a head/ skull as well). But my target group should not be trophy hunters.
Maybe the Inuits could get some community help to establish a small scale ” replica plant” and advertise its products ( that maybe should be of an exclusive limited suply) to tourists and the US and European markets.
Hey, me would love to have a fake polar bear fur with head in my dinning room , I would be the first one to buy one !
The Inuits could as well produce some ” teddy bear polar bears” for the market. Personally , I would try to sell them in Germany, since they have a polar bear hysteria in the country , the Knut -fever, from an orphaned polar bear cub in the Berlin Zoo.
If I was a business woman I would try to arrange travels ( similar to the Norwegian ones) to Inuit country ( non lethal polar bear safaris).
As far as I know there is a HUGE demand after such polar bear safaris in Europe!
The coment on Zim was before the current government trouble where wildlife has been decimated by poaching due a lack of food. Previously before Magarbee completly lost his marbles poaching was controled and animal numbers were very good.
I have been to the artic in summer on a camping, hiking holiday and have talked to many Inuit including some who take out paying Polar Bear hunters. It is a legal requirment to use dog teams while hunting and to camp out on the ice. Where I was other than the ocational pet huskie the only dog teams where those used by polar bear hunters. Without the income from paying hunts they would not be able to aford to keep their dog teams fed and the tradition of dog teams would be lost.
“BTW: The idea of a highly motivated Inuit hunting a big rogue male with a hand held harpoon today greatly amuses me.
Posted by: gavin at September 28, 2007 08:14 AM”
Amuses me too – I vote we let Patrick show us and the Inuit how it´s done so that they can get back to their “traditional” ways ( according to pat )
Still trying to disseminate your disingenuous anti-aboriginal whale hunting propaganda, eh George?.. on a thread about Polar bear populations…
‘Cultural tradition’ is a favorite war cry of the pro-commercial whaling faction but ‘tradition’ requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats…’ – Lamna
How many of the current Norwegian fleet are sailing ships used to launch rowing boats containing whalers using hand held harpoons?.. None…
‘TTD is the least important of the arguments concerning commercial whaling and the one most easily subverted by pro international commercial whaling pundits…’ – Lamna
As George has just demonstrated…
Back to topic, which is Polar Bear populations and sustainablity –
‘Trends in Canadian polar bear populations.
(extracted from IUCN 2006, Polar Bear Specialist Group Proceedings from 2005 meeting). Much of the data in the IUCN Proceedings were provided by the Government of Nunavut which participated fully in the production of the status report.
To summarize the above table:
Of the 13 Canadian polar bear populations, the current trends for the 11 populations not known to be severely reduced from historic levels are:
five populations declining,
five populations stable and
one population is data deficient.
In the next 10 years, five polar bear populations have an estimated high/very high risk of decline, six have a low/very low risk and there is currently no estimate for two populations.’ – Ann
The topic is Polar bears AND inuit hunting Batty.. I´m sure if Paul thinks its off topic he´ll delete it like he did your ad hominem sniping post yesterday 😉
Soooo, Once again, which is it?
your statement was
“I have absolutely no problem with sustainable, aboriginal commercial hunting rights, using humane methods ”
and you also stated :
” ” ‘Cultural tradition’ is a favorite war cry of the pro-commercial whaling faction but ‘tradition’ requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats….. They cannot have it both ways ”
Which is it? What do you actually beleive in ( if anything, rather than just having an agenda that is )
Let me spell it out for you
If “Tradition” requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats (actually, it would be skin boats/kayaks/canoes ) whilst hunting whales, “tradition” must also require non modern hunting equipment whilst hunting other prey such as polar bears, Walrus, seals etc…
It´s noted that, you are of course, trying to condecendingly dictate to the inuit what weapons and methods they can or cannot use during their hunts
Or are you simply lying through your teeth with the statements you made above and you don´t believe those statements you made to be true?
If however, you made a mistake and meant something else entirely, then by all means, feel free to explain to the readers what you actually DID mean .. I´m sure they are all ears…
Whilst you are at it, you could also adress these questions :
“So tradition requires hand held harpoons and rowing boats and you have no problem with humane methods being used – a hand held harpoon is more humane compared to a penthrite grenade is it?”
and
“So tradition requires spears and you have no problem with humane methods being used – a hand held spear is more humane compared to a high powered rifle is it?”
After all, spears are traditional Patrick, Right?
So which is it it Batty? tradition or humane? ”
Patricks third way – squirm out of a direct answer has already been proven ;O)
It´s rather simple Batty, according to your statements above, If tradition requires hand held harpoons and skin boats whilst hunting whales, then of course, tradition requires similar “antiquated” methods in hunting other prey… and never mind about whether its humane or not
The converse is also true, If humaneness is the priority, modern technology used in conjunction with traditional methods, whist still retaining the traditional spiritual element would be the optimal solution.
It´s noted that you try to deny the inuit this option wth your statements…
Oops, missed this question From Patrick Batty ..
“How many of the current Norwegian fleet are sailing ships used to launch rowing boats containing whalers using hand held harpoons?.. None…”
Ummm.. well spotted -not – note that the subject here is Inuit Patrick 😉
– or are you seriously trying to tell us that you only apply your definition of tradition to modern day whalers and NOT to the Inuit Batty?
Do make up your mind Sport
George: Let’s ratchet up the standard for an exciting modern bear shoot.
Get one vintage dog sled and unarmed Inuit driver. Take one only TZ2 or 3 with 10 x Leica zoom, one only 250 m SD card, one only Lumix battery pack then grab a good close up of bear eyes square on before dark, repeat shooting for tooth count, then determine the age of targets in every case after a week of playing big white hunter.
Seriously; I have a lot of respect for those who can relate one to one with dumb creatures.
One night after poaching trout in a private stream I took my catch on the short cut through paddocks in the moonlight with out a torch. Swishing wet grass behind me alerted me to a large stalker and one smaller following. I felt the droplets and hot breath on my neck. I also felt the clinking nose chain behind my knees. Don’t turn, don’t run!
Ages later, I reached the extra stiff barbed wire fence and scaled it like a monkey after leaving both rods in the bull paddock. Jerseys on the neighbouring farm had killed the father on my school palls.
I can stare down a big guard dog or two and cower a police defence mutt marking my stuff but I have no idea on how we stand with bears. A cobber faced a big brown in the Rockies as he went for a quick relief out of sight of his borrowed car up the road. We guessed Bruno standing was probably as tall as the mate since he had the wit to use his swinging 35mm in retreat.
I guess a tourist takes chances everywhere these days but the best thing about having a TZ or equivalent, it should be handy in the shirt pocket at all times. A good picture can save a thousand words.
Gavin,
Re Tz´s or equivalent, here´s been a few folk eaten by PB´s in the last few years, I remember one young woman from Oslo on Spitsbergen and another was a professional Wildlfe Photographer from Japan with years of experience with PB´s … they got him in his tent as far as I can remember.
On Svalbard ( Spitsbergen ) Once you see a polar bear You´re required by law to stop going in its direction and you are not allowed to approach it at all …All good stuff – other wise the sisselman ( governor ) smacks yer fingers rather severely.
I have seen a documentry by a norwegian Filmer who spent part of a winter on Franz -josef land ( I think it was ) with a russian guy … the russian guy was one serious alapha male – if PB´s approached the hut / camp – he´d go out and chase them away with a long chunk of driftwood … the bears just could´nt figure him out … so when in doubt – try whacking em on the nose with a bit o two by Four and see what happens :O)
Sad end for young polar bear:
http://www.svalbardposten.no/nyhet.cfm?nyhetid=938
Russian scientists killed a 2 year old polar bear that got too near them ( 10 metres) . According to the Russians they had tried to scare the PB away ( with some shots) but the PB didn’t care, so finally they had to shot the PB. ( It was in July).
PS. George, don’t want to be picky but it’s the sysselman;-)!!!! So you can impress your Norwegian friends!!!
Check out the link…
Don’t know how to react when you encounter a PB, but when you meet a brown bear , try to walk away calmly. If this doesn’t help , try to lie down and be immobile. Make yourself as little as possible.( Very easy to say). For the first time over 100 years a brown bear killed a human in Scandinavia last year.
Another story that I heard from a hunter was that one huner was attacked by a brown bear and reared so he kicked the bear in the the genitalia and the bear run away !
Link to George:
http://www.snf.se/verksamhet/djur-natur/rovdjur-bjorn-mote.htm
I would not camp or hike in an area with PB unless there was at least two of us with guns. PB do not aproach because they are curious or to chase you off like other bears they approach to eat. Before the Inuit got guns and solid buildings they were often eaten by bears. I have read of cases where bears broke into less than solid homes and killed and ate whole families.
Before I camped in the artic I cheacked with locals how close the closest PB was. As it was summer I was asured that it was 250km. I was not very woried camping down south in areas with Brown and Black bears. Being an Ausie who is used to being at the top of the food chain I was still a bit concerned.
Hi again Goodoo,
“Without the income from paying hunts they would not be able to aford to keep their dog teams fed and the tradition of dog teams would be lost.”- Goodoo
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….
As for the dog teams they are fed mostly with whale meat and blubber as I have understood…
‘he´ll delete it like he did your ad hominem sniping post yesterday’ – George
You are of course referring to my censored posts responding to the article – Greenpeace Rumbled – which included the quote by Mr Moore – ‘They (Greenpeace’ s new management) have become far more extreme, their politics little more than neo-Marxism in green garb.’ – an accusation that apparently was OK to post; but my verifiable details of the long term Marxist activities of the Scientific Alliance’s Scientific Advisory Forum member, Bill Durodié (who is not a scientist).. which interestingly were not OK to post…
“You are of course referring to my censored posts responding to the article”
No actually, I was referring to the personal attack or sniping tone you used in the post – pretty much the kind of personal attack you use on all posters you disagree with….
Thing is Patrick, you are perfectly capable of holding your own in a discussion without those kind of personal attacks and ad hom tactics … they are simply not neccessary .. but for whatever reason, you choose that road instead…
your choice of course…
As to the censorship stuff ..
Is´nt this on your own blog?
“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)”
I get the impression that:
“the ‘right’ to abuse others and behave like a muppet is not. I will edit offensive material.
Moderator’s judgement is final! :o)”
Is Precisely what Paul did …
You are of course, free to disagree ;O)
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.
‘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…
“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
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…
‘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.
” Completely unverifiable rhetoric.. ” – Lamna
I know that George has provided photographies to WWF, Greenpeace and RSPCA…
‘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.
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.
Where abouts do you reside IceClass, and if you don’t mind me asking, what sort of work do you do?
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