A lone polar bear on an iceberg. This year’s Wildlife Photographer of the Year People’s Choice Award winner is, in many ways, a photo we have seen before. It is a peaceful scene, with the slumbering bear reminiscent of a contented house cat. Yet it is a reminder that all life depends on ecosystems that are growing increasingly fragile as the planet heats with our greenhouse gas emissions.
A new study underscores the same message of fragility through images of polar bears in a landscape we rarely envisage — terrain completely devoid of snow or ice. Researchers tracked 20 bears in Manitoba, Canada, equipping them with video collars to monitor activity levels and food intake. There is a lesson for us all in the surprising and sobering results.
Polar bears in this region have long become land-based during ice-free periods and the time spent without sea ice — periods when they cannot hunt their usual prey — is getting longer. In the 1980s, they would be on land for about 110 days. That has since increased by three weeks, and is only expected to get longer thanks to the climate crisis (the arctic is warming roughly four times faster than the planet as a whole).
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
While on shore, bears were thought to fast, conserving precious energy until the sea ice returned. However, the study showed differences in survival strategies between individuals. Some did not seek sustenance. The laziest bear rested for 98 percent of the time — making lead author Anthony Pagano’s job of watching 115 hours of video footage a slog at points. Others were surprisingly active, moving across the landscape and consuming a range of terrestrial foods including bird carcasses, duck eggs, berries and seaweed.
It did not really matter what strategies the bears employed. Apart from one lucky nanuk who was able to feed on a large mammal, all of them lost body mass. While land-based fodder compensated for the energy expended seeking it out, berries and birds do not sustain a polar bear. They are simply too big, US Geological Survey research wildlife biologist Pagano says. The implication is that if the ice-free period extends for long enough, the bear population in the area would starve.
The animals were more active than expected, which raises a few extra risks. The first is knock-on effects for seabird colonies and other land-based creatures, who might end up getting preyed upon more than they are used to.
The other big consequence is that, in their search for food, hungry bears might wind up in human settlements, including communities not accustomed to having apex predators in their backyards. That makes the development of management techniques to keep both bears and humans safe crucial.
Contrary to the researchers’ expectations, there was no correlation between energy expenditure and body condition. In other words, the driver behind the different tactics is individual-level variation: Some bears might simply be lazier than others.
Pagano told me that there were some behaviors with no clear explanation. Three individuals, for instance, spent between 10 percent and 16 percent of their time swimming, an energy-intensive activity for the world’s largest living bear species.
Even though two out of three did find marine mammal carcasses, looking at the wind speed and direction, Pagano and his team concluded it was unlikely they could smell food in the water from the shore.
One young female meanders along in the water before she presumably catches the scent of a beluga whale carcass, makes a sharp turn eastwards and continues swimming along a much straighter line. However, the deceased did not end up serving as a meal — the bear was only observed feeding on it for 35 seconds out of the six hours she spent with it — but as a buoy to rest on. In total, the bear swam 175km for little gain. Similarly, when an adult female who found a seal carcass out at sea attempted to bring it to shore, she eventually dropped it during her swim after only feeding on it for a total of 20 seconds.
There is no knowing why these three bears swam so far, but it put them at a disadvantage: They each had the earliest predicted time of starvation for their respective age and gender.
There is a tendency to believe animals have an unimpeachable survival instinct — that a species would behave, as a group, in the same, optimal way. However, just as humans are not always the rational actors some economists model us to be, neither are animals. This does not make them stupid, but speaks instead to their intelligence: Each bear is trying to creatively solve the puzzle of how to stay alive in a challenging scenario.
Some behavior, such as the long swims, could be categorized as maladaptation, which humans also fall prey to. In trying to adapt to the climate crisis, projects could actually make us more vulnerable or simply waste resources. For example, we keep building higher flood barriers, only to see the water redirected to an area without protections or have them breached as climate change intensifies storms. In some cases, efforts to make farming resilient to drought actually made the farms less water-secure.
We do not know if those bears learned that swimming brings little reward. However, as humans, we have a unique advantage to avoid the same maladaptive mistakes: We could review our actions as well as the decisions of others, collecting data and modeling impacts to optimize our collective blueprint for survival in a changing world. We could also read studies about polar bears — and vow both to learn from their behavior and protect them.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS