Academic Progress Report Due Date: March 25, 2016: Fill & Download for Free

No. No. No. There are no poor starving polar bears from global warming. There is evidence there are too many bears and this could explain the Russian story.When deer, wolves or bears grow too fast they often become a threat to nearby human populations. The result is culling of the herds to get a better balance. I remember when Canadian wolves were introduced into Wyoming to cull the over multiplied deer population. The result was positive. Canadian Inuit hunting of Polar bears which has been ongoing for centuries has the same effect.Take a good look at the Russian bears and the evidence is strong they are healthy and not starving but they will always prefer a free meal to the rigours of hunting their own prey.No, climate change hasn’t driven polar bears to take over a Russian townAnthony Watts / 2 days ago February 11, 2019Dr. Susan Crockford writes:The MSM have gone mad for this story today. I wrote up a post yesterday debunking the AGW claim.Polar bears have been terrorizing a Russian town on the Barents Sea since DecemberLarge group of polar bears at the Belushya Guba town dump on Novaya Zemlya, Russia. From the 11 Feb. 2019 story at The Daily MailSince early December, a group of 52 polar bears have terrorized the Russian village of Belushaya Guba on southern Novaya Zemlya. The aggressiveness of some of the bears, their boldness in entering local buildings and fearlessness in the face of the usual deterrents has caused the local government to call a state of emergency to help the town residents.Global warming is blamed for the problem but as is so often the case, that claim does not stand up to scrutiny.BARENTS SEA BEARS ARE THRIVINGAccording to recent research results, despite low ice cover since 2016, the population of polar bears around Svalbard and presumably in the Barents Sea as a whole are still increasing, as they recover from decades of over-hunting in the 19th and 20th centuries (Aars 2018; Aars et al. 2009, 2017; Crockford 2017).This incident of winter problems with polar bears and others like it reported from the Russian Arctic, almost certainly reflect the confluence of a growing human presence in the Arctic and thriving polar bear populations, not lack of sea ice due to global warming.Recall that explorer William Barents and his crew, who became stranded on the shore of northeast Novaya Zemlya over the winter of 1596-1597, had endless problems with polar bears (back when polar bears and sea ice were really abundant). That story provides an important perspective on this year’s troubles.Republished with permission of the author, originally published at https://polarbearscience.comhttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/11/no-climate-change-hasnt-driven-polar-bears-to-take-over-a-russian-town/Here are the facts -Polar bear populations healthy not dwindling.POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting OtherwiseNO other icon of ‘Global Warming’ epitomizes its very own false narrative like the polar bear does for ‘Climate Change’.WITH deadly irony, polar bear numbers have grown dramatically as carbon dioxide emissions have risen in lock-step. A CO2 correlation, at last!INDIGENOUS Inuit’s of Northern Canada are now facing the very real task of having to cull the population as “the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”*“Inuit believe there are now so many bears that public safety has become a major concern,”“Public safety concerns, combined with the effects of polar bears on other species, suggest that in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe, government document says | The Globe and Mail*https://climatism.blog/2019/01/17/climatism-2019-state-of-the-climate-report/Posted: January 22, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:polarbearscienceIn scanning comments generated by the recent flurry of internet interest in polar bears and blogs I noticed that a good many people, fed alarming media stories, are still convinced that polar bear numbers are declining rapidly when nothing could be further from the truth.In some cases, the media have made a possible future problem sound like a current problem. In others, people are remembering data from 2010 or so, not realizing that the picture has changed — or they assume that a conservation status of ‘threatened’ or ‘vulnerable’ (e.g. Amstrup et al. 2007) must mean numbers are declining (because that’s true for virtually all species classified that way, except polar bears).The sea ice situation hasn’t really improved or deteriorated since 2007 but the polar bear picture is much better: there is information on more subpopulations and studies show most are holding stable or increasing (Aars et…https://climatism.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/polar-bear-numbers-not-declining-despite-media-headlines-suggesting-otherwise/← Histrionics over Arctic temperatures & sea ice extent: implications for polar bearsDr. Susan J. Crockford Polar bear scientist U of VictoriaState of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingPosted on February 27, 2018 | Comments Offon State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingMy new report reveals that polar bears are doing well despite recent reductions in sea-ice. It shows in details why this is so, with summaries of critical recent research.Press release and pdf below. And read my op-ed in the National Post here.polar bears can survive a complete or nearly complete fast from June to late November (and pregnant females from June to early April the following year). That’s the beauty of their Arctic adaptation: …Starvation is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears because if they cannot put on the fat they need in spring, they will not survive the low food months of summer and winter, whether they are on land or out on the sea ice (Amstrup 2003).Polar bear survival depends on the consumption of large numbers of fat, newborn seals that are only available in abundance from March to mid May (depending on the location and species of seal): after this time, fewer seals are available and are very hard to catch.FINANCIAL POSTPolar bears keep thriving even as global warming alarmists keep pretending they’re dyingSusan Crockford: Polar bears are flourishing, making them phony icons, and false idols, for global warming alarmistsA polar bear eats a piece of whale meat as it walks along the shore of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Man.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian PressSpecial to Financial PostSusan CrockfordFebruary 27, 20186:30 AM ESTOne powerful polar bear fact is slowly rising above the message of looming catastrophe repeated endlessly by the media: More than 15,000 polar bears have not disappeared since 2005. Although the extent of the summer sea ice after 2006 dropped abruptly to levels not expected until 2050, the predicted 67-per-cent decline in polar bear numbers simply didn’t happen. Rather, global polar bear numbers have been stable or slightly improved. The polar bear’s resilience should have meant the end of its use as a cherished icon of global warming doom, but it didn’t. The alarmism is not going away without a struggle.Part of this struggle involves a scientific clash about transparency in polar bear science. My close examination of recent research has revealed that serious inconsistencies exist within the polar bear literature and between that literature and public statements made by some researchers. For example, Canadian polar bear biologist Ian Stirling learned in the 1970s that spring sea ice in the southern Beaufort Sea periodically gets so thick that seals depart, depriving local polar bears of their prey and causing their numbers to plummet. But that fact, documented in more than a dozen scientific papers, is not discussed today as part of polar bear ecology. In these days of politicized science, neither Stirling nor his colleagues mention in public the devastating effects of thick spring ice in the Beaufort Sea; instead, they imply in recent papers that the starving bears they witnessed are victims of reduced summer sea ice, which they argued depleted the bears’ prey. There are also strong indications that thick spring-ice conditions happened again in 2014–16, with the impacts on polar bears being similarly portrayed as effects of global warming.The polar bear's resilience should have meant the end of its use as an icon of global warming doomOne reason that the 2007 predictions of future polar bear survival were so far off base is that the model developed by American biologist Steven Amstrup (now at Polar Bears International, an NGO) assumed any polar bear population decline would be caused by less summer ice, despite the Beaufort Sea experience. Moreover, Amstrup and fellow modelers were overly confident in their claim that summer ice was critical for the polar bear’s survival and they had little data on which to base their assumption that less summer ice would devastate the polar bears’ prey.Consequently, many scientists were surprised when other researchers subsequently found that ringed and bearded seals (the primary prey of polar bears) north of the Bering Strait especially thrived with a longer open-water season, which is particularly conducive to fishing: These seals do most of their feeding in summer. More food for seals in summer means more fat seal pups for polar bears to eat the following spring, a result that’s probably true throughout the Arctic.As long as polar bears have lots of baby seals to eat in spring, they get fat enough to survive even a longer-than-usual summer fast. And while it’s true that studies in some regions show polar bears are lighter in weight than they were in the 1980s, there is no evidence that more individuals are starving to death or becoming too thin to reproduce because of less summer ice.Not all bears get enough to eat in the spring, of course. Starvation has always been the leading natural cause of death for polar bears, due to a number of factors including competition, injury, tooth decay and illness. Some cancers induce a muscle-wasting syndrome that leads to faster-than-usual weight loss. This is likely what happened to the emaciated Baffin Island bear captured on video in July 2017 and promoted by National Geographic late last year. The videographers claimed it showed what starvation due to sea-ice loss looked like — an implausible conclusion given the time of year, the isolated nature of the incident, and the fact that sea ice that year was no more reduced than previously.That starving-bear video may have convinced a few more gullible people that only hundreds of polar bears are left in the world. But it also motivated others to locate the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List report for 2015 that estimated global polar bear numbers at somewhere between 22,000-31,000, or about 26,000, up slightly from 20,000-25,000, or about 22,500, in 2005. Newer counts not included in the 2015 assessment potentially add another 2,500 or so to the total. This increase may not be statistically significant, but it is decidedly not the 67-per-cent decline that was predicted given the ice conditions that prevailed.The failure of the 2007 polar bear survival model is a simple fact that explodes the myth that polar bears are on their way to extinction. Although starving-bear videos and scientifically insignificant research papers still make the news, they don’t alter the facts: Polar bears are thriving, making them phony icons, and false idols, for global warming alarmists.Susan Crockford, a zoologist and adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, is author of State of the Polar Bear Report 2017, released Tuesday. She will present her findings at Grounds for Thought in Toronto. www.susancrockford.comMy Published CommentJames Grant Matkin ·Arctic ice is stable and not melting away as predicted. Yes, polar bears are thriving, sea levels are not rising much if at all, Pacific islands are rising not sinking. The fear mongering of the alarmists is revealed as politics not science.“No matter if the science is all phony; there are collateral environmental benefits…. Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”Christine Stewart, former Minister of the Environment of CanadaThat Paris conference agenda got a useful boost from U.S. government agency scientists at NASA and NOAA who conveniently provided “warmest years ever” claims. Both have histories of stirring overheated global warming stew pots with alarming and statistically indefensible claims of recent “record high” temperatures.Global cooling from unstoppable solar cycles of dimimuished sunspots is rearing its ugly head as it did in the seventies. BEWARE cooling is a real threat.http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/polar-bears-keep-thriving-even-as-global-warming-alarmists-keep-pretending-theyre-dyingThis just in about increasing ice from falling temperatures annually.W. Hudson Bay Freeze-Up Earlier Than 1980’s Average For Third Year In RowNov 11, 2019This is the third year in a row that freeze-up of Western Hudson Bay (WH) ice has come earlier than the average of November 16 as documented in the 1980s.Reports by folks on the ground near Churchill confirm polar bears are starting to move onto the sea ice that’s developing along the shore after almost five months on land.After five good sea ice seasons in a row for WH polar bears, this repeat of an early freeze-up means a sixth good ice season is now possible for 2019-2020.Sadly for the tourists, however, it means the polar bear viewing season in Churchill will be ending early this year, just like it did last year and the year before.When mothers with cubs are out on the ice (see photo above), it’s pretty certain the mass movement from land to sea ice is well underway because these family units are usually the last to leave.CURRENT ICE CONDITIONSWeather in Churchill was very cold today, -36C with the wind chill. The slight moderation in temperature in the forecast for the rest of this week is still very conducive to ice formation:The Canadian Ice Service charts for 10 November 2018 below (the overall picture and the details for ice development in northern Hudson Bay) show the ice conditions last year at the time that bears left for the ice:Just to round out the comparison, below is the detailed ice development chart for 11 November 2017:W. Hudson Bay Freeze-Up Earlier Than 1980's Average For Third Year In RowPolar Bears & The Sleazy New York TimesPublished on April 16, 2018Written by Donna LaframboiseSPOTLIGHT: Journalistic professionalism evaporates in front of our eyes.BIG PICTURE: When historians document the demise of the mainstream media, an article published this week by the New York Times will make an excellent case study.Titled “Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back,” it’s written by Erica Goode who isn’t just any journalist. She’s a former Environment Editor of the Times. In 2009, she “founded and led a cluster of reporters dedicated to environmental reporting.” Currently, she’s a visiting professor at Syracuse University.Out here in the real world, a debate exists about polar bears. Will they be adversely affected by climate change or will they continue to adapt as they have historically?Since the future hasn’t yet arrived, it’s impossible to know whose opinions will turn out to be correct. But rather than presenting a range of perspectives to her readers, Goode takes sides. Apparently clairvoyant, she knows that experts concerned about the long term prospects of polar bears are correct. She knows that dissenting voices are wrong. No other possibility is conceivable within the confines of her exceedingly narrow mind.She doesn’t tell us that researchers with significant academic records and decades of experience can be found on both sides of this question. Instead, in the first sentence of her article, Goode negates all possibility that a legitimate debate might be in progress. Climate “denialists,” she declares, are “capitalizing” on the iconic status of polar bears “to spread doubts about the threat of global warming.”Goode knows the dissenters are playing politics. She knows their motives are profane. With a wave of her hand, she thus relieves herself of the obligation to take seriously these alternative viewpoints.People who think polar bears are currently doing well – a separate question from how they might fare in the future – are similarly labeled “climate denialists” by Goode in paragraph four. Individuals on the other side of the fence, meanwhile, are portrayed as “real experts” and “mainstream scientists.”Last November, a shocking paper was published online. It has now appeared in the print edition of the journal BioScience. Titled “Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate Change Denial by Proxy,” the PDF version fills five pages of text, followed by two pages of references. This is an assault by a gang of 14 authors on an individual scholar.The target is Susan Crockford, a Canadian zoologist and adjunct professor with more than 35 years experience in her field. As the author of PolarBearScience.com, Crockford performs a public service. She encourages us to look past activist spin and media hype. Not everything we’re told about polar bears, she says, rests on a solid foundation.While it’s appropriate for these 14 people to challenge Crockford’s assertions, their tone is anything but scholarly. This is five pages of name-calling. PolarBearScience.com is labeled a “denier blog” at the outset. So are online venues that cite Crockford’s work. The term ‘denial’ is used 9 times. ‘Denier’ 18 times. ‘Deniers’ 12 times.The entire exercise is brazenly political. This paper sends a message to everyone else: think twice before departing from the polar bear party line. Our ugly gang of bullies will come looking for you next.How does Goode present these events? Is 14 against one viewed as a tad unsporting? Does anyone in her article express astonishment that a naked political screed somehow got published in a peer-reviewed academic journal? Is free inquiry lauded? The importance of vigorous scientific debate championed?I’m afraid not. She’s an extension of the gang, you see. Smugly certain that Crockford is a ‘climate denier,’ Goode considers this female scholar in a male-dominated field unworthy not only of a hearing, but of empathy, as well.According to Goode, the 14 are merely “scientists banding together against climate change denial.” She quotes Michael Oppenheimer: “Some climate scientists basically have had enough of being punching bags.” Voilà, the victim is transformed into an aggressor who deserves what she got.Goode tells us Oppenheimer is “a professor of geoscience and international affairs” at Princeton. She fails to mention that he spent two decades cashing paycheques at the overtly activist Environmental Defense Fund. This man isn’t impartial. He has a flashing neon sign of an agenda.In the world inhabited by Goode, polar bear dissenters are dismissed out-of-hand because she knows they’re politically motivated. But orchestrated political behaviour by a gang of 14 is OK. And scientists affiliated with organizations that lobby for political change are reliable commentators.Rather than inform its readers in a fair and even-handed manner, the Times this week became a mouthpiece for one side in a scientific debate. Erica Goode chose to be prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner in the case of Susan Crockford.She sided not with the brave dissident, but with the numerous and the powerful. Crockford wasn’t merely assaulted in BioScience, her assault was justified and amplified in the pages of the Times. By another woman.TOP TAKEAWAY: Environmental reporting at the New York Times is a disgrace.Polar Bears & the Sleazy New York Times | PSI IntlPolar bears not starving, says Nunatsiavut wildlife managerThis monster polar bear was photographed in Labrador in 2016.Jim Goudie says there are lots of bears the in northern Labrador/Quebec regionGeoff Bartlett · CBC News · Posted: Apr 21, 2018 11:00 AM NT | LThis monster polar bear was photographed in Labrador in 2016. Research suggests numbers of the animals have been increasing since before 2007. (Submitted by Edwin Clark)One of the people who oversees an Indigenous hunt of polar bears says the population is doing well, despite heart-wrenching photos online suggesting some bears are starving.Every year, the Nunatsiavut government awards polar bear licences to Inuit hunters living in the northern Labrador settlement area.The Inuit set a quota of 12 polar bears this winter. Nunatsiavut wildlife manager Jim Goudie said all 12 were taken within the first seven days of the season.Sea ice is critical habitat for polar bears from late fall through late spring onlyPosted on July 14, 2018 | Sea ice is critical habitat for polar bears from late fall through late spring onlySea ice is said to be “an essential habitat for polar bears” but that’s an overly simplistic advocacy meme as ridiculous as the “no sea ice, no polar bears” message with which the public is constantly bombarded. Polar bears require sea ice from late fall to late spring only: from early summer to mid-fall, sea ice is optional. Historical evidence of polar bears that spent 5 months on land during the summer of 1874 proves an extended stay ashore is a natural response of polar bears to natural summer ice retreat, not a consequence of recent human-caused global warming. Sea ice is a seasonal requirement for polar bears: it’s not necessary year round.[This PBI newsletter from 2011 repeats this meme and Andrew Derocher’s recent tweet conveys a similar message (“Sea ice loss = habitat loss for polar bears”)]As long as sea ice is available from late fall through late spring (December to early June) and accompanied by abundant seal prey (sometimes it isn’t, see Derocher and Stirling 1995; Stirling 2002; Stirling et al. 1981, 1982, 1984), polar bears can survive a complete or nearly complete fast from June to late November (and pregnant females from June to early April the following year). That’s the beauty of their Arctic adaptation: fat deposited in early spring allows polar bears to survive an extraordinary fast whether they spend the time on land or sea ice.Young and very old bears, as well as sick and injured ones, are the exception: these bears often come ashore in poor condition and end up dying of starvation — as a much-publicized bear on Baffin Island who likely had a form of cancer did last summer (Crockford 2018). Competition with bigger, stronger bears means these bears can’t keep what they are able to kill and they are most often the bears who cause problems. Starvation is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears because if they cannot put on the fat they need in spring, they will not survive the low food months of summer and winter, whether they are on land or out on the sea ice (Amstrup 2003).Polar bear survival depends on the consumption of large numbers of fat, newborn seals that are only available in abundance from March to mid May (depending on the location and species of seal): after this time, fewer seals are available and are very hard to catch.As I’ve stated previously (Crockford 2018:15):“Sea ice extent in June has declined, on average, from just over 12 mkm2 in the 1980s to just over 11 mkm2 from 2004-2017. 140By late May to early June, the young seals that form the bulk of polar bear diets in spring take to the water to feed and are no longer available on the ice, leaving only predatory-savvy adults and subadults hauled out as potential prey. 141This means few seals are actually caught and consumed by polar bears after about mid-June in Seasonal and Divergent sea ice ecoregions, or by mid-July in Convergent and Archipelago regions (see Section 6, Prey Base).”The most pessimistic predictions of March sea-ice extent at the end of the 21st century is about 12.0 million km2 (Stroeve et al. 2007), equal to the average extent of ice for May 2016 (shown below, from NSIDC), which is a perfectly adequate amount of ice to meet polar bear needs in all subpopulations during late winter/early spring:Not a single sea ice prediction suggests the disappearance of sea ice in winter or early spring due to human-caused global warming (Amstrup et al. 2007; Regehr et al. 2016) and predictions of catastrophic polar bear losses due to sea ice declines have failed to materialize (Crockford 2017).From early summer to mid-fall, many bears lounge around on land with no ill-effects. As far as we know, they have always done so (see Historical Evidence below). There is also no biological reason to suggest that well-fed bears that historically did not have to spend much time ashore in summer (such as those in the Southern Beaufort) are incapable of doing so for 5 months if necessary.HISTORICAL EVIDENCEBack in 1874 — well before human-caused global warming reared its ugly head — hundreds of fat, healthy Chukchi Sea polar bears (see drawing below) spent four to five months on St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea during the summer (at about 60°N latitude, not quite as far south as Churchill, Manitoba); some females stayed on to have their cubs in maternity dens dug into the hills (Eliott and Coues 1875; Elliott 1875; Klein and Sowls 2011).Figure 2. A drawing of polar bears on St. Matthew Island that accompanied the May 1, 1875 Harper’s Weekly Journal of Civilization article written by Henry Elliot. See here.From my 2013 post on this topic:“Elliott’s government report (Elliott and Coues 1875: Appendix) notes that the bears they saw were “in most excellent condition, fat and sleek.” They encountered both males and females with twin cubs. Maynard’s report apparently mentions twins and triplets – “about one third grown” (cited in Klein and Sowls 2011:430), i.e. one year old cubs. Elliott and Maynard found empty maternity dens that had been dug into the hillsides and “bear roads” winding around the island. Fresh water was abundant on the island and while there were walrus and a few seals offshore, there was only scant evidence (the carcass of one young walrus) that the bears were feeding on them. The bears appear to have been fasting – except for the odd bit of scavenging and grass-chewing, which all land-bound polar bears appear to do.”The fact that well-fed Chukchi Sea polar bears spent 5 months onshore in the late 1800s suggests that well-fed polar bears throughout the Arctic have always had the ability to fast for this length of time: it is not a new phenomenon associated with recent sea ice changes blamed on human-caused global warming (Overland and Wang 2013; Wang and Overland 2012, 2015).Note that polar bears no longer den or spend the summer on St. Matthew Island because they were exterminated by commercial hunters. Wrangel Island to the north is now the primary denning/summering location.MODERN EVIDENCEWrangel IslandOne of the largest terrestrial denning area in the Arctic is on Wrangel Island, off the Russian coast of the Chukchi Sea, where in 2017 almost 600 bears were estimated onshore for the 3-4 month summer ice-free season. Bears in the Chukchi Sea are doing very well, better than they were in the 1980s (Rode and Regehr 2010; Rode et al. 2013, 2014, 2018), despite a dramatic reduction in summer sea ice (Serrez et al. 2016).Last year, polar bear biologist Eric Regehr (US Fish & Wildlife Service) told the Daily Mail (23 November 2017) that the Chukchi Sea subpopulation “appears to be productive and healthy.”Photo below of a fat Wrangel Island bear. Shutterstock.SvalbardDespite concerns over the effect of spring sea ice loss around the Svalbard archipelago in recent years (circled in yellow in the maps below, from Walsh et al. 2017), polar bear data collected by researchers up to the spring of 2018 show little to no negative impact from these low ice springs (see previous post here, with references).It must be remembered that the polar bear subpopulation region that encompasses Svalbard is called “Barents Sea” (see map below from the PBSG) and includes the archipelago of Franz Josef Land to the east that has a much colder climate (Barr 1995). Franz Josef Land is where most Barents Sea polar bears live (Aars et al. 2009) and provides abundant denning habitat for pregnant females as well as a refugium for bears that prefer to stay on land during the summer when sea ice retreats. It is likely that most females that formerly made terrestrial dens on Svalbard have now shifted to Franz Josef Land (Aars 2015; Aars et al. 2017; Descamps et al. 2017), except for years (like 2014) with abundant fall ice.Western and Southern Hudson BayHere are critical words to remember (more details here) from biologist Martin Obbard and colleagues (2016:29) on the relationship between body condition and sea ice for Southern Hudson Bay (SH) polar bears, which apply equally well to bears in other regions:“Date of freeze-up had a stronger influence on subsequent body condition than date of break-up in our study. Though models with date of freeze-up were supported over models with other ice covariates, we acknowledge that lower variability in freeze-up dates than in ice duration or break-up dates could have influenced the model selection process. Nevertheless, we suggest that a stronger effect of date of freeze-up may be because even though break-up has advanced by up to 3-4 weeks in portions of Hudson Bay it still occurs no earlier than late June or early July so does not yet interfere with opportunities to feed on neonate ringed seal pups that are born in March-April in eastern Hudson Bay (Chambellant 2010). Therefore, losing days or weeks of hunting opportunities during June and July deprives polar bears of the opportunity to feed on adult seals, but does not deprive them of the critical spring period (Watts and Hansen 1987) when they are truly hyperphagic. No doubt, the loss of hunting opportunities to kill adult seals has a negative effect on body condition, but it appears that for bears in SH a forced extension of the fast in late fall has a greater negative effect on subsequent body condition.” [my bold]In other words, by mid-June at least, polar bears have largely finished their intensive feeding that’s so critical to their survival over the rest of the year. They may catch a few seals over the coming months but for most bears, this makes little difference to their overall condition or potential survival.Most bears are at their fattest in early summer (when they come off the ice to spend the summer ashore) after having gorged on newborn seals in early spring.Breakup dates for Western Hudson Bay have not become progressively earlier each year since 1979: rather, a step-change occurred about 1997/1998 that meant breakup dates since then have been about 3 weeks earlier than before (with much year to year variation). There has been no trend in breakup or freeze-up dates since 1995 or 2001 depending on how you calculate the data (Castro de la Guardia et al. 2017; Lunn et al. 2016).For both Western and Southern Hudson Bay, very late freeze up has had the most negative impact on polar bear survival. When bears come ashore in less than good condition (as they did in 1983), many bears can struggle to survive. However, poor feeding conditions on the bay during early spring (about which virtually nothing is known), can also impact the body condition and survival of bears.REFERENCESAars, J. 2015. Research on polar bears at Norwegian Polar Institute. Online seminar (‘webinar”), January 14. pdf here.Aars, J., Marques,T.A, Lone, K., Anderson, M., Wiig, Ø., Fløystad, I.M.B., Hagen, S.B. and Buckland, S.T. 2017. The number and distribution of polar bears in the western Barents Sea. Polar Research36:1. 1374125. doi:10.1080/17518369.2017.1374125Aars, J., Marques, T.A., Buckland, S.T., Andersen, M., Belikov, S., Boltunov, A., et al. 2009. Estimating the Barents Sea polar bear subpopulation. Marine Mammal Science 25: 35-52.Amstrup, S.C. 2003. Polar bear (Ursus maritimus). In Wild Mammals of North America, G.A. Feldhamer, B.C. Thompson and J.A. Chapman (eds), pg. 587-610. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Amstrup, S.C., Marcot, B.G. & Douglas, D.C. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century.US Geological Survey. Reston, VA. Pdf hereBarr, S. 1995. Franz Josef Land. Oslo: Norwegian Polar Institute. ISBN82-7666-095-9.Castro de la Guardia, L., Myers, P.G., Derocher, A.E., Lunn, N.J., Terwisscha van Scheltinga, A.D. 2017. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspective. Marine Ecology Progress Series 564: 225–233. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspectiveCrockford, S.J. 2017. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 2 March 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v3 Open access. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)Crockford, S.J. 2018. State of the Polar Bear Report 2017. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report #29. London. pdf here.Derocher, A.E. and Stirling, I. 1995. Temporal variation in reproduction and body mass of polar bears in western Hudson Bay. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73:1657-1665. Canadian Science PublishingDescamps, S., Aars, J., Fuglei, E., Kovacs, K.M., Lydersen, C., Pavlova, O., Pedersen, Å.Ø., Ravolainen, V. and Strøm, H. 2017.Climate change impacts on wildlife in a High Arctic archipelago — Svalbard, Norway. Global Change Biology 23: 490-502. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13381Elliott, H.W. 1875 . Polar bears on St. Matthew Island. Harper’s Weekly Journal of Civilization. May 1 issue. Harper and Brothers, New York.Elliott, H.W. and Coues, E. 1875. A report upon the condition of affairs in the territory of Alaska. US Government Printing Office, Washington. A Report Upon the Condition of Affairs in the Territory of AlaskaKlein, D.R. and Sowls, A. 2011. History of polar bears as summer residents on the St. Matthew Islands, Bering Sea. Arctic 64:429-436. http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/article/view/4142Lunn, N.J., Servanty, S., Regehr, E.V., Converse, S.J., Richardson, E. and Stirling, I. 2016. Demography of an apex predator at the edge of its range – impacts of changing sea ice on polar bears in Hudson Bay. Ecological Applications, in press. DOI: 10.1890/15-1256Obbard, M.E., Cattet, M.R.I., Howe, E.J., Middel, K.R., Newton, E.J., Kolenosky, G.B., Abraham, K.F. and Greenwood, C.J. 2016. Trends in body condition in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from the Southern Hudson Bay subpopulation in relation to changes in sea ice. Arctic Science, in press. 10.1139/AS-2015-0027Overland, J.E. and Wang, M. 2013. When will the summer Arctic be nearly sea ice free? Geophysical Research Letters 40: 2097-2101.Regehr, E.V., Laidre, K.L, Akçakaya, H.R., Amstrup, S.C., Atwood, T.C., Lunn, N.J., Obbard, M., Stern, H., Thiemann, G.W., & Wiig, Ø. 2016. Conservation status of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to projected sea-ice declines. Biology Letters 12: 20160556. http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/12/20160556Supplementary data here.Rode, K. and Regehr, E.V. 2010. Polar bear research in the Chukchi and Bering Seas: A synopsis of 2010 field work. Unpublished report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Anchorage. pdf here.Rode, K.D., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2013. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Oral presentation by Karyn Rode, 28thLowell Wakefield Fisheries Symposium, March 26-29. Anchorage, AK.Rode, K.D., Regehr, E.V., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2014. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Global Change Biology 20(1):76-88. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12339/abstractRode, K. D., R. R. Wilson, D. C. Douglas, V. Muhlenbruch, T.C. Atwood, E. V. Regehr, E.S. Richardson, N.W. Pilfold, A.E. Derocher, G.M Durner, I. Stirling, S.C. Amstrup, M. S. Martin, A.M. Pagano, and K. Simac. 2018. Spring fasting behavior in a marine apex predator provides an index of ecosystem productivity. Global Change Biologyhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13933/fullSerreze, M.C., Crawford, A., Stroeve, J.C., Barrett, A.P. and Woodgate, R.A. 2016. Variability, trends and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi Sea. Journal of Geophysical Research 121 (10):7308–7325. Variability, trends, and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi SeaStirling, I. 2002. Polar bears and seals in the eastern Beaufort Sea and Amundsen Gulf: a synthesis of population trends and ecological relationships over three decades. Arctic 55 (Suppl. 1):59-76. http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/issue/view/42Stirling, I., Andriashek, D., and Calvert, W. 1993. Habitat preferences of polar bears in the western Canadian Arctic in late winter and spring. Polar Record 29:13-24. Habitat preferences of polar bears in the western Canadian Arctic in late winter and spring | Polar Record | Cambridge CoreStirling, I., Calvert, W., and Andriashek, D. 1984. Polar bear ecology and environmental considerations in the Canadian High Arctic. Pg. 201-222. In Olson, R., Geddes, F. and Hastings, R. (eds.). Northern Ecology and Resource Management. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton.Stirling, I, Cleator, H. and Smith, T.G. 1981. Marine mammals. In: Polynyas in the Canadian Arctic, Stirling, I. and Cleator, H. (eds), pg. 45-58. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No. 45. Ottawa.Stirling, I, Kingsley, M. and Calvert, W. 1982. The distribution and abundance of seals in the eastern Beaufort Sea, 1974–79. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper 47. Edmonton.Stroeve, J., Holland, M.M., Meier, W., Scambos, T. and Serreze, M. 2007. Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast. Geophysical Research Letters 34:L09501.Walsh, J.E., Fetterer, F., Stewart, J.S. and Chapman, W.L. 2017. A database for depicting Arctic sea ice variations back to 1850. Geographical Review 107(1):89-107. A database for depicting Arctic sea ice variations back to 1850Wang, M. and Overland, J.E. 2012. A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years: An update from CMIP5 models. Geophysical Research Letters 39:L18501.Wang, M. and Overland, J.E. 2015. Projected future duration of the sea-ice-free season in the Alaskan Arctic. Progress in Oceanography136:50-59.https://polarbearscience.com/2018/07/14/sea-ice-is-critical-habitat-for-polar-bears-from-late-fall-through-late-spring-only/POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting Otherwise“NOAA mysteriously forgot to mention that Arctic ice is expanding in their Arctic Report Card.”POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting OtherwisePosted: January 22, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:polarbearscienceIn scanning comments generated by the recent flurry of internet interest in polar bears and blogs I noticed that a good many people, fed alarming media stories, are still convinced that polar bear numbers are declining rapidly when nothing could be further from the truth.In some cases, the media have made a possible future problem sound like a current problem. In others, people are remembering data from 2010 or so, not realizing that the picture has changed — or they assume that a conservation status of ‘threatened’ or ‘vulnerable’ (e.g. Amstrup et al. 2007) must mean numbers are declining (because that’s true for virtually all species classified that way, except polar bears).The sea ice situation hasn’t really improved or deteriorated since 2007 but the polar bear picture is much better: there is information on more subpopulations and studies show most are holding stable or increasing (Aars et…https://climatism.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/polar-bear-numbers-not-declining-despite-media-headlines-suggesting-otherwise/← Histrionics over Arctic temperatures & sea ice extent: implications for polar bearsState of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingPosted on February 27, 2018 | Comments Offon State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingMy new report reveals that polar bears are doing well despite recent reductions in sea-ice. It shows in details why this is so, with summaries of critical recent research.Press release and pdf below. And read my op-ed in the National Post here.ARCTIC ICE EXTENT EXPANDING“NOAA mysteriously forgot to mention that Arctic ice is expanding in their Arctic Report Card.” Gee, could it be because it doesn’t fit the climate alarmists’ narrative?i love ‪#DeplorableClimateScienceBlog for documenting the fraudArctic Sea Ice Increasing For Eleven YearsJames Matkin •"THE GLOBAL ICE AREA IS VIRTUALLY THE SAME TODAY AS IT WAS IN 1979.' Yes, fears of unusual warming by Al Gore and the UN are based on misleading data and pseudo-science not reality. The scientists error exposed by new satellite data have been duped by the oldest trick in the books, CHANCE - when deducing a theory from a false trend over a too short timeline. See https://www.academia.edu/33...Polar bears are thriving because polar ice melt is moderate and not unusual. Recent research with real data shows no unusual warming from fossil fuels. From TIBET recent peer review of climate history derived from 2000 years of tree-rings showed " that "no obvious warming trend since the industrial revolution was observed," WHICH MEANS THE AGW THEORY FAILS.A 2000-Year Temperature History of China's Animaqin Mountains http://www.co2science.org/a......Sadly, the terrible waste and distortion of public resources is massive and will never be recovered to be used to address real issues. This is the greatest scientific hoax ever. Note even if the AGW theory had any merit the reality is the earth's climate is "anti-fragile" and climate change cannot be stopped.See - Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever's speech at the Nobel Laureates meeting 1st July 2015.-https://www.youtube.com/wat...http://netrightdaily.com/2015/08/polar-ice-caps-stable-since-1979/WRITTEN BY THOMAS RICHARD, EXAMINER.COM ON JULY 21, 2015. POSTED IN LATEST NEWSPlentiful Arctic spring ice helping polar bears thrive (despite misleading news)Polar bear expert and zoologist Susan Crockford is firing back today at recently published articles that say polar bears are somehow starving and “food deprived” because of global warming. The problem is that since 1979, polar bears are thriving and far from starving. This is due to plentiful Arctic sea ice they need (except when it’s too thick) to hunt for food before the summer arrives. Unlike most carnivores, polar bears are unique mammals that do all their primary feeding in the spring, and very little during the summer. Other mammals hunt and gather food in the late spring, summer, and fall, but because of the Arctic’s unique climate, late winter/spring is the time that polar bears hunt and fatten up.According to Crockford, “polar bears are at their lowest weight in March and at their highest in June/July.” She notes that other large mammals don’t have this unique eating pattern because no other carnivore lives on the surface of the sea ice. “Summer is warm across the Arctic,” she writes. “It’s the perfect time for polar bears to fast, as little energy is needed for keeping warm, especially if they don’t swim around.”She also notes the “polar-bears-are-doomed crowd can’t hide the fact that this year, spring sea ice habitat for polar bears worldwide has been excellent.” For example, Hudson Bay sea ice extent on July 19 this year was 150,000 square kilometers higher than in recorded on that date in 2009 (526.2 vs. 368.5 mkm2).Norwegian polar bear researchers also reported a good crop of cubs this spring because conditions have been excellent for pregnant females around Svalbard. Worldwide, the amount of Arctic sea ice on July 18, 2015, was the same on that date in 2006, and by July 19, there was actually more sea ice than the same date in 2006 (8.4 vs. 8.3 mkm2).Put simply, the recent summer ice melt has not interfered with the spring feeding period “that is so critically important for polar bears.” Leftover sea ice in early summer meant there was plenty of sea ice in the spring (April-June), even in the Southern Beaufort Sea. The only polar bear region with below-average sea ice extent over the last five years was the Chukchi Sea, but researchers have already shown that polar bears in that region are “doing very well even with no summer sea ice.”Even though the Chukchi Sea currently has below-average summer sea ice, it doesn’t affect a polar bear’s eating habits, as fasting during the summer is normal for them. These Arctic carnivores put on hundreds of pounds of fat during the spring feeding period, chowing down on plump, plentiful young seals that are easy to catch, in preparation for the summer months. This time period, known as the “walking hibernation,” is likely an adaptation to their environment and not a physiological mechanism.What all this means, Crockford writes, is that summer sea ice declines predicted in the Arctic “cannot possibly have any significant impact for otherwise healthy bears.” In 2012, this was evidenced by the record-breaking low September ice extent in the Southern Beaufort Sea that showed no noticeable effect on polar bear health or survival. Why? Summer ice extent has “nothing to do with polar bear health or survival.” Spring ice conditions are what matter most to all polar bear populations. It’s the time of year they spend fattening up for the upcoming summer.http://climatechangedispatch.com/plentiful-arctic-spring-ice-helping-polar-bears-thrive-despite-misleading-news/Posted on 14 Oct 2017 by Iowa Climate Science EducationDay 285 Arctic sea ice extent has been increasing since the start of MASIE records in 2006. This year is fifth highest since 2006.fmasie_4km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csvMeanwhile, criminals in the press and scientific community continue to report the exact opposite of what the data shows.https://iowaclimate.org/2017/10/14/arctic-sea-ice-increasing-for-eleven-years/@ccdeditorArctic Sea Ice Volume Up 15% Over The Past Decade | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog ‪Arctic Sea Ice Volume Up 15% Over The Past Decade“In a new report published by London-based think tank, the Global Warming Policy Foundation, zoologist Susan Crockford says that predictions that climate change is bringing about the demise of these iconic creatures have proven to be far from the mark.Dr Crockford’s report, published to mark International Polar Bear day, makes clear that although Arctic sea-ice has declined to levels not expected until 2050 and widely predicted to cause catastrophe for polar bears, their numbers have remained stable, or have even increased slightly. As she explains“Ice levels during the key feeding period in Spring have been good, and prey species have been abundant. It’s not really a surprise that polar bears are doing so well.”And in the Southern Beaufort Sea, the one area where polar bear numbers have fallen, the reason appears to be too much sea ice rather than too little.“The fearmongering from the media and the polar bear specialists is now backfiring”, says Crockford. “They convinced the world that polar bears were doomed but the facts got out. Now would be a good time to set the story straight”.The State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 summarizes clear, reliable and concise information on the current state of polar bears in the Arctic since 2014, relative to historical records.It highlights up-to-date data and research findings in a balanced and factual format that avoids hype and exaggeration. It is intended for a wide audience, including scientists, teachers, students, decision-makers and the general public interested in polar bears and Arctic ecology.”Here it is, in pdf form: State of the Polar Bear Report 2017Cite as: Crockford, S.J. 2018. State of the Polar Bear Report 2017. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report #29. London.Less Svalbard polar bear habitat during the early Holocene than nowPosted on April 21, 2018 | Comments Offon Less Svalbard polar bear habitat during the early Holocene than nowSvalbard in the western Barents Sea has recently had less sea ice extent than it had in the 1980s, especially in the west and north, but this is not unprecedented.New evidence from clams and mussels with temperature-sensitive habitat requirements confirm that warmer temperatures and less sea ice than today existed during the early Holocene period about 10.2–9.2 thousand years ago and between 8.2 and 6.0 thousand years ago (based on radio carbon dates) around Svalbard. Barents Sea polar bears almost certainly survived those previous low-ice periods, as they are doing today, by staying close to the Franz Josef Land Archipelago in the eastern half of the region where sea ice is more persistent.As this sea ice chart for 18 April 2018 shows, ice this month has been virtually absent from the west and north coasts of the Svalbard Archipelago, while Franz Josef Land to the east is surrounded by highly concentrated pack and land-fast ice.From a new paper by Jan Mangerud and John Svendsen (2018) [my bold]:Svalbard, located between 74° and 81°N, is the warmest place on Earth at this latitude (Drange et al., 2013). This is because of the North Atlantic Current and large-scale atmospheric circulation which transport warm water and air masses from lower latitudes northwards across the Atlantic and along the coast of Norway to Svalbard (Figure 1). Yet, during the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the climate of Svalbard was considerably warmer than at present.The transition from Younger Dryas cold to Holocene Thermal Maximum warm conditions took place very rapidly, according to records from nearby Greenland (Taylor et al. 1997), warming in “steps” of about five years each over a period of about 40 years. This was at last as fast, if not faster than, recent Arctic warming between the 1980s and 2015. And since polar bears of the Barents Sea and adjacent Arctic areas appear to have survived this change to Holocence Thermal Maximum conditions, it challenges the notion that recent warming has been (or will be) too fast to allow polar bears to survive without huge changes in their present distribution (Amstrup et al. 2007).The summer water temperature map from Mangerud and Svendsen (below) not only illustrates why western Svalbard is subject to periods of no or low sea ice in winter but why Franz Josef Land to the east (surrounded by near-zero temps (in blue), even in summer) is the perfect refugium for polar bears during low-ice years (Aars 2015; Aars et al. 2017; Andersen and Aars 2016; Barr 1985; Chernova et al. 2014; Descamps et al. 2017; Fauchald et al. 2014), see previous post here.Franz Josef Land provides the most stable sea ice habitat for Barents Sea polar bears because it is largely beyond the influence of warm water influxes from the North Atlantic.The schematic below from Mangerud and Svendsen shows the warm water incursions from the Atlantic flowing past the west coast of Svalbard at about 11 thousand years ago, when the Laurentide Ice Sheet still covered the eastern half of Canada and the northern US, excluding fish, seals and polar bears from most of Canadian Arctic and Hudson Bay.Here is the abstract from Mangerud, J. and Svendsen (2018) [my bold, link added]:“Shallow marine molluscs that are today extinct close to Svalbard, because of the cold climate, are found in deposits there dating to the early Holocene. The most warmth-demanding species found, Zirfaea crispata, currently has a northern limit 1000 km farther south, indicating that August temperatures on Svalbard were 6°C warmer at around 10.2–9.2 cal. ka BP, when this species lived there. The blue mussel, Mytilus edulis, returned to Svalbard in 2004 following recent warming, and after almost 4000 years of absence, excluding a short re-appearance during the Medieval Warm Period 900 years ago. Mytilus first arrived in Svalbard at 11 cal. ka BP, indicating that the climate was then as least as warm as present. This first warm period lasted from 11 to 9 cal. ka BP and was followed by a period of lower temperatures 9–8.2 cal. ka BP. After 8.2 cal. ka, the climate around Svalbard warmed again, and although it did not reach the same peak in temperatures as prior to 9 ka, it was nevertheless some 4°C warmer than present between 8.2 and 6 cal. ka BP. Thereafter, a gradual cooling brought temperatures to the present level at about 4.5 cal. ka BP. The warm early-Holocene climate around Svalbard was driven primarily by higher insolation and greater influx of warm Atlantic Water, but feedback processes further influenced the regional climate.”Survival of Barents Sea polar bears during low-ice years does not require emigration to another sea ice ecoregion or even another subpopulation area. The eastern Barents Sea (located in Russian territory), as defined by the Polar Bear Specialist Group (see map below), provides ample habitat for polar bears to thrive despite extended fluctuations in seasonal sea ice cover in the western portion. Although it must be frustrating for Norwegian researchers and their colleagues to see “their” bears abandoning Svalbard for Franz Josef Land because of recent low ice levels, they are not witnessing a biological catastrophe.Bottom line: Barents Sea polar bears are loyal to this region because the eastern portion has the habitat they require to thrive even when sea ice cover in the western portion essentially disappears for thousands of years at a time.aTaylor, K.C., Mayewski, P.A., Alley, R.B., Brook, E.J., Gow, A.J., Grootes, P.M., Meese, D.A., Saltzman, E.S., Severinghaus, J.P., Twickler, M.S., White, J.W.C., Whitlow, S., and Zielinski, G.A. 1997. The Holocene-Younger Dryas Transition Recorded at Summit, Greenland. Science 278:825-827. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/278/5339/825https://polarbearscience.com/2018/04/21/less-svalbard-polar-bear-habitat-during-the-early-holocene-than-now/See: Morano’s new book shoots to #1 at Amazon in 4 Categories! Climatology, Earth Sciences, Env. Science & Nature & EcologyThe book has also been getting extremely positive reviews with a nearly 5 star average at Amazon:Book Excerpt: – Chapter 5: The Ice Caps Are Melting!The Polar BearsThe photogenic polar bear has been the icon for the modern global warming movement. “They are looking for poster children,” explains geologist Bob Carter. “It suits that advertising purpose. It has nothing to do with science.” The fact is that polar bear populations are at or near historic highs. Scientists point out that the computer models predicting polar bear population collapse simply do not reflect reality or account for the adaptability of these animals. “Polar bears have survived several episodes of much warmer climate over the last 10,000 years than exists today,” evolutionary biologist and paleozoologist Susan Crockford of the University of Victoria explains. “There is no evidence to suggest that the polar bear or its food supply is in danger of disappearing entirely with increased Arctic warming, regardless of the dire fairy-tale scenarios predicted by computer models.” As her research shows, “Polar bears have not been harmed by sea ice declines in summer.” And so she rejects predictions of doom: “While the decline in ice extent is greatest in September, all evidence suggests this is the least important month of the year for polar bears—the yearly ice minimum in September occurs after the critical spring/summer feeding period, after the spring/summer mating period and well before the winter birth of cubs,” she added.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has estimated that the polar bear population was as low as 5,000 to 10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations “may now be near historic highs.” And in 2016, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature estimated the current polar bear which according to Crockford is “the highest estimate in 50 years.”As Crockford wrote in 2016, “So far there is no convincing evidence that any unnatural harm has come to them. Indeed, global population size appears to have grown slightly since 1993, as the maximum estimated number was 28,370 in 1993 but rose to 31,000.”Climatologist Judith Curry has said, “It seems like the polar bears are doing well and have managed to evolve and adapt over a very long time. It’s not clear what we’re doing up in the Arctic that’s particularly jeopardizing them.”According to geologist Don Easterbrook, “There are five times as many polar bears now as they were in the 1970s so doesn’t look like they are hurting too much. And I can also tell you on a factual basis that the past 10,000 years we’ve had temperatures that were…a half to 5° warmer and Greenland and the polar bears survive[d] that so there’s not any problem now.”In 2008, scientists spoke out publicly against the polar bear climate fears and I wrote a report for the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. What follows is based up on that report.Award-winning quaternary geologist Ólafur Ingólfsson, a professor at the University of Iceland, has also rejected bear fears. “We have this specimen that confirms the polar bear was a morphologically distinct species at least 100,000 years ago, and this basically means that the polar bear has already survived one interglacial period,” said Ingólfsson, who has conducted extensive expeditions and field research in both the Arctic and Antarctic. “This is telling us that despite the on-going warming in the Arctic today, maybe we don’t have to be quite so worried about the polar bear,” he added.Biologist Matthew Cronin, a research professor at the School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, rejected climate fears as well. “Polar bear populations are generally healthy and have increased worldwide over the last few decades,” Cronin said.Biologist Josef Reichholf, who heads the Vertebrates Department at the National Zoological Collection in Munich is also skeptical of bear fears. “In warmer regions it takes far less effort to ensure survival,” Reichholf said. “How did the polar bear survive the last warm period? Look at the polar bear’s close relative, the brown bear. It is found across a broad geographic region, ranging from Europe across the Near East and North Asia, to Canada and the United States. Whether bears survive will depend on human beings, not the climate.”The Nunavut government in Canada is not concerned about the fate of polar bear populations. Territorial Environment Minister Daniel Shewchuk said, “Through direct consultation, [Inuit communities] are unanimous in their belief that polar bears have not declined…. Based on hunter observations, polar bears are presently still healthy and abundant across Nunavut—and for that reason, not a species of special concern.”The Los Angeles Times reported in 2012, “Doomsday predictions of the polar bear’s demise tend to draw an Inuit guffaw here in Nunavut, the remote Arctic territory where polar bears in some places outnumber people….Heart-rending pictures of polar bears clinging to tiny islands of ice elicit nothing but derision.”Internationally known forecasting pioneer J. Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania and his colleague, forecasting expert Kesten Green of Monash University in Australia, coauthored a January 27, 2008, paper with Harvard astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon, which found that polar bear extinction predictions violate “scientific forecasting procedures.” As they explained, their “study analyzed the methodology behind key polar bear population prediction and found that one of the two key reports in support of listing the bears had ‘extrapolated nearly 100 years into the future on the basis of only five years data—and data for these years were of doubtful validity.”Polar bear expert Dennis Compayre, formerly of the conservation group Polar Bears International, who has studied the bears in their natural habitat for almost thirty years, weighs in. “I tell you there are as many bears here now as there were when I was a kid,” Compayre, author of the 2015 book on polar bears Waiting for Dancer, said. “Churchill [in Northern Canada] is full of these scientists going on about vanishing bears and thinner bears. They come here preaching doom, but I question whether some of them really have the bears’ best interests at heart.”Executive summary1. Polar bears are still a conservation success story: there are more polar bears now than there were 40 years ago.2. Fewer populations are in decline than in 2010(onlyone,of cially)andonlysix are data de cient (down from nine).3. Abrupt summer sea ice decline has not affected polar bear numbers as pre- dicted: even though sea ice levels dropped to mid-century levels in 2007, the expected decimation of polar bears failed to occur.4. The Chukchi Sea population is thriving, despite a pronounced lengthening of the ice-free season since 2007.5. Less sea ice in the summer in the Chukchi Sea has meant a healthy prey base for polar bears because ringed seals feed primarily in the ice-free season.6. Polarbearshaveshownthemselvestobeadaptabletochangingiceconditions in several regions.7. SouthernBeaufortnumbershavereboundedsincethelastsurveycount.8. Barents Sea numbers have probably increased since 2005 and have de nitely not declined, despite much less sea ice cover.9. There is no evidence that record-low summer sea ice in 2012 had a harmful effect on Southern Beaufort bear numbers.10. Other species are being negatively impacted by high polar bear numbers, es- pecially nesting sea birds and ducks.11.WesternHudsonBaypopulationnumbershavebeenstablesince2004,despite what scientists are telling the media.12. Hudson Bay sea ice has not changed since about 1999: the breakup dates and freeze-up dates are highly variable but the ice-free period was not any longer in 2015 than it was in 2004. However, this fall freeze-up is shaping up to be the earliest in decades.13. ProblembearsinChurchillarenotleanorstarving.14. ChurchillManitobahadthemostproblembearsin1983and2016,whichwere late freeze-up years, but many of the incidents in 2016 can be attributed to in- creased vigilance on the part of patrol of cers after an attack in 2013.15. There have been only marginal sea-ice declines during the feeding period in spring, when polar bears need sea ice the most.16. Theisnoevidencethatsubsistencehuntingisaffectingbearpopulations.17. StressfulresearchmethodshavebeencurtailedinmuchofCanada.ix18. Therehavebeennoreportsofpolarbearcannibalismsince2011.19. Polar bears appear unaffected by pollution: studies suggest only that harm is theoretically possible, not that it has happened.20. Polar bears have survived past warm periods, which is evidence they have the ability to survive future warm periods.Conclusion· Polar bears are thriving: they are not currently threatened with extinction.· Tens of thousands of polar bears did not die as a result of more than a decade of low summer sea ice, as was predicted.· Polar bears don’t need sea ice n late summer/early fall as long as they ar ewell- fed in the spring.·1 A conservation success story· Polar bears are still a conservation success story. With a global estimate almost certainly greater than 28,000, we can say for sure that there are more polar bears now than there were 40 years ago (Fig. 1). Sadly, although completing a global survey was one of the primary objectives of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) at its inception 49 years ago, it has so far been unable to do so because at least four subpopulations have never been counted.https://polarbearscience.com

1 introductionThe Chinese Government have developed one of the best-ever systems for consistently producing a high-growth low-inflation economy based on MMT Shimomuran-Wernerian understandings but it was not always thus.After the general adoption of an intermediate Shimomuran-insight driven economy in 1975/6, the general systems which had worked well in Japan were shown to be bit more difficult to apply in the much more populous, larger and more complex economy of China. See The Origin and Spread of Investment Credit Economics part 3 which says:“3 Japanese Economists and the Theory of Investment Credit Economics1961: Dr Shimomura presented his Model of the Japanese Economy and its equations to the joint meeting of the Japanese Economic Association and the Japanese Econometric Society. His presentation was then published under the title “Seicho Seisaku No Kihon Mondai” (Basic Problems of Growth Policy) in Riron Keizaigaku, March 1961.1961: Dr Shinohara published “The Secret of Accelerated Growth,” Tokyo, 1961.1961: Professor S. Tsuru, writing in the American Economic Review in May 1961, on Growth and Stability in the Post War Japanese Economy, referred to the long-term credit granted by Japanese Banks by mentioning the Japanese government’s “gigantic industry-funding program … aimed at specific industries and investment programs (sic)”. [See K. K. Kurihara, The Growth Potential of the Japanese Economy, p137.] “The Chinese Government found out about that when many Chinese delegations visited Tokyo in the October 1972–75 period, to “learn the secrets of high economic growth.”China then went through several phases of economic stimulation polices and while none of these were completely successful, nearly all of these were partly successful, and the learning government of China through four decades became increasingly more competent at achieving its economic growth objectives. That learning process still continues.The current policies of the Chinese government demonstrate a kind of geological economic development, as layer upon layer is piled upon pre-existing policies. It is inaccurate but perhaps may be helpful approximately to list some of these phases or changes in emphasis in economic policy through the last 44 years (1975–2018), and up to 2025, but the identification of the era of these different phases is potentially misleading, because new emphases were usually a new overlay on many previous developments, and these new policies do not always have a clear date of origin.And my knowledge of China is that of a Scot who can only see things from the outside. I cannot read Chinese but I have a deep third-hand knowledge of observed Chinese history, mainly economic, partly cultural and/or otherwise. I have avidly read the great Western academic books about China such as these written by the great sinologist Professor C P Fitzgerald and, for example, the informative and objective book about the Mongols written by John Man.Some other books about the Mongol Empire, and any which deny the murderous destruction of tens of millions of Chinese by the Mongols and their city-elimination and cultural destruction of Chinese and Islamic libraries, are best relocated into the fiction section of any library. See my view about this atA Brief Guide To Early Chinese History: The Mongol Conquest Of China And Its Consequences1.1 Caveat I must depend on third-hand sources but I have a deep knowledge of the inadequacy and prejudices of the western media and know enough to disregard most of the opinionated nonsenses which fill that media. It is easier to do that than you might think. If you disregard opinions not based upon an objective attitude or accurate numerical data then nearly all of the western media collapses into the trashcan. Media opinions have no validity if they are not based on accurate historical observation arising from competent politically neutral academics and ideally founded upon numerical data.2 Preamble: The 1971 US Abandonment of the Bretton Woods AgreementThe rise of the great exporting nations of the Tokyo Consensus nations (of Japan and China and South Korea and Taiwan) was made possible by the 1971 “open-door” to imports created by the American Government. That policy created the great consumer society of the USA along with the close-to-insoluble American balance of payments problem.See George Tait Edwards's answer to How can the U.S. dollar become stronger?The consumers of America became able cheaply to import the best available goods from anywhere in the world. Some economists have seen this historical decision as an amazingly generous American assistance to the development of the rest of the world. Others have argued it was economically inept. Still others have evaluated that change in a complex web of interesting information about how this decision helped the rest of the world but crippled US industry, which had continually to adapt to keep up with the best-in-the-world products, but (as they did not usually observe) could not invest due to the absence of effective industry-financing policies in the USA.Whatever viewpoint is adopted, the historical reality is undeneniable. It was this decision, for the US to abandon the Bretton Woods Agreement, that formed the foundation of the creation of the US as the world’s greatest importing nation, a situation which continues until today.President Trump’s “blaming” of the rest of the world for the unsustainable US balance of payments is completely uninformed. It was, to use the words of the gutter press, “America wot done it.” The Americans created the circumstances of their own economic decline. I would ask that US media commentators should please note this, with no very likely hope of success.2 The Japanese Actions To Match Higher Output with Higher DemandIn 1960s Japan, the application of Shimomuran economics was a difficult system to manage, even for Dr Osamu Shimomura. That great economist was head of the Price Control Section of Japan’s Ministry of Finance when the inflation-limiting masterstroke of the partial payment of wage awards in two tranches - one paid in about April or May after the “labour/wage offensive” and the other later in the year in November or early December - took its full effect.After Dr Osamu Shimomura calculated and understood that the growth of Japanese industry was outstripping demand and there was a need to introduce a demand management budget in the form of higher wage increases, both these and a policy of higher wage increases with increased demand from government expenditure was implemented. That event is recorded in the Springer book which partly records but does not explain Shimomuran macroeconomics. See Dr. Osamu Shimomura's Legacy and the Postwar Japanese Economy | Kozo Horiuchi | Springer for a description of the Shimomura legacy without any insightful economic explanations.Japan’s post war government took the view that inflation did not matter much in the post war economy because without the growth of the major keystone industries of food (mainly rice) to feed Japan’s population and of the electricity, steel and cement industries, as the foundation inputs of rapid future growth, that growth could have not have occurred. That idea was summarised in the post-war slogan “Economic Growth First.”The SMEs of Japan initially had a high proportion (c80%) of BoJ credit creation funding in order to re-establish these companies as the inventive and innovative basis of Japan’s future. That percentage fell to about 45% by 1960. Time and again Shimomura stressed his belief in the outstanding abilities of the Japanese people as the key quality which enabled Japanese economic growth and the clusters of thousands of supporting small parts manufacture around the Japanese car factories (most thoroughly investigated by Dr and Professor Shinohara).3 The Problem StatedEven in a high-growth high-investment economy it is not easy to assess and produce the “right” level of domestic demand to arrive at the best available mix for meeting domestic supply with low inflation. In a high growth economy like China a central setting of the appropriate mix which maximises output and consumption while limiting inflation is never easy. That mismatch often caused some inflation in China during the 1980s and 1990s.3.1 The Phases of Chinese Economic DevelopmentThe great growth of China was largely based upon the transfer of the economic insights of the great investment credit economist, Dr Osamu Shimomura (1910–1989) from Japan to China. See The Origin and Spread of Investment Credit Economics where in Section 6 it is stated:“6 The Rise of Chinese Economic UnderstandingSeptember 29, 1972: Normal diplomatic arrangements established between China and Japan.1972-75: Chinese delegation visits Japan to study how Japan has developed so rapidly. Some Chinese economists plead with their Japanese counterparts to share with them the secrets of rapid economic development.1976: China adopts investment Credit Economics.February 1978: Chinese-Japanese Long-Term Private Trade Agreement concluded.1979: Thatcher comes to power in Britain on the promise her government would reverse the UK’s relative economic decline.1980: The Japanese foreign ministry on 31 August 1980 releases a press statement that “China will emerge as a tremendous economic and military power in the 21st century.”1980: Chinese economic growth, accelerating from the mid 1970s, rose to an average rate of about 10% pa from 1980 to 2010. “During the late 1970s and early 1980s I had several, often not constructive, discussions with several British and American economists. Most of these took the view that the pre-1975 China which they had visited was not capable of growing rapidly and that any source which said it could was mistaken. Some western economists had produced books and reports arguing that both post-war Japan and the China of the 1975–85 period would remain forever as starving peasant economies. They could hardly have been more wrong.1975–85: The Growth of The Foundation Industries of ChinaAt first China took another leaf out of the Japanese experience and developed the major industries which were to form the foundation of the great manufacturing industries of the future as well as the basis for feeding the Chinese population. The funds made available for farm modernisation and food (mainly rice terrace) cultivation had a considerable leap forward during this era. The establishment and growth of the electricity generation industry, the metals-foundries and the many cement factories, all key industries of the future, were laid during this first two-five-year plans period.The Chinese learned the fundamentals and many of the nuances of Shimomuran macroeconomics with such effect that the Japanese Ministry of Finance was moved to comment on 31 August 1980 as shown above.In parallel with economic growth, social welfare policies in China increased considerably. As Social welfare in China - Wikipedia reports“Social welfare in China has undergone various changes throughout history. The Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security is responsible for the social welfare system.“Welfare in China is linked to the hukou system. Those holding non-agricultural hukou status have access to a number of programs provided by the government, such as healthcare, employment, retirement pensions, housing, and education. Meanwhile, rural residents are generally expected to provide for themselves.[1]“In pre-1980s reform, China, the socialist state fulfilled the needs of society from cradle to grave. Child care, education, job placement, housing, subsistence, health care, and elder care were largely the responsibility of the work unit as administered through state-owned enterprises and agricultural communes and collectives. As those systems disappeared or were reformed, the "iron rice bowl" approach to welfare changed. Article 14 of the constitution stipulates that the state "builds and improves a welfare system that corresponds with the level of economic development." The government has expressed desire to encourage NGO participation in tandem with local state efforts to improve social assistance to low-income households.[2] Such measures have been a central part of the Chinese state's decentralization efforts and its retreat from delivery of welfare and social provisions.[3] In this regard, the Shanghai government has "increasingly encouraged the contracting of social services to NGOs,"[4]while local governments are also entrusted with a wide range of decision-making and responsibilities on the delivery of social welfare needs.[5].”1986–95: Consumer Goods GrowthDuring this era the Chinese economy started to provide for the many consumer needs of its vast population. Exports partly based upon the foreign supply of US domestic demand soared due to the low tariffs and the increasingly varied outputs of Chinese factories.1996–2005: Inward Technological TransferDue to the high funds available for investment in company growth, many western companies (including most of the major US high-technology producers) established offices in China and some set up manufacturing arms in China. This produced a great deal of technology transfer to China from the West. The best analogy may be that inward technology transfer provided the spark plug but Chinese investment funds provided the engine for rapid economic development.The western illusion that Chinese development is due to western funding is another of the western media myths about China. The annual investment credit creation in China was historically about 25% of GDP - equivalent to trillions of USD annually - and the western inward funds are never more than in the USD billions. The great growth of China is somewhere between hundreds and sometimes even thousands of times more funded by Chinese PBoC credit creation rather than by any western inward funds.In 2003 China implemented a law to advantage the establishment and growth of SMEs. That worked and Chinese SMES became the foundation of a vast level of Chinese exports to the USA and to the rest of the world.2006- 2015: China becomes the Greatest Industrial Economy in the WorldThe great real economic growth of China inevitably resulted in the Chinese economy at PPP becoming the greatest industrial power in the world in about 2014. American industry now has less than 40% of the industrial size of Chinese industry. In fact China’s industry is greater in PPP output terms than that of the next five largest nations in the world. See the table inGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to Why is Russia's GDP per Capita behind even the poorest US states, despite having lots of natural resources, fertile land and a well educated, youthful population?The Chinese Govenment adopted a social policy to address the left-behind rural population of China. Again see Social welfare in China - Wikipediawhich points out that“In 2004 China experienced the greatest decrease in its poorest population since 1999. People with a per capita income of less than 668 renminbi (RMB; US$80.71) decreased 2.9 million or 10 percent; those with a per capita income of no more than 924 RMB (US$111.64) decreased by 6.4 million or 11.4 percent, according to statistics from the State Council’s Poverty Reduction Office.Welfare reforms since the late 1990s have included unemployment insurance, medical insurance, workers’ compensation insurance, maternity benefits, communal pension funds, individual pension accounts, universal health care,[9] and a carbon tax.[10] Social welfare schemes introduced by the Hu Jintao regime (2003-2013) and the Xi Jinping regime (2013-present) encompass several urban programmes and aim to "revolutionize the urban safety net and social insurance contract in China."[11]”and“A law approved February 2013 will mandate a nationwide minimum wage at 40% average urban salaries to be phased in fully by 2015.[13] “So China continues to make social as well as economic progress.2016–2025: The MadeinChina2025 developmentChina, using its immense R&D investment, has stepped beyond the technological capabilities of the west in several directions.The development of all aspects of the G5 internet-accelerating system, with a latency of about a millisecond, and the potential G6 development now started for one-terabyte per second latency, both indicate that China will have the best-in-the-world internet capabilities.China has set out explicit plans to become the greatest manufacturing economy in the world based upon a Chinese upscaling of Germany’s inspiring Industrie04 policy. The implications of that policy are economically monumental. SeeGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What Advances Are Happening "Only In China?"4 Conclusions4.1 The inflation in China during the 1980s and 1990s were minor side effects of temporary imbalances between inadequate supply and too-high demand in the economy. Other indices of these imbalances were the high levels of spare capacity often created in several industries where production temporarily ran ahead of demand. Both of these situations were comparatively minor events on the road to rapid economic development.4.2 I agree entirely with the Japanese post-war assessment that inflation is sometimes the natural result of rapid economic growth and that higher economic growth is much more important as a government policy objective than the control of inflation.4.3 The western obsession with inflation is a product of a misdirected system of independent central banks. The more effective objective of a central bank is not to pretend it can control inflation (when it generally can’t) and not to generate asset bubbles which are always disastrous, but to assist in the process of credit creation for productive purposes. No western Washington Consensus Central bank does that.4.4 China has a fascinating system of setting local wages and salaries in its major cities by reference to local costs of living. That system seems to reduce inflation levels by providing often appropriate local levels of demand. The Chinese ”blindflow” - the large movement by HSTs of tens or hundreds of millions of Chinese workers from western and central China to the coastal provinces to access higher-wages&salaries through a vast temporary relocation - is a interesting response to that policy.I apologise that this Answer is not fully adequate, but given the scope of the subject I suspect no Answer could be. I have not mentioned the OBOR/B&RI/ Other-Chinese-Funded-Projects although these are included inGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What Advances Are Happening "Only In China?"

The twists and turns in the Sushant Singh Rajput case would outfox even the most skilled of Bollywood’s storytellers. The death of the 34-year-old actor at the height of his popularity stunned the country. His fans thought it was a suicide brought on by immense inner mental torment, an affliction he hid from the world. Then, as the drama unfolded amid a pandemic and a lockdown, an army of warriors started playing detective on social as well as conventional media. These self-appointed sleuths first billed his death as an outcome of the “movie mafia” in Mumbai filmdom, denying talented outsiders such as Sushant their due. Then, after an unexplained hiatus of 40 days, Sushant’s family alleged foul play. The spotlight then shifted to Sushant’s girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty and her family, whom Sushant’s father Krishna Kishore Singh accused of siphoning off Rs 15 crore from his account and having abetted his suicide. In between, a convoluted potboiler began to simmer, one involving the death of Disha Salian, Sushant’s manager briefly, a few actors and a political battle between two states and their police machinery. Suddenly, the word ‘murder’ began doing the rounds. On August 19, the case took its most dramatic turn when thePicture of Happiness, Sushant and Rhea seen together in Mumbai on July 7 last yearSupreme Court, acting on Rhea’s petition challenging an investigation by the Bihar police, handed over the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The CBI must now find answers to the questions that have haunted headlines more than two months after Sushant died.A Hero’s Farewell, Sushant’s fans take out a candlelight march for him in Patna on June 16Last Rite, Sushant’s family immerses his ashes in the Ganga in PatnaWhat is the evidence that Sushant took his own life?Nothing on June 14 suggested that the day would be any different for Sushant, who stayed on the sixth floor of a duplex apartment in the Mount Blanc housing society of Bandra in Mumbai. Around 8 am, he asked his domestic help Neeraj for a glass of cold water. For breakfast, he asked his cook Keshav to give him coconut water, juice and bananas. He didn’t have the bananas. When Keshav went to ask him around 10 am what he wanted for lunch, he found the room locked. Assuming that Sushant wanted to sleep till late, everyone let him be. But when the actor did not open the door or answer the calls of Siddharth Pithani, his creative content manager and flatmate since January 2020, the staff grew concerned enough to hunt for a key and alert Sushant’s sister Meetu, who lives in Mumbai suburb Goregaon, 16 km away. They decided that the lock had to be broken. Around 1 pm, a local locksmith broke the lock to the door. But rather than go into the room immediately, Pithani paid the locksmith Rs 2,000 and saw him off. He then came back, and went into Sushant’s room, with house manager Dipesh Sawant and Neeraj following him. It was then that they found Sushant hanging from the ceiling fan.Pithani says he brought the body down, severed the green kurta Sushant had used to hang himself and tried to revive him. Sushant’s sister Meetu, too, had reached by then. There was no suicide note, a fact that has fuelled some controversy. The Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) in Kalina ruled out homicide in its report as nothing in the samples suggested foul play. FSL sources say the “tests of nails and the stomach wash showed no struggle or poisoning, respectively”. The post-mortem report reached a similar conclusion, listing the cause of death as “asphyxia due to hanging”. Based on the half-open eyelids, secretion of semen on the shorts, the viscera report and the contents of the stomach, the forensic experts concluded that there is no foul play.However, on July 25, almost six weeks after Sushant’s death, his father K.K. Singh filed a complaint with the Patna police, stating that he suspected foul play. The family’s advocate, Vikas Singh, outlined the family’s reasons for suspicion. For one, they characterise Pithani’s behaviour with the locksmith as peculiar. “Normally, you would open the door first before seeing the locksmith off. Why was he sent away first?” he asks. Singh cites other alleged inconsistencies in the Mumbai police probe following the actor’s death. The Mumbai police say Sushant climbed on to his bed to hang himself. Singh argues that at six feet, Sushant was tall enough to touch the fan if he stood on his bed. According to him, when people want to hang themselves, they stand on a stool, slip the noose around their neck and then fling the stool away. Sushant, Singh adds, would have had to be in an inclined position to hang himself; even so he’d still have the support of the bed.Dr Harsh Sharma, director, State Forensic Science Laboratory at Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, who has investigated over 800 suicide deaths, dismisses his claim. He told YouTube channel Crime Tak that once the noose is tied around the neck and connected to the anchor point, whether a person is standing, sitting or kneeling, the neck is compressed and all impulses to the brain are cut off, sending the body into a state of paralysis. The lack of bruises and abrasions on Sushant’s body and the half-open eye were typical of suicidal hanging, he added.Did Sushant suffer from a serious mental disorder?Sushant’s family now even questions the Mumbai police’s initial conclusion that the actor had a serious mental illness that could have led to him taking his life. That Sushant’s interests extended beyond cinema is well-established. On his Instagram, one was more likely to find nuggets on his progress with 50 dream projects, navel-gazing or insights on astronomy than film-related posts. What would push a man with so many interests to take this tragic step?Rhea Chakraborty, who describes herself as his “live-in partner”, believes Sushant had been suffering from a serious mental disorder for the past eight months. She recalls that she first noticed it when she, Sushant and her brother Showik had taken a trip to Europe in October 2019. Rhea told officials investigating the case that the first episode occurred in a hotel room in Florence after they had seen the Goya painting, ‘Saturn Devouring His Son’. Sushant, she said, was shaken and had hallucinated over the next few days. His condition got serious enough for them to cut short their trip. Between November and December 2019, Sushant and Rhea consulted Mumbai-based clinical psychologist and psychotherapist Dr Susan Walker Moffat, who diagnosed the actor as having a bipolar disorder. In a video statement shared with YouTube channel Mojo Story, Moffat said Sushant was “suffering terribly during his bouts of depression and hypomania”. Moffat was one of at least four doctors Sushant reportedly consulted till March 2020. Rhea also revealed that she consulted Moffat for her own battle with anxiety and panic attacks.In an August 1 interview to Aaj Tak television channel, Sushant’s help Neeraj said the actor appeared to be ‘down’ ever since returning from his Europe trip. He also said that no party took place on the night before the suicide, as was alleged in some circles; Sushant barely stepped out during the lockdown.In a June 18 post on Facebook that she later deleted, Sushant’s sister Shweta Singh Kirti wrote, “I know you were in a lot of pain and I know you were a fighter and you were bravely fighting it.” On August 3, Mumbai police commissioner Param Bir Singh told the media that their inquiries had established Sushant as suffering from ‘depression’. Pithani was witness to more telltale signs of Sushant’s fragile mental state. The actor had asked him in January to urgently come to Mumbai (from Ahmedabad) and work with him. He told Pithani that he wanted to quit acting. “He said I don’t have anyone right now,” Pithani recalls. In a video interview to Zoom, he said the news of Disha Salian’s death on June 9 affected Sushant so much that he cried and even fainted. “He was upset about his name being used again and again,” Pithani said.The Rajput family lawyer Singh denies all these allegations. “Sushant did not have any mental health issues till the end of 2019,” he told india today. “If he was feeling depressed after 2019 or had any issues, Rhea is responsible for it.”Could mental illness have led Sushant to commit suicide?Question Round: Rhea arrives with brother Showik for ED interrogation in Mumbai on Aug. 15There were reports from some quarters that Sushant’s mental torment was a result of the setbacks he faced in his career apart from discrimination in the industry. And it was this pressure that finally got to him. It is true that over the years, two big projects, that were particularly dear to Sushant and in which he had made considerable creative and physical investments, did fall through. One was Shekhar Kapur’s Paani, which was shelved after differences between Kapur and producer Aditya Chopra, and the other was Chandamama Door Ke, a space drama for which Rajput had visited the US Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama, for training. Serial entrepreneur Varun Mathur, Sushant’s partner in his other company, Innsaei Ventures, started in 2018, cited a conflict of dates as the reason why the actor left the film.But despite these prominent setbacks, Sushant regularly received offers of new roles in films. Rumi Jaffrey was going to direct a romantic comedy featuring him and Rhea. National Award-winning filmmaker Anand Gandhi had hoped Sushant would, as a friend, consider doing his next film set in the backdrop of the pandemic. Just a day before his death, producer Ramesh Taurani and director Nikhil Advani, in a call, had pitched a new project to Sushant.Mental health experts say setbacks in career may not necessarily be the prime reason for mental torment. “There is no physical parameter one can look [at] and say one’s depressed. Just because you are depressed does not mean you cannot function,” says Mumbai-based psychologist Dr Shraddha Sidhwani. A practitioner for 17 years, she adds that the media’s denial and trivialisation of mental health issues “is reversing the work psychiatrists have done in beating the stigma over the past decade”. Sidhwani says it’s common for patients to seek second opinions and change psychiatrists since they feel they have “lost control over” their minds. “It is more difficult for high achievers to accept the illness,” she adds. Flatmate Pithani says Sushant had stopped taking medication in March.Once known as manic depressive illness, the bipolar disorder that Sushant’s psychiatrist diagnosed is associated with severe mood swings ranging from manic highs to depressive lows. There are no conclusive triggers for the illness, but experts largely attribute it to a chemical imbalance in the brain, genetics, or deep disturbances in the neurotransmitters. The consensus is that symptoms show up in the second decade of life. “It could begin with episodes of mania, excessive spending, high energy, delusions of grandeur and disturbed sleep; and, after a while, depressive tendencies take over, low energy, low concentration, poor memory and a tendency to harm oneself. In some people it occurs the other way round,” explains Dr B.N. Gangadhar, director of NIMHANS, Bengaluru.It is hard to diagnose bipolar patients because the symptoms need not always be evident. Many patients hide their symptoms for fear of stigma or out of shame. Dr Purnima Nagaraja, a Hyderabad-based psychiatrist, says: “Bipolar patients could also have personality disorders. Some of them could have more tendencies for depression it differs from patient to patient.”Medication and therapy are essential for bipolar patients, especially among those who are strongly suicidal. “If a person has an established disorder then, through appropriate counselling and medication, any mental health patient can lead a fully functional and stable life,” says Dr Gangadhar. If left untreated, the symptoms in most patients are self-limiting, he adds.But even if the symptoms aren’t always permanent, for most patients, their severity, particularly the depressive episodes, are unbearable to withstand. It can lead to severe feelings of guilt, abandonment, a sense of not being wanted and of extreme hopelessness. A 2015 study titled ‘Suicide Attempts in Bipolar Disorder’, published in the National Center for Biotechnology Information, a US-based resource for the scientific research community, estimates that between 25 per cent and 60 per cent of individuals with bipolar disorder attempt suicide at least once in their lives, and 4 per cent to 19 per cent see it through to the end. Psychiatrists say depression in bipolar patients can be extreme. It often overrules logic and positive feelings in a patient, prompting some to turn suicidal, as they are unable to find hope or feel good about themselves and their lives.Did his relationship with Rhea drive Sushant to suicide?The 34 years and 146 days of Sushant Singh Rajput’s life are now largely being seen through the time he spent with Rhea Chakraborty, the actress he began dating in April 2019. Rhea and Sushant knew each other from when they were both talents at Yash Raj Studios in 2012. Sushant had a three-film contract with the studio, beginning with Shuddh Desi Romance (2013), while Rhea had been signed on for the Y-Films project Mere Dad Ki Maruti. At the time, Rajput was in a live-in relationship with his Pavitra Rishta co-star Ankita Lokhande with whom he would part ways in 2016.Things had soured between Rhea and Sushant’s family in the initial stages of their romance. Rhea’s advocate Satish Maneshinde, in an interview to india today, claimed that in April 2019, when she was staying with Sushant at his apartment for a few days, the actor’s sister Priyanka and her husband were also there. On one occasion they had attended a party together and later, while Rhea was asleep in Sushant’s bedroom, an inebriated Priyanka had allegedly groped Rhea. Rhea moved out soon after but not before informing Sushant of the incident, leading to a falling out between the two siblings. The Rajput family lawyer vehemently denies the charge against Priyanka, saying, “It is a completely false allegation and Sushant had even apologised to his sister later on this. The entire family knew it was a false allegation.”The family blames Rhea for creating barriers between them and Sushant. The rift sharpened after December 2019 when Rhea moved in with him. The actor did reduce contact with his father and sisters at this time, but celebrated his 34th birthday with his sisters, Meetu and Neetu, in Chandigarh between January 20 and 24. According to what Sushant’s friend Mahesh Shetty told the police, Rhea had also fired all of the actor’s staff members, cook, manager and bodyguard, and hired replacements. Sushant and Shetty go back to their days of acting together in the TV show Pavitra Rishta. Sushant had tried to connect with Shetty late at night on June 13.Meanwhile, Rhea’s brother Showik, 24, grew close to Sushant, becoming a frequent visitor to his Bandra house and the director of the two companies Sushant started, Vividrage Rhealityx Pvt Ltd (which had Rhea as part of its name), a firm dealing with mixed reality, experimental technology and artificial intelligence, and Front India for World Foundation, a non-profit organisation working to promote healthcare and eradication of hunger, poverty and malnutrition. On July 24, Showik would take to Instagram to describe his feelings towards Sushant, the “catalyst” in his life, writing that “you believed in love and spreading as much love as you could even though you were fighting a battle of your own”.Rhea and Sushant’s relationship had become increasingly troubled in recent months on account of his alleged mental illness. According to Maneshinde, “Sushant had been calling his family, informing them of his decision to move out of Mumbai and requesting them to come and meet him. After several days of Sushant calling and crying over the phone, his sister Meetu agreed to come live with him on June 8, 2020. Due to this development, Sushant requested Rhea to live with her parents for the time being. Even though Rhea wanted to see her family, she was not at all comfortable leaving Sushant.” On July 14, a month after his death, Rhea wrote on Instagram: “My words are incapable of expressing the love we have and I guess you truly meant it when you said it is beyond both of us Eternally connected.”However, the Rajputs’ advocate Singh claims that this is, in fact, a complete lie and says, “Sushant’s sister had to go and stay with him because Rhea had left. Rhea should explain why she blocked Sushant’s number if she had gone at his behest.” On August 20, a WhatsApp chat between Rhea and filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, who produced her last release Jalebi (2018), surfaced. The exchange on June 8, the day Rhea left Sushant’s house, suggests she had broken up with him. Bhatt reporte­dly asked her not to look back. “Make it possible what is inevitable,” he wrote.Did Rhea embezzle Sushant’s money and abet his suicide as his father alleges?While the police’s account that this was a suicide seemed cut and dried, the case took a completely different turn when Sushant’s father K.K. Singh filed a police complaint in Patna on July 25, alleging foul play and accusing Rhea of abetting Sushant’s suicide and siphoning off Rs 15 crore from his bank account. The Patna police filed an FIR the same day against Rhea, three of her family members, father Indrajit, mother Sandhya and brother Showik, Samuel Miranda (house manager) and Shruti Modi (former business manager) under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including 306 (abetment of suicide), 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint), 342 (punishment for wrongful confinement), 380 (theft in dwelling house), 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property).Attempting to explain why Sushant’s father took nearly six weeks after his death to file a complaint, family lawyer Singh says he was forced to do so because he had ‘given up on the Mumbai police’. “We waited for them to take some action. But when we saw they were completely going in the wrong direction, we decided to file a complaint in Patna,” Singh said. For reasons that remain unclear, the Mumbai police chose not to file an FIR and played down the probe (see The Great Goof-Up).Sushant was said to be close to his family till his relationship with Rhea caused friction with them. Krishna Kishore retired from the State Handloom Corporation in Patna, where he was a section officer, some 16 years ago. Sushant was the youngest of his five children. “We all are from a middle class family. My uncle too has had his struggles,” recalls Neeraj Kumar Bablu, son of Krishna Kishore’s elder brother and a BJP MLA.Sushant was born in Bihar’s Purnea district and did his schooling till the 10th grade at Patna’s St. Karen’s High School. Neighbours remember him as shy and unassuming but academically brilliant. He then moved to Delhi to finish high school and pursue engineering. He got into the Delhi College of Engineering (now Delhi Technical University), but dropped out in the final year of his course in 2005 to pursue a career in acting.Divya Gautam, Sushant’s cousin, says the actor continued to maintain a very close bond with his family. He also reportedly supported his father financially and took care of his medical treatment when he came to stay with him in 2018. Just days before his death, Sushant is said to have spoken to the house help in Patna, telling her to take greater care of his father during the Covid pandemic.The Enforcement Directorate (ED), while going into Krishna Kishore’s charges against Rhea, are finding it difficult to come up with evidence. That Rhea didn’t have a career as successful as Sushant’s led to accusations of her being a “gold digger”, Rhea herself noted in an Instagram post. The ED is yet to find any evidence of a transfer of any big sum to Rhea’s or her family’s bank accounts, as per the bank statements filed by Sandeep Sridhar, Sushant’s accountant since last year. Sushant’s big transactions, Sridhar told Aaj Tak on July 31, pertained mainly to “lifestyle expenses” typical of film stars. They involved paying rent, including for his farmhouse in Pavana, travels abroad and staff salaries. As per his bank statements, he filed at least Rs 2.78 crore in GST and income tax, paid Rs 61 lakh to talent management agency CAA Kwan, and monthly instalments for a flat he bought in Malad early in his career. Sridhar also said that Sushant never had Rs 15 crore in his account to transfer it to anyone. Priyanka Khemani, Sushant’s lawyer, told India Today TV that the Sushant she knew “always made his own decisions” even when it came to “handling his finances”.With the CBI stepping in, the Mumbai police will now have to transfer all case material, including the spot panchnama, the postmortem and inquest reports and the CCTV footage, to the central agency. The CBI will have to interrogate all the witnesses present at the scene of the incident and visit Sushant’s apartment to recreate the sequence of events. If it concludes that Sushant’s death was a case of suicide, it will then have to establish whether or not there was abetment. For that it will have to interrogate eyewitnesses again and assess whether Sushant was indeed pushed into taking his life. Proving abetment to suicide is always tricky. To do that, the CBI would have to identify a clear motive for this crime. The agency unfortunately doesn’t have much of a reputation for solving cases in recent years. Sushant may have chosen to take his life to end all the questions troubling him. Little would he have known that his suicide would raise even more questions. Finding the answers to them is the only way we can bring closure to a bright young life cut short needlessly.with Sonali Acharjee and Divyesh SinghSinghs vs. ChakrabortysCritical questions surrounding Sushant Singh Rajput’s death and the contesting versions of the families of the deceasedactor and Rhea ChakrabortySushant Singh Rajput was found dead in his Mumbai flat on June 14. The family filed a complaint with the Patna police on July 25. Why did they wait for 40 days to do so?Sushant’s family: We had given up on the Mumbai police. We waited for them to take some right action, but when we saw them heading completely in the wrong direction, we decided to register a complaint.Rhea’s family: Their lawyer Satish Maneshinde says that Sushant’s family made no allegations whatsoever before the Mumbai police or to any authority till July 27. Their statements were recorded by the police in Mumbai. The allegations are totally concocted and fabricated for ulterior purposes. Rhea denies all allegations, be it abetment to suicide or misappropriation of funds.Why is Sushant’s family now saying it is a murder when they initially blamed Rhea Chakraborty for ‘abetment to suicide’?Sushant’s family: After deciding to get an FIR registered, the family wanted to press for murder charges. The circumstances suggested that murder couldn’t be ruled out. The family had pressed for abetment to suicide charges (against Rhea) in the FIR based on what Siddharth Pithani (Sushant’s creative content manager) told them about Rhea. As he was Sushant’s close friend and flatmate, the family believed him. However, after the FIR was registered and Pithani’s name did not figure among the accused, he started backing Rhea. It was Pithani’s U-turn that made the family take a deeper look at some of the things—Sushant’s body had one eye open, the suspicious mark on the neck, there was no photo/ video evidence to prove that he was found hanging.Rhea’s family: Siddharth Pithani has alleged that two of Sushant’s family members asked him to testify that Rhea siphoned off Rs 15 crore from the actor’s bank account. “I have no idea about this,” Pithani told India Today TV. “I don’t want to say something I don’t mean to.” Pithani informed Mumbai police about the calls via an email. Maneshinde says the ED and police have examined Rhea’s income tax details and found nothing incriminating in them.Why does Sushant’s family doubt suicide?Sushant’s family: Sushant was 6 feet tall. Standing on the bed, he could have touched the fan above and there would have been no space. People wanting to hang themselves climb on a stool, tie themselves with a rope and kick the stool away, that way, there is no way to save them. In Sushant’s case, he would have had to get into an inclined position to hang himself from the bed. On struggling for breath, he would have automatically come back to the bed as the fan was over it. Then, the cloth used for hanging was cut from the noose and not the knot by which it was supposedly tied to the ceiling fan. Why would anyone do that? The mark on Sushant’s neck is also suspicious. There is also talk of a stun-gun (being used on Sushant). The autopsy report does not have the time of his death.Rhea’s family: The report of the forensic lab in Kalina (Mumbai) ruled out homicide as nothing in the samples had suggested foul play. The postmortem report had also concluded the cause of death to be “asphyxia due to hanging”. In an interview to YouTube channel Crime Tak, Dr Harsh Sharma, director, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, ruled out homicide. The eye position, he said, is “typical of suicidal hanging” and “suggestive of sympathetic compression of carotid artery”. “Once the neck is compressed, impulses from the brain are cut off and the body enters a state of paralysis,” Dr Sharma explained.Anomalies in the suicide theorySushant’s family: Sushant’s sister Meetu Singh was just 10 minutes away, they should have waited for her. (She was at Goregaon, at least a 20 minute drive from Bandra if the roads are empty.) A locksmith was called to open the locked door. Once he had done the job, he was taken away. (The locksmith broke the lock. However, no one seemed to be in hurry to open the door. The locksmith was taken downstairs before the door was opened.)Rhea’s family: In televised interviews, Pithani has said that he had followed Meetu Singh’s instructions over phone to bring Sushant’s body down in the hope that he was still alive, and that he tried to revive him by pumping his chest.Role of the Mumbai policeSushant’s family: The Mumbai police were required to complete the inquest process. Instead, they started calling people from the film industry in the name of probing nepotism, which cannot be the direct cause of death. There are so many unanswered questions. The more you deal with them, the more you realise that there’s foul play.aWhat could be the motive for murder?Sushant’s family: Advocate Vikas Singh says several theories need to be probed, and whether murder or suicide, Rhea is completely involved. An impartial agency, like the CBI, should find out the truth, he says.Rhea’s family: Maneshinde says Rhea had herself called for a CBI investigation. Since the Supreme Court has transferred the case to the CBI, she will appear and face the investigation like she did with Mumbai police and the ED. The truth, he says, will remain the same whichever agency investigates.Why does Sushant’s family blame Rhea?Sushant’s family: If Sushant was disturbed mentally, would he tell Rhea to block his number? There was not a single conversation in his last six days.Rhea’s family: Maneshinde says Rhea left Sushant’s home on June 8 reluctantly, on his request, and told him to “let her or her brother know about anything he required or if he needed to talk”.