In 2006 a wildlife biologist of repute published his documented aerial observations of drowned polar bears in the Beaufort Sea. In 2011 he was 'placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation ...' related to the 2006 publication. 'Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility' has now filed a detailed complaint accusing the ocean energy bureau of scientific misconduct.
Polar Bear Drownings
The 2006 Polar Biology article by Monnett and Gleason reported on aerial surveys carried out in 2004 where 55 polar bears were seen. 51 of these were alive (with 10 swimming in open water) and 4 were seen floating – dead presumably drowned.
The paper noted that between 1987 and 2003 a total of 315 had been seen, with 12 swimming and none presumed drowned.
Monnett and Gleason speculated that: 'mortalities due to offshore swimming during late-ice (or mild ice) years may be an important and unaccounted source of natural mortality ....', and that: 'drowning-related deaths of polar bears may increase in the future if the observed trend of regression of pack ice and/or longer open water periods continues.'
Scientific Research and Activism
In The New York Times (2011) Felicity Barringer suggests that: 'The federal government has suspended a wildlife biologist whose sightings of dead polar bears in Arctic waters became a rallying point for campaigners seeking to blunt the impact of global warming'.
Barringer points out that: 'images of drowned polar bears became a staple for activists who warned that global warming and the retreat of sea ice were threatening the bears’ survival'.
The question here is whether scientists should report what they find, or rather tailor their reporting in the light of possible consequences.
Unintended Consequences
An amusing and thought-provoking article on 'Unintended Consequences ...' mentions the 'The Streisand Effect', where the attempt to remove something from the public gaze has the opposite effect.
Maybe this case will have just this result – raising awareness of the very serious question: 'who are scientists responsible to?'
Certainly, by eliciting an official complaint the 'Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement' has given this particular case a very high profile. Many people will be watching.
The Role of Scientific Investigation
Many feel that the disciplined observations and experiments of scientists should be freely available, and that findings, such as the one detailed here (where more polar bears are drowning now than in the past) should be fed into policy decisions and campaigning activism – rather than limited by any sense of 'political correctness'.
If the results of scientific investigations are censored by politicians, what is the value of science?
Sources:
- 'Report on Dead Polar Bears Gets a Biologist Suspended', Felicity Barringer, The New York Times, 28 July 2011.
- 'Observations of mortality associated with extended open-water swimming by polar bears ...' Monnett and Gleason, Polar Biology, July 2006.
- Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Complaint pdf
Join the Conversation