Polar Bear

IV. Conservation Management Strategy
Protect denning habitat
The availability of and access to terrestrial denning
habitat is an important component of polar bear
reproduction. Collaborative processes are currently
in place to minimize effects on denning bears (e.g.,
the Incidental Take Program under the MMPA, for
industrial activities). Going forward, we will continue
those efforts with industry and others, and will work
to improve our ability to detect dens and identify
desirable denning habitat.
As sea ice declines and the availability of stable
sea ice suitable for denning decreases, terrestrial
denning habitat will become even more important
(Fischbach et al. 2007). We will work with partners
to minimize development and disturbance on barrier
islands, which provide or could provide crucial
habitat for denning, migrating, and resting and
we will work collectively to minimize and mitigate
impacts when development occurs there.
Conservation and recovery actions
1. Continue den detection, mapping, behavioral, and habitat work in polar bear habitat in the United
States.
2. Minimize development and disturbance on barrier islands (where denning habitat is most limited).
Where development occurs in polar bear habitat within the United States, work collaboratively to mitigate
loss of denning habitat.
Total cost: approximately $197,000 per year.
Minimize risk of contamination from spills
Ship traffic and offshore oil and gas activities have
increased due to summer sea ice declines (Gautier
et al. 2009, Smith and Stephenson 2013), increasing
the risk to polar bears and their prey of exposure
to oil spills. Spills have the potential to harm polar
bears in numerous ways, including through impaired
thermoregulation (Hurst and Øritsland 1982, Hurst
et al. 1991), ingestion (Derocher and Stirling 1991,
Øritsland et al. 1981, St. Aubin 1990), and consumption
of contaminated prey (Stirling 1990). Depending
on the size, location and timing, a spill could affect a
large number of animals (Amstrup et al. 2006).
Current regulatory processes (e.g., NEPA analyses,
ESA section 7 consultations, MMPA incidental take
regulations) and industry-led plans and practices
have contributed to the absence of any major
mishaps affecting polar bears in 30 years of oil
and gas operations on the North Slope. Continued
vigilance is imperative, particularly with the opening
of new shipping lanes, the prospect of offshore oil
exploration and development, and the increased
risk of contaminant release from community tank
farms and landfills along the coast. We will pursue
several avenues to minimize the risk of marine spills
and, should a spill occur, to improve the ability of
responders to minimize harm to polar bears and
their prey. Examples of specific actions include
continuing to provide feedback on oil exploration
plans and compliance documents; ensuring that
responders and companies have current information
on seasonal bear movements, aggregations, and
important habitat areas; and developing standard
operating procedures for deterrence, rescue, and
handling of oiled bears.
Conservation and recovery actions
1. Update existing oil spill modeling and scenarios; anticipate potential overlap with seasonal polar bear
movements, aggregations, and important habitats within the United States.
2. Review and comment on proposed projects and activities in polar bear habitat within the United States
(e.g., oil and gas exploration, new shipping routes and regulations, and community tank farms) to mitigate
potential adverse outcomes.
3. Develop and distribute standard operating procedures and mitigation plans for deterrence, rescue, and
handling of oiled polar bears.
Total cost: approximately $501,000 per year.
Polar Bear Conservation Management Plan 47