A small subpopulation of approximately 150 polar bears, estimated in 1997. Harvest is thought to be unsustainable, and the population declining.
Status table outtake
|
Aerial survey / Mark-recapture analysis |
Additional / Alternative Analysis |
|||||||||||
| Number (year of estimate) |
±2 SE or 95% CI |
Number (year of estimate) |
±2 SE or min-max range |
Sim | TEK | Historical annual removals (5 yr mean) | Potential maximum annual removals | Status | Current trend | Estimated risk of future decline | ||
| 164 (1998) | 94-234 | 11 | 15 | Reduced | Declining | Very high | ||||||
Table comment: 100% of PVA runs resulted in decline after 10 years. Research data are 11 years old.
Based on the movements of adult females with satellite collars and recaptures of tagged animals, the boundaries of the Kane Basin (KB) subpopulation include the North Water Polynya (to the south of KB), and Greenland and Ellesmere Island to the west, north, and east (Taylor et al. 2001a). Polar bears in KB do not differ genetically from those in Baffin Bay (Paetkau et al. 1999). The size of the subpopulation was estimated to be 164 ± 35 (SE) for 1994 – 1997 (Taylor et al. 2008a). The intrinsic natural rate of growth for KB polar bears is low at 1.009 (SE, 0.010) (Taylor et al. 2008a), likely because of large expanses of multi-year ice and low population density of seals (Born et al. 2004). Taylor et al. (2008a) suggested that KB might act as a sink because of unsustainable rates of harvest, relatively unproductive habitat, and lack of genetic differentiation with Baffin Bay.