A population size of 190 was estimated in 1998. The population is thought to be declining; harvest is low, but the population has lower productivity and is quite discrete.
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 | ||
| 190 (1998) | 102-278 | 4 | 4 | Data deficient | Declining | Very high | ||||||
Table comment: 82% of PVA simulations resulted in population decline after 10 years; demographic data are 11 years old.Projections of decline are high also because of low sample size.
The Norwegian Bay (NW) subpopulation is bounded by heavy multi-year ice to the west, islands to the north, east, and west, and polynyas to the south (Stirling et al. 1993, Stirling 1997; Taylor et al. 2008b). From data collected during mark-recapture studies, and from satellite radio-tracking of adult female polar bears, it appears that most of the polar bears in this subpopulation are concentrated along the coastal tide cracks and ridges along the north, east, and southern boundaries (Taylor et al. 2001a). The current (1993 – 97) estimate is 203 ± 44 (SE; Taylor et al. 2008b). Survival rate estimates for the NW subpopulation were derived from pooled Lancaster Sound and NW data because the subpopulations are adjacent and the number of bears captured in NW was too small to generate reliable survival estimates.