Polar bears and humans: fragile coexistence on the edge of a melting world

Introduction: the Arctic symbol as an indicator of global change

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) is not only the largest terrestrial predator on the planet but also a key indicator species of the state of Arctic ecosystems and one of the most charismatic umbrella species, whose protection ensures the preservation of the entire circumpolar environment. The relationship between humans and polar bears has evolved from uncontrolled hunting and confrontation to recognizing the need for protection and complex conflict management. Today, these relations are defined by two main factors: anthropogenic climate change destroying the bear’s habitat and increasing human pressure in the Arctic.

Historical context: from extermination to conservation

For centuries, the polar bear was an important resource for the indigenous peoples of the North (Chukchi, Eskimos, Nenets)—a source of meat, fat, and skins. Hunting was conducted on the principle of sustainable use, embedded in cultural codes and mythology. The situation radically changed with the arrival of European hunters and explorers in the Arctic in the 18th–20th centuries. Bears were massively shot for their skins and as trophies, leading to a catastrophic population decline.

The turning point was the signing in 1973 of the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears (Moscow Agreement) by five Arctic states (USSR/Russia, USA, Canada, Norway, Denmark/Greenland). This was the first international document based on an ecosystem approach. It banned hunting from aircraft and icebreakers, introduced quotas for indigenous peoples, and initiated scientific cooperation. Thanks to it, the global population stabilized and increased from about 10-12 thousand in the 1970s to 22-31 thousand individuals by current estimates (IUCN, 2023).

Modern threats: climate and conflicts

1. Loss of sea ice — loss of home

The polar bear is a specialized hunter of seals, dependent on sea ice as a platform for hunting. Global warming is causing an unprecedented reduction in ice area and thickness.

Physiological consequences: Reduced fat accumulation period. Bears are forced to come ashore where they cannot hunt effectively. This leads to starvation, reduced reproductive success, increased mortality, especially among cubs.

Behavioral changes: Cases of cannibalism, attempts to hunt terrestrial animals (reindeer, birds), and active incursions into settlements in search of food are recorded.

Interesting fact: Studies using satellite collars show that some bears, stranded on land, enter a state similar to “walking hibernation,” lowering metabolism to survive the snowless period. However, this is an energy-saving strategy of desperation, not the norm.

2. The “bear-human” conflict: a new reality

The reduction of ice cover and increased human activity in the Arctic (navigation along the Northern Sea Route, resource extraction, tourism) lead to more frequent encounters.

Risks for people: Bears, especially young and hungry ones, become less cautious. In Russia, particularly on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago and in Chukotka settlements, “bear emergencies” are regularly declared.

Risks for bears: “Problem” bears approaching dwellings often have to be chased away, tranquilized for relocation, or, in extreme cases, shot. This is direct anthropogenic mortality, further reducing population numbers.

Coexistence and conservation strategies

1. Monitoring and science

The key tool is continuous monitoring. In Russia, polar bear populations are tracked using aerial surveys, satellite tagging, and genetic analysis. The “Bear Patrol” program by WWF Russia, involving local residents of Chukotka and the Nenets Autonomous Okrug in monitoring and conflict prevention, is a vivid example of conservation through participation.

2. Conflict management

Non-lethal methods are being developed and implemented:

Alert systems (radars, motion sensors) around settlements.

Patrolling and deterrence using signal pistols, noise cannons, rubber bullets.

Formation of “bear patrols” from indigenous residents who know bear behavior.

Arranging landfills and food storage areas to be inaccessible to bears.

3. Legal protection and international cooperation

The polar bear is listed in the IUCN Red List as Vulnerable and in the Russian Red Book. Hunting it in Russia has been completely banned since 1957 (except for a very limited quota for indigenous peoples of Chukotka). Arctic states continue cooperation under the Circumpolar Action Plan for polar bear conservation, coordinating research and protection measures.

The role of indigenous peoples: from hunters to guardians

Today, indigenous peoples are not just “resource users” but key partners in conservation. Their traditional knowledge of migration routes, behavior, and bear ecology is invaluable to science. Integrating this knowledge with Western scientific methods (co-management) is the most promising path. In Greenland and Canada, harvest quotas for indigenous needs are determined based on joint decisions by communities and scientists.

Example: In Chukotka, a project for collecting and analyzing genetic samples (hair, feces) conducted by the hunters themselves operates successfully. This allows tracking bear movements and kinship without costly and stressful capture and tagging.

The future: adaptation in a changing world

Scenarios for the polar bear directly depend on the pace of global warming. According to scientists’ forecasts, if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced, the population could decrease by 30% by 2050. However, the species shows some plasticity:

Occupation of new ecological niches (hunting terrestrial prey).

Use of anthropogenic resources (which, however, increases conflict risk).

The task of humanity is not just to preserve the species in zoos or isolated areas but to maintain functional Arctic ecosystems where the polar bear continues to play its key role at the top of the trophic pyramid. This requires both global measures to combat climate change and local measures to minimize direct anthropogenic pressure.

Conclusion: a test of responsibility

The relationship between humans and polar bears is a test of our ability to be responsible neighbors on the planet. The bear has become a living symbol of the consequences of the climate crisis—its struggle for survival on melting ice is vivid and dramatic. Preserving this species is not only an ethical duty but also an indicator of the health of the entire Arctic, a region critically important for Earth's climate. Success will mean that humanity has moved from exploitation and confrontation to complex, science-based, and respectful management of coexistence with wildlife in the Anthropocene era. The future of the polar bear is, in essence, a question of what kind of Arctic future generations will see and whether there will remain a place for the true, wild—not symbolic—master of the icy deserts.

Permanent link to this publication: