Extinction: Not Just for Polar Bears

October 3, 2014

This week another massive beaching of walruses in the Alaskan Arctic. I did video on this a few years ago that is still relevant. The science denial media would like images of suffering animals to just go away, and for you to stop thinking about it all the time, dammit.

Media Matters:

The Daily Caller tried to “debunk” the “myth” that a recent mass walrus beaching is connected to global warming, even though scientists say the walruses have crowded onshore because they cannot find a resting place on Arctic sea ice, which has declined significantly as the Earth warms.

An October 1 Daily Caller article titled “Myth Debunked: Arctic Walrus Beachings Are Nothing New” promoted zoologist Susan Crockford’s claims that a recent massive beaching of around 35,000 walruses on a single Alaskan shore has nothing to do with climate change. To support her claim, Crockford cherry-picked two instances of walrus beachings from the 1970s.

However, Biologist Anatoly Kochnev of Russia’s Pacific Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography told NBC News that extended beachings of this size only began occurring in the late 1990s, adding: “The reason is global warming.”  Vox.com’s Brad Plumer further reported that this “appears to be the largest ever observed in northern Alaska, though NOAA is still trying to verify the exact numbers.” The current beaching is so vast that the Federal Aviation Authority is re-routing flights in order to avoid setting off a stampede.

In six of the past eight years, all of the floating sea ice in the Chukchi Sea (the region of the Arctic near the current haul-out) that walruses need to rest in between swims has completely melted away by mid-September, according to Chadwick Jay, head of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Pacific walrus program.

In the Daily Caller article, Crockford even noted that mass walrus beachings occurred in 2009, 2011 and 2014, but dismissed them simply because they “did not coincide with the lowest levels of Arctic summer sea ice” in 2007 and 2012.

However, every one of these years had much less Arctic sea ice than the historical average, contributing to the extended beachings.

And 2007 actually did experience a massive beaching, contrary to Crockford’s claim.

Daily Caller’s attempt to rebut what appears to be the consensus, that the massive walrus beaching is one example of climate change’s impacts, relied entirely on Crockford. But Crockford may not be the most reliable source — she has been working to attack the scientific consensus for years, once signing onto a document “rebuk[ing]” President Obama for accepting manmade global warming. A 2012 document from the climate “skeptic” Heartland Institute, which has received funding from oil interests, showed that Crockford was paid by the institute for the explicit purpose of combatting the United Nations’ consensus reports on the state of climate science. She has co-authored several of Heartland’s “Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change” (NIPCC) reports that attempt to mirror and debunk the U.N. reports. Climate scientist Kevin Trenberth has stated that the NIPCC reports have “no standing whatsoever.”


72 Responses to “Extinction: Not Just for Polar Bears”

  1. omnologos Says:

    I know this one. It was hurricanes then the hurricanes stopped. Before, it was polar bears but the polar bears kept going around. It was tornadoes, but they didn’t cooperate, and it was surface temps until those refused to do as told and were replaced by the deep ocean.

    Just ammunitions to those who say that environmental activism has morphed into a sterile chasing of the latest striking image and big news. It makes for newspaper copy but reality is something else.

  2. dumboldguy Says:

    Great video—-informative and disturbing. York waffles a bit near the end, but the minute after 5:40 really gets to the heart of the matter. Walruses are in deep doo-doo because of the decline of the ice—-they may not go extinct overnight, but their numbers will likely decline drastically—-to the point that the mass gatherings will no longer occur and will therefore no longer be “news”. Then we can forget about them.

  3. dumboldguy Says:

    From Yale Climate Connections:

    “In 2009, thirty one Alaskan villages were deemed “imminently threatened” by erosion and flooding. One of these communities is Newtok, Alaska, the home of about three hundred and fifty people who still depend on the food they hunt, gather, and fish near the Bering Sea”.

    “As the Arctic warms, the sea ice, which used to protect the coast from waves and storm surge, is melting. Permafrost is also thawing, causing the ground itself to sink or melt away, making the citizens of Newtok some of the world’s first climate refugees”.

    The world’s first climate refugees are Eskimos? Not people living on tropical islands? The walruses are not alone in “feeling the heat” in a very cold place.

    PS There are only some 200-250 Alaskan Native villages, depending on how you count them. Thirty-one is a rather substantial part of that total.

    • omnologos Says:

      Last I can find about Newtok is a Guardian article from aug 2013 saying the relocation had been halted due to local disputes. If anybody has more recent news, it would be interesting to see what those are.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Omno once again shows us how good he is at looking through the wrong end of the telescope by focusing on Newtok, which is not even the biggest “poster child” of the threatened villages. Google “Images for Kivalina and Shishmaref Alaska” for more spectacular evidence of what climate change is causing in Alaska
        Some more “recent news” can be found in the links below.



        Or Google this for the broad perspective: Climate Impacts in Alaska | Climate Change | US EPA

        PS This message of Omno’s once again demonstrates his need to wiggle and squirm rather than face truth. “More eecent news?”, demands Omno? ALL of this is RECENT NEWS. Those villages stood there for many decades until RECENT AGW-caused sea-level rise and melting permafrost attacked them.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Bad link for the Brookings paper. Google “Induced Displacement of Alaska Native Communities” to access it.

          • omnologos Says:

            You mention Novtok and then explain it’s not important. Nice.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Long drawn out SIGH….

            Incredibly obtuse Omnos does it again.

            Newtok was mentioned only because it was in a quoted post from Climate Connections that I had just received AND it was relevant to the walrus situation. It is certainly important to Newtokians BUT other villages ARE better “poster children”. Did Omno read the links? Does he now understand how widespread and serious the problem is among the Inuit?

            No, because he was too busy looking through the wrong end of the telescope, which, by the way, is inserted (along with his head) into a body orifice where he can view yesterday’s dinner.

          • omnologos Says:

            So many useless words Dumbo. I was busy reading the Guardian where Newtok is considered newsworthy


            they’ve been told in 2007 they’ve got to move by 2017. They agree. Yet 6 years later they were busy fighting each other. Any news for 2014? That’s all I asked.

            If the Newtokers don’t move who will?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Too dumb to reply to. Except to note that the head and telescope are so far “up there” that Omno can now see his teeth.

      • David Minor Says:

        Newtok sounds like a microcosm for the whole goddamned world to me…

      • anotheralionel Says:

        It would be interesting to have this Newtok issue revisited and examine the reasons for the division within the populace as to what to do. This is not a new situation for Shishmaref faces a similar fate, as anybody who has read Elizabeth Kolbert’s ‘Field Notes From A Catastrophy: A Frontline Report on Climate Change’.

        Now why can’t omnologos do a house swap with somebody from one of these Alaskan communities? Maybe then he will understand why there is division.

        As it happens outside vested interests can stir this up by offering cash incentives, but not to all equally, a moot point with Shishmaref it would appear.

        Jonathan Raban in ‘Passage To Juneau: A Sea and Its Meaning’ relates sad tales about the corruption of the Inuit along the coast that he sailed from Seattle. A good read BTW.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Omno has misinterpreted what is going on in Newtok as “local disputes”, and you have followed his lead somewhat with “reasons for the division within the populace as to what to do”.

          It appears that there are no real divisions on what to do and what the base problem is—-all DO understand that they are going to have to abandon Newtok, and work on a new village site has been underway for a while. There have been construction and bureaucratic snafus, and much political infighting and disagreement among the members of the town’s governing body as to “who shot John”, as well as some of the “corruption” you mention.

          Omno doing a house swap with an Inuit would be worthy of a reality television series. Omno could actually study the walrus and overcome his ignorance there. Being up to his chubby little rear end in melting permafrost might be a good experience for him too. LOL

          • anotheralionel Says:

            I recall that Greg Palast brought up the divide and rule situation in Alaska over other issues such as oil spills.

            Not exactly following omno’s lead, he rarely leads anywhere.

          • omnologos Says:

            yeah right. I write of local disputes, and after a lot brain flatulence you guys agree on “political infighting”. Maybe political infighting about global disputes, who knows.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            You wrote nothing about “local disputes”—-just using the words means nothing. We tried to educate you on what may have held up the move and you refuse to even try to understand.

            “Maybe political infighting about global disputes, who knows”. YOU don’t know, obviously, or you wouldn’t have made this obtuse and inane comment.

            I am now joining gingerbaker in giving Omno a “time out”. Trying to carry on an intelligent conversation with him is a waste of time.

            Say goodnight, Omno. (and he won’t get Rowan & Martin either)

    • redskylite Says:

      That’s an interesting point as I always think of the Pacific Islands Kiribati etc), Sundarbans and Bangladesh as the most vulnerable.

      This hot from the Alaska Dispatch News (10/3/2014):

      “The office noted that 183 out of 216 Alaska Villages, nearly 86 percent of Native villages, “are more susceptible to flooding and erosion due in part to rising temperatures.”

      Alaskans need a much more robust response to climate change.


  4. I wonder how many (if any) of you remember this movie from 1980, called “Virus”:


    In this film, the world’s population is wiped out by a virus, the only survivors being at a base in Antarctica. Thanks to the cold, the virus can’t replicate in the Antarctic atmosphere.

    One more good reason not to let the polar regions get too warm.

  5. lorne50 Says:

    You guy’s do know you can’t beach a walrus right they live in the sea and on the land ? If they did not hit the beach during breeding season we would have not one walrus to make up scary story’s about .

    P.S sent this to my two girls in University 18 and 19 2nd year they laughed their self’s horse really ask a 6th grader about walrus rookie’s Gawd you made me spit beer on the screen this fine -4c day

    Lorne Clinton

    • lesliegraham1 Says:

      You are just showing your ignorance and if the ‘girls’ really exist then so are they. You have no idea what you are talking about.
      The point about this mass beaching is that the individuals are overwhelmingly females and calves.
      Males regularly seperate from the females and calves and haul out onto the beaches. Females and calves don’t.
      Females and calves remain offshore on floating ice.
      The ice is now very scarce so they are forced to come ashore.
      What is it you and your ‘girls’ find so difficult to understand about such blindingly obvious visible facts?
      It’s almost as if you don’t want to accept the obvious everyday reality of climate change and the effects that are now occurring all over the planet. Are you seriously denying that the Arctic ice has lost 75% of it’s volume since 1980 as the sattelite record shows?
      Are you seriously denying that the loss of over 50% of ice extent – particularly in the area in question – has somehow NOT had an effect on the life cycle of the animals that depend on it?
      Do you have any IDEA just how insane that sounds in the face of such obvious realities?

      • omnologos Says:

        leslie – you do not know what you are talking about. Even the overenthusiastic scientist mentioned the females and calves because, usually, haulouts include all types of walruses, not just females and calves.

        Then of course a few years of observing walruses is taken as Established Truth for All the Future, but in case of global temps we have to look at many decades.

        • lorne50 Says:

          Bye the way Day sun is 2.5 hours and dropping fast 2 weeks no sun for 4 months Damm the heat up take with no sun looking forward to -45C ;>( it should melt the ice faster then -19C right ?

      • lorne50 Says:

        Have you been NORTH to see these animals just a thought go and look the Bulls are around 2500kgs the females half that , the bulls fight all the time for thier harem calf’s and females get crushed it’s nature . where are you ? bye the way since you seem to know more about where I live then I do when I walk out my dam door ?

      • lorne50 Says:

        OOP’S forgot to tell you dress warm the ice is melting a -19C today

      • lorne50 Says:

        Why is it that this claptrap got one forward and your like ? you two if there is no sock puppet got your nad’s handed to you LOL ;>)

      • Leslie, never mind Omnoecologos, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to Odobenus rosemarus divergens. No really, he doesn’t. His non-quantitative “haulouts include all types of walruses” directly contradicts the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Alaska), its counterpart agencies in Russia and the Eskimo Walrus Commission, i.e. ‘during the ice-free season, coastal haulouts in the Bering Sea are primarily male’.

        He misses the point that the walrus is considered an ice-dependent species. Why? They use floating sea ice for birthing and nursing calves, resting, isolation from predators, and for passive transport to new feeding areas. Why else would most of the population spends the summer months in the pack-ice of the Chukchi Sea?

        His statement that “Then of course a few years of observing walruses” is deeply dismissive of the history and oral history of the Inuit peoples. Just saying.

        • omnologos Says:

          Hubris in the form of overestimating scientific knowledge is never far from these comments. Walruses live comfortably far from the ice and feed on a variety of things


          also for obvious reasons cold war data is sparse if not still untranslated and in Russian. And Inuit reports skewed as hunters only care about easily available giant males. Etc etc.

          A little precaution before seeing climate change everywhere wouldn’t hurt

          • dumboldguy Says:

            The Omnidiot outdoes himself with this one. He expects us to dig through all this crap to find the ONE sentence he has misinterpreted to mean “walruses are comfortable far from the ice and eat a variety of things”? If he had any brains and knowledge at all, he’d know that walruses appear to be MOST comfortable in the environment they are adapted to, and that includes a lot of ICE.

            Next he’ll be telling us that “fish are comfortable far from the water”, and giving us some 500 page reference to search for that gem.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      In addition to having an insulting and inappropriate Gravatar image, Lorne insults us with his ignorance. We shouldn’t feel too insulted however, because Lorne posts his ignorant trash on other sites, mostly as short and semi-literate tweets, and can even be found in “conversation” with Steve Goddard on some sites. A real brain trust, that.

      Breeding season for walruses is OVER, Lorne, and what’s going on is more of a migration/habitat issue. They’re on land at a time and place they normally wouldn’t be because of abnormal ice melt. They would normally be on the ice, but the ice has melted so far out that the water is now too deep at the ice margin, and they can’t dive down to their food. You and your stooge Omnologos are the ones that need to get educated.

      Glad to see proof of the old adage “The DumbApple doesn’t fall too far from the DumbTree”, though. Your girls sound like they got your genes, and you can feel good about the fact that they likely won’t cost you too much more tuition, since they will likely not make it to 3rd. year.. (Or did they gain admission through some sort of affirmative action plan and have a “pass”? Special consideration for children of fathers with low IQ’s?). Actually, they may be laughing just to humor you, since you ARE their dad no matter how dumb and deluded you are.

      PS Try not to spit beer on the keyboard. It’s not good for the electronics. I’m sure you have learned how to clean the screen after sneezing on it without covering your mouth in the past.

      • lorne50 Says:

        so are you next door from me then is your hair rainbow colored who do you work for we can chat in the kitchen after you and I have a breakfast together, But then I guess I go to work and you won’t , And I’m north right now and your not !!!!!!! ;>)

      • lorne50 Says:

        ADHOMS the things used bye week minds and week arguments from a week side well done never answered me and just attacked GUESS YOU WIN ;>)

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Lorne is another commenter who shows a serious case of the D-K Effect. From this flood of semi-literate babbling can we assume that Lorne lives somewhere in the north and therefore has some first-hand knowledge of walruses?

          Sort of an “argument from authority” when the “authority” appears to be a beer-swilling (perhaps drunken), uneducated in science, north country “hillbilly”?

          And who threw “adhoms at you? It is not an ad hominem to point out “week” and illogical arguments put out by someone with a “week” mind and THEN call them an idiot based on analysis of their “weekness”. You’ve got it backwards—–THIS is an adhom—-“You are an idiot, therefore your arguments are “week” and idiotic”.

          ADHOMS the things used bye week minds and week arguments from a week side well done never answered me and just attacked GUESS YOU WIN ;>)

  6. redskylite Says:

    Wikipedia (on the Walrus) – “The effects of global climate change are another element of concern. The extent and thickness of the pack ice has reached unusually low levels in several recent years. The walrus relies on this ice while giving birth and aggregating in the reproductive period. Thinner pack ice over the Bering Sea has reduced the amount of resting habitat near optimal feeding grounds. This more widely separates lactating females from their calves, increasing nutritional stress for the young and lower reproductive rates. Reduced coastal sea ice has also been implicated in the increase of stampeding deaths crowding the shorelines of the Chukchi Sea between eastern Russia and western Alaska”

    The “Climatedepot” is telling us it is normal and good as it benefits the lucky polar bear – who have a veritable feast from the carcasses.

    So what does the “Climatedepot” think will happen to the walrus by mid century or earlier, when the sea ice is no more, or do they think we will have a miracle ice age to balance the geo-engineering feat that mankind has already achieved on our climate.

    The denier sites, like climatedepot, hate any publicity that can be construed as empirical evidence for climate change, as they want us to see the world through their rose coloured glasses and presumably keep on using the atmosphere as an open sewer.

    “Those animals have essentially run out of offshore sea ice, and have no other choice but to come ashore,” said Chadwick Jay, a research ecologist in Alaska with the US Geological Survey.

    He said there was no doubt the migration – or “hauling out” as it is called – was caused by climate change.


  7. lorne50 Says:

    oops never seen the news paper hahahahahahah

  8. lorne50 Says:


    Read some real science and if you just blow her off because of me didn’t she is with the polar bear institute of CANADA .

    • How unusual! A juvenile skeptic has hauled itself onto a climate science floe (floating ice to you). This bucks the trend of haulout behaviour increasing in frequency on the rocky beaches of skeptic blogsites. Dwindling numbers of skeptics are congregating on the skeptic beaches as the flotsam of ‘climategate’ emails, ‘IPCC typographical errors”, “faux pauses” and “rebounds” are melting away. The skeptic’s massing behaviour, to provide warmth and comfort in an increasingly hostile environment, adds to the illusion that they are not an endangered species.

      What places the skeptics in the ‘at risk’ category is that contrarian memes have a decreasing buoyancy on mainstream blogsites and are sinking in the sea of climate science facts. As a result of the buoyancy blowout, all types of skeptics can no longer haul themselves onto these memes, rest and enjoy passive transport free from predation.

      Allow me to illustrate. Your “real scientist” is not with the Polar Bear Institute of Canada(PBIC); no such institute exists. Perhaps you meant the Norwegian Polar Institute(NPI). But she doesn’t work for them either. By the way, the NPI has a page on polar bears and a page on walruses. [This latter page states that: “There is significant sexual segregation outside the breeding season.” and that walrus breeding season is in “December and January“. Thought that you might like to know that as it has relevance to this particular blog article.]

      Your “real scientist” has her own blogsite called Polar Bear Science (PBS). An impressive title that would be more appropriate if it was called Polar Bull S***t. Her name is Susan Crockford; a name that is close to Crockfull when applied to her blogsite articles. If you were to read her peer-reviewed work, you would know that she is not an expert in polar bear biology. No she isn’t, she is an expert in canine evolution, you know, dog evolution, on which she is eminently qualified to prognosticate.

      What does Susan do in the academic world? She is a sessional adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, in Canada. Sessional means sometimes and adjunct means that she is not paid by the university. Who pays her then? No, not the PBIC which doesn’t exist. Apparently, some or all of her income is derived from the Heartland Institute .

      Be comforted by the knowledge that the insulation provided by your thick layer of skeptic beliefs (and ignorance) will keep you protected as your skeptic memes melt and you sink into the cold sea of hard facts from real science. Or will it? I’ve noticed that a few (Orcinus) orcas are cruising on this blogsite.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Excellent comment, George. Even rises to “poetic” in several places.

        PS Please don’t warn the fools about those toothy big black and white guys cruising on Crock. The fools might hide and thereby deprive them of an easy meal,

        • omnologos Says:

          Am sorry mandumbochild to see you couldn’t stick to your promise and ignore me, not even for a day

          as I said you only exist as a silly reply machine. Grow up at last and stop spamming this blog with your empty meta analyses.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Do I hear the village idiot nattering on somewhere?

        Since I am ignoring Omno, perhaps someone on Crock would be kind enough to pass on these thoughts to him?

        1) George and I were commenting about the fool called Lorne, not the fool called Omnologos.
        2) Omnomoron apparently thought the “s” I appended to “fool” in my comment meant that I included him as well and took umbrage. Such is the way with those narcissists who always try to make it “all about them”.
        3) Omno is apparently unable to understand that what he said is a tacit admission on his part that HE is a fool like Lorne. No surprise there.
        4) I would applaud that admission if I though it showed self-awareness on Omno’s part.
        5) Alas, I think it just proves his narcissism and inability to examine himself.
        6) Omno should understand that just because I may be commenting about stupidity and stupid people that I AM ignoring him unless I address him by name and/or respond to one of his comments.
        7) I.E., talking ABOUT someone rather than TO someone IS a form of “ignoring”.
        8) Omno should be made aware of the fact that the “empty meta analyses” that I and others have performed on him have been so extensive and repeated so many times with such accuracy that they are irrefutable.
        9) In light of all that certainty I therefore propose that that we establish a new Universal Law of Nature, whose basic premise is that Omno’s cluelessness is the standard against which all others should be measured. (Akin to “nothing can travel faster than the speed of light”)
        10) I will leave it to others to flesh out the idea, but I think we do need an “Omno’s Constant” and and “Omno Scale” as part of it.

  9. omnologos Says:

    Someone ought explain how a giant animal built to survive extremes all over the Arctic could find itself endangered apart from being killed by hunters. If climate change is making their life difficult where are the dead walruses or the malnourished calves or a drop in the number of newborns?

    • redskylite Says:

      It is not our job to “educate” you – if you are interested why not study up on the creature, I am sure your local library has some good books on the animal. It seems to me that the animal has adapted to using sea ice for birthing and looking after the young, whether it can adapt to a sea ice free environment is unknown. It will be a stressful time for the species . Denier sites like WUWT and ClimateDepot just quote one dubious expert, no one says how the Walrus will fare without any sea ice (which most experts expect will be gone by mid century summers). Maybe it will adapt maybe not, certainly it will have to change.

    • redskylite Says:

      It is not our job to “educate” you – if you are interested why not study up on the creature, I am sure your local library has some good books on the animal. It seems to me that the animal has adapted to using sea ice for birthing and looking after the young, whether it can adapt to a sea ice free environment is unknown. It will be a stressful time for the species . Denier sites like WUWT and ClimateDepot just quote one dubious expert, no one says how the Walrus will fare without any sea ice (which most experts expect will be gone by mid century summers). Maybe it will adapt maybe not, certainly it will have to change.

    • redskylite Says:

      If you can’t be bothered to go to the library and read some non-SQL material for a change, maybe this USGS video will help, no one has said that the Walrus is endangered, but it is threatened (obviously) as it’s environment is changing quickly.

      • omnologos Says:

        I wasn’t expecting to be taught anything – mine was a rhetorical question. But thanks for inspiring some clarification on endangered vs threatened – no sarcasm now.


        If sea ice is so important for the walruses, it looks to me too weak a species to survive – unless somebody can show that the Arctic Ocean has been having ice in the right places for millions and millions of years. I suppose the concern is that might disappear from most but not all of its current range.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          It is obvious that Omno “wasn’t expecting to be taught anything”. Judging by how much he rejects our attempts to educate him, it is also obvious that he just likes to hear himself talk—-yes, “mine was a rhetorical question” says it all.

          Omno is ignorant of walrus evolution also, or he would know that walruses “millions of years ago” appear to have lived in warmer oceans and migrated to the arctic as global conditions changed.

          Omno shows his ignorance of evolution in general by talking about “too weak a species to survive”. Species are not “weak”, Omno, they are adapted to their habitat (and are able to adapt if it changes) or they are not—-if not, they die out.

    • redskylite Says:

      If you can’t be bothered to go to the library and read some non-SQL material for a change, maybe this USGS video will help, no one has said that the Walrus is endangered, but it is threatened (obviously) as it’s environment is changing quickly.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      “Someone ought explain how a giant animal built to survive extremes all over the Arctic could find itself endangered”, says Omno? Lord love a duck, but that’s what this whole thread is about. Stop admiring yourself in the mirror and pay attention, Omno.

      “….where are the dead walruses….?”, Omno asks? They’re there, Omno, along with many millions of other DEAD things—-we’re in the sixth mass extinction, remember?

      (And sometime in the future, people will find them with the dead dinosaurs, mammoths, sabre-toothed tigers, dodo birds, tree frogs, and Omnos)..

    • anotheralionel Says:

      Probably littering the ocean floor, like the remains of all your convoluted comments from some buzz phrase generator.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        In the lexicon of the USMC Drill Instructor can be found an appropriate phrase, usually delivered with spit and at high volume from six inches away when a recruit makes an error. (And all USMC recruits are error-prone, a trait they share with Omno).


        That’s pretty “low”, since we all know whale s**t sinks to the bottom of the ocean.

        Yes, the “remains” of many walruses are likely down there, on TOP of the whale s**t. If you want to find Omno’s comments, you will have to dig deep indeed.

  10. redskylite Says:

    More on hauling out and polar bear/walrus interaction in this 6.20 min video from the Beeb (with David Attenborough).

Leave a Reply to George Montgomery Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: