Polar Bear Conservation

Introduction

A fear that polar bears are going extinct is the world’s most potent symbol of climate change, which has been causing lots of devastation across the globe. Global warming is affecting many species on the plant, including the polar bears in the Arctic. As air and sea temperatures rise, the world has been experiencing droughts, more significant storms, and other changes in climates. Global warming has been noticeably seen within Polar Regions and especially the Arctic. This is because ice loss in the Polar Regions affects the entire ecosystem that relies on sea ice for denning, breeding, and hunting.

Climate change has been changing the face of habitats around the world by driving plant and animal species into new environments. Numerous species that cannot stand the heat are then facing extinction unless they move to new habitats to survive the scorching effects of global warming. Those unable to move to new territories are left in a state of destruction due to unfavourable conditions for survival. A report by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated a third of all species in the polar region to face extinction over the next few decades due to rising global temperatures ( Derocher, 2010) . The impact is mostly faced along the Polar Regions, with the Arctic experiencing the most significant effects.

Globally, the population of polar bears has continued to decline due to numerous factors such as starvation, poor health, and destroyed habitat. The marine mammals have been starving to death in some parts of the Arctic with others swimming numerous miles searching for sea ice. In this sense, scientists and conservationists are debating whether it makes sense to move endangered species from one habitat to another to avoid extinction. In the context of polar bears, the focus is whether moving the endangered species to the Antarctica region would save these marine mammals from the brink of extinction ( Kuhn, 2010) . This paper examines the polar bears and their ecosystems to determine whether a change of habitat will benefit their existence. The document discusses the Arctic and Antarctic Polar Regions and their distinct characteristics that make them an ideal environment for polar bears.

Polar Bears

Public interest towards the state of polar bears has increased in recent years following a debate on global warming in the Arctic Region. More people are concerned with the risk of extinction for polar bears that rely on sea ice for survival. Polar bears are marine mammals found in the Arctic Ocean that spends their life living in the sea ice. They are the most significant land carnivorous whose body characteristics have evolved to adapt to cold temperatures of the Polar Regions. Polar bears survive the cold habitats due to thick body fat layer ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . They are also talented swimmers using their front paws and can swim for long distances and many hours to get from one piece of ice to another. The large claws are adapted for swimming and allow them to travel long miles while searching for prey.

People feel connected to polar bears due to their iconic status in the world. The ice predators have long captured the attention of scientists and other researchers, and are increasingly getting public attention today with discussions on climate change effects ( Derocher, 2010) . They are an essential part of the Arctic, with a massive attachment to people. Polar bears occupy a remarkable cultural and spiritual life of the circumpolar people as important symbols in their culture. For example, indigenous tribes in Canada have a unique artistic representation of polar bears with a vast spiritual attachment to them. There are pictures and videos on the internet today depicting starving polar bears struggling to stand on their feet or hunt for food. These pictures are drawing increased scrutiny of marine mammals and their risk of extinction.

Polar Bear Ecology

The ecology of polar bears is an exciting topic when discussing the extinction of its species on the face of the earth. Polar bears are not a single sizeable homogenous population, preferably groups of communities distributed throughout the arctic. There are a total of 19 subpopulations of polar bears that are all characterized as endangered, with only one seems to be steadying with the remaining populations declining and on the red list of endangerment ( Veltre et al., 2008) .

Research has shown that polar bears have a limited ability to reproduce and bring forth offspring, which slows down population growth. The ice predators rarely occur in large numbers, though they have a longer lifespan. These natural means defines polar bears as endangered whenever a catastrophe arises since their reproduction rate is flat ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) . The inability to reproduce in large numbers makes then vulnerable to the effects of climate change without having offspring to continue the species survival. The rate of reproduction for polar bears has also reduced drastically due to the impact of climate change. Studies have shown that polar bears have a reduced reproduction rate that can help protect the existence of a species. This means they can easily be threatened and be wiped from the earth’s surface.

The population of polar bears tends to fluctuate depending on the climate and availability of food. Other factors, such as oil spills, hunting, and shipping, have also been associated with a low population of polar bears. These factors take centre stage in the current situation, in the sense that polar bears are unable to find food with the melting sea ice in the Arctic ( Regehr et al., 2007) . This is because polar bears only survive under extreme cold climate covered by sea ice all year round using it for hunting for prey. Due to the frigid weather, the bears need eating with a high-fat content, which makes seals the ideal prey.

The Arctic ecosystem has been profoundly affected by global warming, with the increasing temperatures affecting the polar ice caps and affecting many species. Global warming has affected the ecosystem with higher temperatures experienced in the ocean. The impacts of global warming are mostly felt by polar bears due to their reliance on sea ice for all functional activities in the habitat; including travelling, denning and hunting ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . 

The Habitat for Polar Bears

The Arctic Circle and its adjacent landmasses are the primary home of polar bears without a presence on Antarctica. The carnivores range across the Arctic and can drift widely into the sea ice within the Atlantic Ocean that provides a natural hunting ground with seals and algae essential for their diet. The sea ice forms 70 per cent of the total food intake for polar bears, making it a fundamental need for the predators ( Regehr et al., 2007) . The shrinking sight of the sea ice in the Arctic due to global warming is a horror view that threatens the existence of these animals.

Arctic Climate

The Artic has been dramatically affected by climate change, with its basin’s ice thickness reducing tremendously in the last few decades ( Derocher, 2010) . Several unusual events are sweeping across the Arctic as global warming disrupts the weather patterns, landscapes, and way of life. These events are affecting the livelihood of most species within the northern region, which depend on a cold climate to survive. For example, polar bears can struggle to breed, hunting, or denning in an environment that is warmer than their adaptable body.

The Arctic has been experiencing extreme effects of climate change with melting ice showing the devastating results of global warming. This is perhaps the primary evidence that humanity needs to understand regarding their activities, contributing to climate change. The Arctic is heating up three times faster than other parts of the plant, attributed mostly to the carbon emissions from industries. Reports have emerged of the melting sea ice happening in a majority part of the Arctic sea all over the five countries bordering the sea ( Veltre et al., 2008) .

The Arctic area has been described to be having a fragile ecosystem as it affects the survival of numerous other species apart from the polar bears. Several plant and animal species are affected by the rising temperatures that affect their adaptation to the ecosystem. This habitat is being destroyed with global warming with increasing temperatures causing more cases of melting sea ice. The region has been experiencing thinning of the polar ice due to warming temperatures, which destroys the life of species thriving in the habitat. The reduction in Arctic sea ice has led to over 60 per cent loss of the polar population due to issues of starvation and malnutrition ( Regehr et al., 2007) .

Risk of Extinction

Reports by the World Wildlife Foundation have considered polar bears are vulnerable and at risk of extinction due to melting Arctic sea ice. This followed a video over the internet depicting a starving bear tying to cling to lumps of ice that continues to melt away in the Arctic. The marine mammals are facing threats of extinction since melting sea ice affects their ability to hunt, build dens, or swim to other areas. They are forced to burn vast amounts of energy engaging in metabolic activities and other functions such as swimming ( Regehr et al., 2007) . Despite being able to swim, it takes more energy to swim than walk, and this puts them at risk of death if they fail to catch prey. More swimming is associated with creating smaller bears and reduced reproduction rates.

Another case of polar bear extinction has been evidenced by reducing populations of the marine mammals at an unprecedented rate. An investigation of polar bears has estimated a population of around 20,000 and 25000 in the entire world. However, this population is expected to reduce to less than 5000 shortly due to the extremely high risk of extinction. The polar bears have become an endangered species as they are unable to adjust to the changing conditions. In the process, the animals are facing extinction ( Kuhn, 2010) . For example, some animals are starving to death due to failure to capture prey to sustain them. 

The situation has affected polar bears in their hunt for seals, whose fat content is needed to keep them warm and endure the cold. This leaves them at risk of starvation and extinction. Polar bears need prey with high-fat content such as seals for survival, and these options are only favourable with thick ice sheets. In this regard, the melting of sea ice hinders their ability to hunt, in the process starving to death ( Regehr et al., 2007) . With little chances of finding prey through their techniques, the polar bears rely on the surroundings to achieve a daily meal or risk sleeping hungry. The melting ice is removing the advantage the bears had over the seals, which makes there are high chances of starving.

A combination of habitat loss, human disturbances, and climate change have played a role in making polar bears an endangered species. The coastal plain of the National Wildlife Refuge in the Arctic is the most critical land habitat for denning polar bears. However, human activity has been targeting this territory for drilling oil and gas to fulfil the earth's demands, which affects the habitat. Similarly, the Arctic in Alaska is rapidly overheating at a higher rate than earlier expected due to global warming. This affects the habitats of polar bears, as the animals cannot adapt to temperatures above 50 degrees ( Derocher, 2010) .

Most polar species are ice obligates, which means they require ice to survive for breeding, denning, and hunting. As a result, starving polar bears have been travelling vast distances to Russian cities looking for idea environments to hunt for food. Bears are going up to 1500 kilometres from the melting Arctic Ocean crossing to the Russian towns for food ( Veltre et al., 2008) . In other cases, bears swim from Greenland to Iceland searching for food, which is often a danger as a majority end up dying along the way. Polar bears have been starving to death as a consequence of global warming after travelling hundreds of miles searching for sea ice to hunt. They are struggling to catch seals since a decline in sea ice affects the hunting ground for polar bears. The stress of these marine mammals has led to a reduction in cold bear fat storage, which exposes them to possible deaths.

The real extinction rate of polar bears in the Arctic is a serious one, placed at 1000 times higher than the standard rate ( Regehr et al., 2007) . This is similar to the danger that dinosaurs had before they were finally extinct from the planet. It requires coming up with a strategy to protect the animals from possible extinction and protect the generational lineage of the polar bears.

At the same time, the decline of polar bears has been linked with persistent organic pollutants such as mercury that influences the health of marine mammals. The contaminants are slow to degrade in the environment and bond to the fatty tissue needed for polar bear survival. The presence of mercury in the waters or through the food chain such as seals affects the immune system, thyroid function, and reproduction of the bears. The melting of ice in the Arctic means the marine mammals are unable to store enough fat needed to survive for the rest of the year ( Veltre et al., 2008) . Every piece of evidence on polar bears shows that the animals depend on sea ice to survive. The melting ice makes it hard for the arctic predators to consume enough calories needed for keeping warm and maintaining good health.

Relocation of Endangered Species

Managed relocation or assisted colonization is one of the conservation strategies within the ecological field that has been proposed to help save endangered species. This strategy focuses on moving animals or plant species from one habitat to another as a way of keeping them from extinction ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011) . This conservation approach is being discussed among policymakers and scientists as a viable solution to protect polar bears from the verge of extinction. The primary motivation for managed relocation of species is the concern over its disappearance, population destruction, and loss of genetic diversity. Field research has already confirmed that climate change affects the geographic ranges of animal and plant species that necessitates moving them to new territories ( Derocher, 2010) .

Managed relocation is a new conservation tactic that can apply to polar bears in the Arctic, assisting the marine mammals in migrating into a better habitat. The rapid change of the rate of climate change necessitates moving polar bears to new territories, though this cannot be achieved without assisted migration. The aspect of managed relocation of polar bears ensures that the mammals can adapt to the unique ecosystem and continue with their survival. Managed relocation can be done by examining the new habitat to determine its ecological factors and whether they fit the species.

Scientists are proposing an aspect of assisted migration as a last resort option to protect polar bears from the scorching effects of climate change. This is the last resort after all other conservation methods have failed to protect the endangered species. Therefore, the idea of relocation is not farfetched, especially with the ever-changing climate conditions around the world. Scientists have been discussing whether it is viable and can be used as a safe way of protecting the polar bears ( Veltre et al., 2008) .

Relocating polar bears to Antarctica is one proposal provided as a strategy to help polar bears from extinction. There have been several cases where endangered species from African significant game reserves are moved to new habitats as a precautionary measure to save them from extinction. The shrinking of climate zones has also influenced the airlifting of certain species from one mountaintop to another ( Kuhn, 2010) .

Is Relocating Animal Species a Good Idea?

The theory of survival for the fittest has always applied to animal species, as they have managed to save themselves from any changes in the climate. This theory has depicted the idea of each animal struggling to get through obstacles by developing adaptive features, with those unable to adapt dying due to reduced genetic composition. Some people have used this theory to advise against the idea of relocating animals from one ecosystem to another ( Veltre et al., 2008) . They believe this would equate to giving the green light to genetically inferior species that will not help with the population. Scientists in the Arctic have observed that the weight of polar bear curbs is gradually reducing in recent years as the animal's struggle with getting enough meal from the seals. Lack of sea ice affects breeding and denning for female bears, thus reducing the population of polar bears.

Reports have shown that the Arctic may not be able to support polar bear life within 100 years with the changing temperatures. Scientists have argued that climate change and its effects on the planet necessitates helping to protect these species by migrating them to new habitats ( Derocher, 2010) . Polar bears lack enough fat reserves and need intervention to stop their extinction from the universe. The solution involves moving them to habitats that have seals and penguins as prey

The endangered polar bears must move to new areas as a conservation strategy to survive climate age. These animals cannot withstand the harsh realities of melted ice within the Arctic, with some being forced into human territories to feed on the garbage. The idea of relocating polar bears to Antarctica is not far-fetched, with numerous successful cases carried out in the past. Scientists have shown that polar bears are adaptable to different environments and will be successful in the Antarctic territory.

Scientific Evidence of Managed Relocation

Scientists have been collecting evidence on the effect of global warming on the Arctic, and the need to give polar bears a new view in Antarctica. This is based on the predictions that the Arctic ice cap will melt entirely, subjecting polar bears to extinction. Scientific studies play an essential role in determining whether to relocate the animals to a new territory or not. For example, experimental investigations are focusing on the ecosystem of Antarctica, including the possibility of bear survival ( Hutchings & Festa-Bianchet, 2009).

The decision to send polar bears to Antarctica is based on a hypothesis that the sea ice in the region will never run out compared to the Antarctic. Scientific studies have suggested that the Arctic ice is disappearing by 14 per cent a decade, which limits the ability of polar bears to hunt and feed. However, reports from the Antarctic have demonstrated a thick ice sheet and cooler temperatures that maintain the climate, making it ideal for bear existence. For the past two decades, scientists have been monitoring how climate change affects the Antarctic and its impact on the future of polar bears. Results have shown that the future of polar bears looks bleak since temperatures in the southern continent are not getting warmer ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) . The continent has not experienced any effects of global warming and does not seem to be affected due to little industrial activity in the region. Scientists have affirmed that Antarctica will not face the same face as the arctic that has suffered.

The fate of the Arctic has been sealed from the fact that most industrialized nations are in the northern hemisphere. Their greenhouse gas emissions have affected the arctic due to its proximity to the industrialized countries, which explains the melting sea ice in the region ( Amstrup et al., 2010) . The species have also suffered as a result of these emissions that have been poisoning the potential prey. The same scenario cannot be said about the Antarctica that is found in the southern hemisphere will reduce cases of gas emissions. The sea ice in the south hemisphere is intact, and global warming is yet to scorch its effects in the region. The remoteness of Antarctica and its separation from several sources of pollution have reduced the impact of global warming. While the toxins from greenhouse emissions have abounded in the environment, the levels of these toxins are less significant in the South Pole ( Amstrup et al., 2010) .

Why Antarctica

Antarctica is a vast continent in the southern hemisphere that has remained a mystery to most people. It is one of the biggest continents in the world, described with a large, ice-covered continent that rarely supports permanent residents of human life due to its adverse weather conditions. The continent has existed mainly as a ground for scientific research and investigations purpose for people seeking to understand the world environment ( Hutchings & Festa-Bianchet, 2009) . Antarctica is described by brave ice and freezing temperature with a vibrant surrounding sea. Furthermore, the continent has known to be the coldest, windiest, and driest. Despite being the driest with little rainfall and a massive block of ice, Antarctica supports the life of several indigenous plants and animal species. 

Antarctica is a spectacular land of ice framed by frigid waters. It is home to numerous fascinating creatures, including penguins and seals that find it a haven. Polar bears do not exist in Antarctica despite the abundance of ice fields and the harsh cold climate that is an idea for their survival. Instead, they have been. Temperatures in Antarctica barely rise above freezing even in the summer, which is different from temperatures in the Arctic. Over three-quarters of the Antarctic continent is girded by ice shelves protecting the land-bound ice behind them ( Veltre et al., 2008) . However, scientists are discovering new vulnerabilities that could weaken the floating extension of glaciers protecting the land-bound ice.

There is seriously thick ice in the Antarctic compared to the Arctic, which makes it sustainable to global warming. The continent has more than a mile thick of ice that will take many years before it could melt away. This makes it an ideal environment for polar bears to hunt for food as well as establish a habitat for survival ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . Antarctica has an abundance of abundant resources that supports the life of many cold-blooded animals and several fish species.

Antarctica Habitat

The temperatures in Antarctica continent are relatively lower than zero in a significant part of the year, which makes it possible to maintain thick ice sheets. The cooler temperatures mean animals have to adapt to living and breeding in the cold, which requires high-fat content for insulation. The ice sheet in Antarctica has the most significant and most significant mass of ice reaching four miles thick. The ice in Antarctica helps in keeping the earth's temperatures lively by deflecting some of the earth's rays away from the planet ( Veltre et al., 2008) .

The polar regions of the Arctic and Antarctic are different kinds of places despite occupying the pole regions of the planet. Both the Arctic and Antarctic are cold, icy, and surrounding a pole, but they are different kinds of places based on the characteristics. The two regions are found in different parts of the hemisphere, with the Arctic occupying the northernmost area while Antarctica is occupying the side of the south. However, they are different in several ways in which they differ from each other. For example, the Arctic is a block of sea ice that is connected to surrounding landmasses while occupied by polar bears, while Antarctica is a landmass surrounded by an ocean ( Regehr et al., 2007) .

Penguins mostly characterize Antarctica due to its unique requirements for feeding and breeding. Other animals in the region include seals, albatrosses, squid, and whales. Most of the Antarctic continent is covered by ice and snow almost permanently, leaving a tiny percentage of land exposed. Polar bears and penguins have never met or shared an ecosystem because they stay on opposite sides of the poles. Polar bears live and breed entirely in the far north while penguins live and breed in the southern hemisphere. If polar animals switched habitats, Polar bears are more placed to thrive in Antarctica than Penguins are to survive in the Arctic sea.

On average, Antarctica is the coldest, driest, and windiest compared to the Arctic, with temperatures reaching -89 degrees Celsius ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . The region also has the most hostile environment for human residence with the reduced temperatures meaning the continent is only best for research. Furthermore, seasons in the Arctic are opposed to seasons in the Antarctic because of being in different hemispheres. For example, simmers in Antarctica runs from October to February than the regular season, and are just above freezing.

Antarctica Climate

Ice is part of the Antarctica averaging 2 kilometres thick, and its climate makes life relatively sparse compared to the arctic. It is classified as a desert despite all the ice because the area receives extremely little moisture from the sky. The only precipitation falls in the form of snow and averages 50 millimetres of rainfall each year ( Veltre et al., 2008) .

The Antarctic is described by having large populations of penguins and seals, alongside other animals that thrive along with its costs and frigid seas. These species provide an excellent environment for polar bears to thrive with food. The availability of food and prey in Antarctica is industrious and sumptuous compared to the Arctic that has limited options for hunting prey ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) . Animals in Antarctica are well adapted to handle the incredible harsh condition in Antarctica with characteristics such as thick skin and substantial fat deposits. Despite the lack of lush greenery in Antarctica, the continent has enough resources to support the existence of amphibians, reptiles, and terrestrial mammals. The plant life is limited to smattering mosses, algae, and lichen due to lower temperatures. However, scientists expect more green plants to grow as global temperatures continue to rise. 

In essence, Antarctica has one of the most natural laboratories that can be used as a habitat for polar bears. The vast frozen landmass within Antarctica is more than just spectacular icing, as it can be crucial for the survival of polar bears. While temperatures in Antarctica have been increasing, the rate of temperature increase is lower than the Arctic or any other part of the world. Research has shown that the continent is overall warmer due to man-made climate change and the influence of greenhouse gases from fossil fuels ( Amstrup et al., 2010) . The freezing weather in Antarctica makes it an essential subject for the sciences to examine and understand how animal species adapt to extreme environmental conditions. The scientific evidence can be used in knowledge whether managed relocating of polar bears can be successful in Antarctica as it is in the Arctic region.

Benefits of Relocating to Antarctica

Polar bears have a higher metabolism than previously thought, which means they need more prey to meet energy demands. Their main meal comprises of beaded seals because of high calories that help fat content to withstand the cold. The hunting of seals is only possible when there is sea ice to aid them in hunting for the seals. With the melting of sea ice, it is becoming difficult to maintain a daily meal for the animals. The Antarctic area is the only territory with sea ice and seals that are not inhabited by the polar bear ( Regehr et al., 2007) . It is, therefore, an ideal habitat for polar bears to get food and build a territory without having to struggle with other species.

Would Polar Bears Thrive in Antarctica?

Some biologists have argued that polar bears would do exceptionally well if transplanted into the Antarctic ecosystem because of similar climatic conditions. The arguments are based on the fact that the two Polar Regions have a similar or resembling climatic and ecosystem conditions that are suitable. 0ver 95 per cent of Antarctica landmass is covered by a vast ice sheet that makes it an ideal environment for polar bears. The ice sheet has an average thickness of 1.5 miles, which is thicker than the sea ice in the Arctic region and makes it difficult to be affected by the effects of climate change ( Derocher, 2010) . In essence, the temperatures in the southern polar region are lower than those in the north, reducing any chances of melting ice due to global warming.

The diminishing food supply is one of the significant issues associated with the extinction of polar bears in the Arctic. This problem is not caused by a reduced number of seals in the region but increased barriers to hunt and get food. These barriers are not available in Antarctica due to thick ice sheets and the availability of seals, penguins, and other fish types. As a result, the Antarctica habitat is ideal for polar bears to survive. In most cases, large carnivorous such as polar bears tend to be sensitive indicators to the health of an ecosystem ( Veltre et al., 2008) . This means the vulnerability of animal species indicate a problem in the ecosystem that requires significant intervention. 

Can Polar Bears Survive in Antarctica?

One of the questions yet to be answered by scientists in the wake of polar bear extinction is whether they can survive into new territory and ecosystem. The conservationists are debating the possibility of trapping and relocating the marine creatures to the southern pole, though there are still questions over its risks and potential danger to the species. The diet of a polar bear is varied, though bearded and ringed seals are the main mean also found within Antarctica. The animals have the same omnivorous and opportunistic approach to feeding as other bear species. This means penguins and seals in Antarctica provide just the needed potential prey for survival ( Veltre et al., 2008) . They are natural meat for victim due to lack of adaptability to evade the polar bears

Furthermore, there is every reason to believe polar bears will adapt to hunting penguins on land as they do with hunting seals under the ice. The giant penguins in the Antarctic would make a perfectly good meal for polar bears. Penguins have similar abilities as seals to provide polar bears with the needed calories for surviving in the cold. Their presence will also reduce the pressure of hunting seals and increase the availability of food for marine mammals ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) .

Moving polar bears to Antarctica can save the population of this species and lead to an increase in the community. The relocation will distribute polar bears in the two-pole regions, allowing those in the Arctic enough food while providing more opportunities for bears to eat in southern Antarctica. The sea ice in Antarctica is the main reason why relocating polar bears will offer a temporary solution to its extinction. The massive ice sheets in Antarctica makes it an ideal habitat for polar bears to thrive and reproduce ( Regehr et al., 2007) . The environment in Antarctica is similar to that t the Arctic but with more ice sheets that support polar bears.

The reason polar bears will flourish in Antarctica is that the penguins and seals are possible food prospects for the animals. The penguins have not evolved to evade the polar bears, and Antarctic seals do not expect surface predators, which makes it easy for polar bears to survive in the region.

Risks of Managed Relocation

Relocating animals is often advertised as a humane solution to protecting species from extinction and giving them a new home for survival. However, the relocation can also be detrimental and cannot necessarily be a long-term solution to the problem. Scientists have argued that relocated animals struggle to survive in unfamiliar surroundings and will have to compete with already established species at the relocation site ( Sax et al., 2009) . Animals do not settle in new surroundings quickly, no matter the state of the habitat. This is because the animal may not know where to find shelter or food due to the unfamiliar place.

Scientists have been discussing the possibility of relocating these endangered species by considering the benefits and risks of changing their habitats. While the benefits of managed relocation are apparent and easy to agree upon, scientists have failed to agree on using the strategy with divergent opinions ( Kuhn, 2010) . Several people believe the risks of transporting polar bears to the Antarctic are higher than the possible benefits of the process. Some scientists are opposed to the idea, claiming invasive species introduced with good intentions often results in all sorts of damage. For example, adding polar bears to Antarctica will wreak havoc on the ecosystem that is unprepared for them. There is the risk of destruction wrought by invasive species with numerous examples from previous examples. Notable examples include the mongoose in Hawaii, cane toads in Australia, and wild hogs in the southern United States.

Other risks of relocation include the costs and logistics that can facilitate moving animals from the North Pole to the South Pole. This idea also faces the threat of difficulties in collecting and touch the animals from the Arctic to the Antarctic. Polar bears are substantial marine mammals weighing between 350 to 700 kilograms and considered the largest land carnivores currently in existence ( Sax et al., 2009) . They are also dangerous to human beings when coming in contact and can result in serious injury to those involved. This means the cost of tracking down and capturing polar bears is severe, without considering the task involved in transporting the polar bears from one pole region to another.

There have been discussions on whether polar bears can be saved by relocating them to Antarctica through managed allocation. Introducing polar bears to Antarctica is not a simple solution due to many associated risks to both the animals and the ecosystem and in this regard, relocating polar bears from the Arctic to the Antarctic faces numerous restrictions that are both ethical, ecological, and legal issues ( Schwartz et al., 2012) . For example, the relocation can violate several national and international laws and treaties regarding polar bear migration.

Risk-Benefit Analysis of Relocating Polar Bears

Concerns have been raised over how long it will take before the polar bears endanger penguins in the South Pole once they are transplanted there. From a food point of view, transferring polar bears to Antarctica would be extreme heaven due to numerous seals and penguins compared to the Arctic. This is because the seals and other potential prey species in the North Pole have evolved lifestyles that minimize the risk of being eaten by polar bears. This is in complete contrast to Antarctica, where seals and penguins have not devised ways to avoid falling prey to polar bears ( Sax et al., 2009) .

Therefore, translocation of polar bears to Antarctica can result in a catastrophic decline in the population of penguins and seals until they evolve to adapt to the changing ecosystem. Introducing a good number of polar bears in Antarctica and within a short time, they will have devoured the whole population of penguin and seal in the region. Questions are raised on what will happen when the bears have eaten all penguins and seals in Antarctica. The Antarctica ecosystem is occupied with penguins and seals, which are not adapted to surface predators such as polar bears. Penguins use Antarctica as their safe breeding ground and do not expect any danger in the land ( Sax et al., 2009) . In this regard, they will be quickly devoured with the introduction of polar bears when they are introduced in their territory. 

At the same time, scientists have raised the risk of polar bears getting exposed to new diseases in Antarctica due to the unknown risk of pathogens. This could potentially affect the survival of polar bears since they have never lived in the region. As such, there is no evidence of diseases in the area that can wipe out the species or other factors that make it challenging to adapt to the new environment. Concerns are often raised on what could happen to the Antarctica habitat once polar bears are introduced, and whether they can survive the White Continent ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . However, this concern is far-fetched as there is every reason for penguins to evolve and adapt new ways of escaping predators.

Balancing Risks and Benefits of Managed Relocation

Scientists all over the world have disagreed on the logic of managed relocation as an adaptation strategy against extinction. The arguments surround the benefits of managed relocation of polar bears in comparison with the associated risks of moving them to a new habitat. Balancing the extinction risk of managed relocation and the potential benefits of the strategy is paramount when thinking of using this conservation strategy ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011) . The balancing requires choosing a proper analysis of the issue and making a comparison of the benefits and risks.

Managed relocation puts into consideration the fundamental biological questions that must be addressed before making the decisions. The essential items include the risk of extinction if nothing is done to help the animals; the risk of harm to the new environment is the species are moved there. Apart from biological considerations, the social dimensions of managed relocation also come into play, including the cost of translocation and the value placed on the target species. A balanced approach is when the risk of extinction for the species is high in its historic range, while the risk to the new territory for the species is low ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011) . This applies to the case of polar bears, whereby the threat of extinction is higher than the risk of moving the marine mammals to Antarctica. The polar bears would likely drive native penguins to extinction until they develop adaptation measures of evading the polar bears.

The arguments have mentioned how past attempts for managed relocation resulted in a number of unintended consequences that affected the ecology. For example, scientists have argued that managed relocation can lead to the extinction of some species as opposed to protecting them due to the change of an ecosystem. Furthermore, there have been concerns that managed relocation can lead to the spread of invasive species, which affects how they will perform in a new environment or continue with extinction. Technology today makes it possible to assess ecological factors of habitat before making decisions for migration ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011).

Ethical Foundations of Managed Relocation

The idea of managed relocation has raised several ethical and logical concerns with controversies arising due to the legal, ethical, and policy issues surrounding the exercise ( Schwartz et al., 2012) . Scientists and ecologists have raised concerns over managed relocation due to the potential invasion risk of the relocated species. The term colonization is used to mean establishing colonies and a viable population at a new site. As a result, concern over invasion risk often emerges when considering this intervention strategy.

The decision on whether to assist species in relocating into new territories rests on the ethical and aesthetical grounds of the conservation strategy. Conservationists have raised ethical concerns regarding managed relocation of endangered species by arguing on preserving biodiversity ( Kuhn, 2010) . Much of the ethical discussions surrounding conservation among scientists is based around the benefits associated with protecting the vulnerable species. The ethics of managed relocation is a dilemma between risks of leaving endangered species unattended and the risk of relocating the species to new ecosystems.

There are often disagreements among philosophers regarding the ethics of managed relocation, usually regarding the validity of this conservation strategy. Most conservationists were against this idea of helping animals to move to new territories as it halts their natural selection. However, the rapid increase in global warming has forced conservationists to consider innovative tactics for protecting the endangered species, regardless of being controversial and raising ethical questions ( Schwartz et al., 2012) .

In essence, managed relocation raises several controversies in the ecological community when discussing endangered species due to the ethical issues associated with the process. There is also a possibility of invasion risk due to the managed relocation in the new environment, which is mentioned as a moral issue for wildlife species ( Kuhn, 2010) . Other ethical questions are raised regarding moving species across the landscape, including the effects of using an aggressive approach to the conservation of species and preserving the ecological integrity of the habitat. In this regard, there is need to develop pragmatic ethics of species undergoing managed relocation by considering how the strategy can be regarded as

Conflicts can be reduced through integrative models of conservation planning and policy, such as managed relocation. Scientists have suggested that the approach of managed relocation can be used when seeking to achieve the goal of increasing landscape connectivity. This idea is widely supported by biologists and conservation activists. Proper planning is required when engaging in managed relocation to deal with the threat of dispersing parasites during relocation. It entails conducting scientific investigations to determine the benefits and risks of managed relocation before giving a green light for the operations to commence ( Hutchings & Festa-Bianchet, 2009) .

There have been several examples of successfully managed relocation done in part, which can be used as an inspiration for moving polar bears to Antarctica. For example, there was a successful relocation of wolves from Yellowstone and Guam rail in Rota in the United States. Since the migration, the grey wolf population has been thriving in the Jasper National Park of Canada ( Sax et al., 2009) . However, climate-driven relocation is more complicated compared to the previous examples of managed relocation for species, as it requires evaluating numerous factors. The scientists need to predict whether the new habitat will be suitable for the species in the long term. It is always essential to determine how the managed relocation will enhance the survival of the species. Managed relocation is mostly about the conflict between the affirmative duty of protecting species and ecosystems and the negative duty to avoid harming the ecosystem and populations ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011) . Conservation scientists have a responsibility in practice to ensure they maintain the ethical aspects of the relocation.

Alternative Recommendations for Saving the Polar Bears

Apart from assisted migration to transport polar bears into new territory, the species can also be collected through human interventions. The primary reason for polar bear extinction on the planet's surface is global warming and rising temperatures in the Arctic Ocean. The increasing temperatures have destroyed the ability to move and hunt. Based on an analysis of the causal problem, the best recommendation for saving polar bears is by fighting climate change and reducing events that have caused global warming.

The solution to saving polar bears lies in reducing the amount of pollution that contributes to climate change. This is because climate pollution has been at centre stage for a disruption in the ecosystems, and can be solved by reducing the amount of greenhouse gas exchange. ( Amstrup et al., 2010) . Without addressing this global warming issue, then the risk of polar bear extinction is highly likely to happen. Therefore, the world should turn attention to the rapid reduction of burning fossil fuels by transiting to clean renewable energy sources.

Numerous strategies can help reduce global warming, focusing mostly on reducing greenhouse emissions. For example, people can contribute by using cars less often, recycling and using energy-efficient bulbs. There have been recommendations that people should ride a bike to work if possible to reduce carbon emissions, or opting to use public transportation instead of personal cars ( Amstrup et al., 2010).

Therefore, the alternate solution to polar bear conservation lies in protecting the Arctic habitat from melting off through climate change strategies. The focus should also be placed on preserving the cold bear habitats to maintain the ecosystem and protect the fields. Conserving polar bears is mostly a matter of minimizing temperature rise and maintain the habitats of the animals. For example, the proposed oil and gas development in the Arctic refuge goes against the conserving and recovering plans to save the endangered polar bears ( Kuhn, 2010) . This proposal will permanently industrialize this critical habitat for polar bears and leave them vulnerable to starving. Activists should stand and speak about the plight of polar bears and the imminent extinction due to climate change and human actions.

Collaborative Action

The best chances of survival for polar bears require a concerted effort from all countries within the Arctic region. This is because polar bears roam freely across national borders and need proper management from the associated states. Collaborative measures could look towards setting rules on trade, hunting, and protecting denning habitats for marine mammals ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) . In this regard, different countries associated with polar bears need to collaborate in protecting the Arctic Ocean. The governments can work by increasing engagement with indigenous people in managing polar bears. 

Secondly, countries need to work together in combating climate change as a solution to the melting sea ice in the Arctic. This includes different countries setting and meeting ambitious targets for reducing carbon emissions by adopting corrective measures. The states need to speak one language regarding global warming and reducing greenhouse gas emissions as an action plan ( Amstrup et al., 2010) . Individuals also need education and awareness on changing their lifestyles to decrease the ecological footprints on the planet. Raising public awareness on how climate change is affecting the polar bear species can spark an interest among the public to take part in saving the world. Without proper action to reduce climate change, scientists have predicted an even quicker extinction of the polar bears from the earth.

What is WWF Doing for Polar Bears?

The World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) has listed the survival and protection of polar bear habitat at the top agenda of its urgent issues. This follows labelling polar bears as vulnerable and on the brink of extinction. In 2017, a video emerged on the internet, showcasing a starving polar bear struggling to find food through the melted sea ice. The emaciated bear was weak and unable to move or hunt since melted ice reduces its ability to target and capture prey for food. This raised global concern over the plight of polar bears within the polar region due to climate change ( Derocher, 2010) .

Polar has been a focus on research to save the species due to their cultural importance in society. They need a high-fat diet to survive coming from seal meat and therefore rely on hunting for food on the Arctic Ocean. Climate change hinders attempts to find enough food that can sustain their bodies. This is because the melting ice is dominating the hunting territories of these marine mammals in the sense that they cannot move and hunt more efficiently ( Stempniewicz et al., 2014) .

WWF has been supporting research on the effects of climate change that allows coming up with the necessary intervention strategies. The study focuses on the rich biodiversity of Canada and Greenland in the Arctic region to establish an appropriate management plan. The WWF has also focused on protecting the habitat for polar bears through different measures, such as creating key resting areas and denning areas ( Sahanatien & Derocher, 2012) . Furthermore, the WWF is also protecting the last ice area of the Arctic that has prospects to persist longer than the ice anywhere else.

Human-Bear Conflicts

Another recommendation to protect the endangered polar bears is to reduce the human-bear disputes involving communities living with polar bears. The melting of sea ice has pushed polar bears inland to human-populated areas. Today, an increased number of mammals are found on the land than they do in the sea ice due to climate changes resulting in clashes with humans ( Derocher, 2010) . They often come in contact with humans on the shores due to the retreating ice, prompting people to hunt them for food and protecting their property. Scientists have provided reports on how hungry bears are congregating around human settlements searching for eating due to the melting sea ice.

At the same time, people have been exploring more opportunities for industrial development at sea following sea ice retreats in the summer. For example, there have been offshore petroleum installation and operations in the Arctic that are poised to continue, which would likely affect the polar bear habitat. There is also a risk of oil spillage that can be fatal for the entire food chain of the bears and other species in the Arctic Ocean ( Sax et al., 2009) . In this regard, measures should be directed towards preventing these conflicts and potentially fatal encounters between people and polar bears.

The melting sea ice is increasing the risk of human-bar conflict that can result in attacks for humanity. There is a chance of polar bears to encroach into the lands due to the melting sea ice and lack of prey to hunt, which will create clashes and possible conflicts. Recent reports have shown increased crashes and attacks in some parts of the world involving polar bears and human beings ( Regehr et al., 2007) . However, these attacks are rare, as the bears live in isolate regions where they cannot come in contact with people.

The government of Nunavut in 2018 drafted a reported that showed how polar bears are encroaching into people's residence and threatening the livelihood of the Inuit people. The abundance of polar bears in the land areas does not signal a large population of bears, rather the risk of brought about by global warming. In this regard, progress towards preventing clashes between humans and bears in the Arctic societies is needed to avoid attacks and injuries from these clashes.

Furthermore, some indigenous communities in the Arctic have been hunting the polar bears for their skin products. They often sell a fortune from the bearskin that can cost up to $10,000. Similarly, the cold bear meat is an integral part of indigenous people in the Arctic region, which is often shared among people. This continues to place this endangered species at risk of extinction due to hunting activities ( Kuhn, 2010) .

Locals are now battling with an increased number of polar bear encounters in Canada. Some being forced to carry a gun whenever they go outdoors as a precautionary measure against being injured with the polar bears. This is one of the reasons why managed relocation is a good idea for polar bears. Since there is no human population in Antarctica, there are zero chances of these clashes between humans and polar bears.

Need for More Scientific experiments

More experiments should be conducted on understanding the correlation between loss of sea ice and polar bears' stress levels. Over one million species around the world are on the verge of extinction, with polar bears representing just one example of the dire situation. Researchers have been conducting studies on the ecology of polar bears since the late 1960s with significant progress made on its population demographics and dynamics. Research data presents information on population size, movements, boundaries, as well as survival parameters needed to make decisions ( Sax et al., 2009) . The research can help conservationists and scientists in coming up with appropriate policy concerns to protect the endangered species.

Conclusion

Polar bears are on the verge of becoming extinct faster than it was feared as the animals face increased struggle to find food for survival. Climate change and global warming have been at the centre of this risk of extinction for polar bears due to their role in melting sea ice ( Derocher, 2010) . Their habitat in the Arctic is considered warmer than the Antarctic, which makes it susceptible to global warming that endangers polar bears. However, polar bears face numerous other issues, such as oil spillage. Human activities are encroaching into the sea ice as well as hunting practices. In this regard, measures should be implemented to not only protect the polar bears but a host of other animals living in the Polar Regions that makes part of the ecosystem.

In essence, the world needs more approaches to save endangered species. It calls for implementing radical strategies such as managed relocation of the species as a last resort to saving the polar bears. Scientists believe the time has come to consider drastic measures to protect the polar bears, which includes relocating them to Antarctica. This is because Antarctica provides a similar habitat characteristic as the Arctic with thick layers of ice and plenty of prey to hunt. Managed relocation entails moving species from one habitat to another to save them from extinction ( McDonald-Madden et al., 2011) . However, there are ethical and legal concerns surrounding managed relocation that needs consideration before deciding to relocate the polar bears. They include comparing the benefit of relocation to the risk of introducing them. Although the strategies have high risk, moving threatened species to new environments may help to keep them away from extinction and save future generations.

Assisted migration is not the permanent solution for endangered wildlife species. However, it is the last resort for saving a population that is on the brink of extinction but can be protected with drastic measures. As such, the use of assisted migration can help a few species deemed necessary enough for the effort for saving lest they go extinct. Polar bears present the best example of species that need urgent intervention to stop them from going the way of dinosaurs. Measures to halt greenhouse gas emissions from all parts of the world will help restore the habitat ( Amstrup et al., 2010) . Regardless, protecting the ecosystem and saving the vulnerable species due to climate change is paramount.

References

Amstrup, S. C., DeWeaver, E. T., Douglas, D. C., Marcot, B. G., Durner, G. M., Bitz, C. M., & Bailey, D. A. (2010). Greenhouse gas mitigation can reduce sea-ice loss and increase polar bear persistence.  Nature ,  468 (7326), 955.

Derocher, A. E. (2010). Climate change: The prospects for polar bears — nature ,  468 (7326), 905.

Hutchings, J. A., & Festa-Bianchet, M. (2009). Scientific advice on species at risk: a comparative analysis of status assessments of the polar bear, Ursus maritimus.  Environmental Reviews ,  17 (NA), 45-51.

Kuhn, M. (2010). Climate change and the polar bear: is the Endangered Species Act up to the task.  Alaska L. Rev. ,  27 , 125.

McDonald-Madden, E., Runge, M. C., Possingham, H. P., & Martin, T. G. (2011). Optimal timing for managed relocation of species faced with climate change.  Nature Climate Change ,  1 (5), 261.

Regehr, E. V., Lunn, N. J., Amstrup, S. C., & Stirling, I. A. N. (2007). Effects of earlier sea ice breakup on survival and population size of polar bears in western Hudson Bay.  The Journal of Wildlife Management ,  71 (8), 2673-2683.

Sahanatien, V., & Derocher, A. E. (2012). Monitoring sea ice habitat fragmentation for polar bear conservation.  Animal Conservation ,  15 (4), 397-406.

Sax, D. F., Smith, K. F., & Thompson, A. R. (2009). Managed relocation: a nuanced evaluation is needed.  Trends in Ecology and Evolution ,  24 (9), 472.

Schwartz, M. W., Hellmann, J. J., McLachlan, J. M., Sax, D. F., Borevitz, J. O., Brennan, J., ... & Early, R. (2012). Managed relocation: integrating the scientific, regulatory, and ethical challenges.  BioScience ,  62 (8), 732-743.

Stempniewicz, L., Kidawa, D., Barcikowski, M., & Iliszko, L. (2014). Unusual hunting and feeding behaviour of polar bears on Spitsbergen.  Polar Record ,  50 (2), 216-219.

Veltre, D. W., Yesner, D. R., Crossen, K. J., Graham, R. W., & Coltrain, J. B. (2008). Patterns of faunal extinction and paleoclimatic change from mid-Holocene mammoth and polar bear remains Pribilof Islands, Alaska. Quaternary Research ,  70 (1), 40-50.

Appendix

Appendix 1

Appendix 2: Video of a starving bear

Gibbens, S. (2017, December 7). Heart-Wrenching Video Shows Starving Polar Bear on Iceless Land. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/12/polar-bear-starving-arctic-sea-ice-melt-climate-change-spd/  

Appendix 3

Appendix 4