polar bears are hunted commercially in Canada, the only country that still allows the practice
What the fuck?! I'm Canadian and I had no idea.
polar bears are hunted commercially in Canada, the only country that still allows the practice
What the fuck?! I'm Canadian and I had no idea.
I'm gonna add some context to this that seems to be missing ...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/churchill-new-waste-facility-project-1.7049919
Good God. Apart from being horrible behaviour, his seems like such self-detrimental thing to do.
edit:
polar bears are hunted commercially in Canada, the only country that still allows the practice
I wonder if this was them thinking "well, if we can't stop it..." but the damage to their reputation (and surely recurring donations) is huge here.
When the fuck did The Guardian become locked behind an account?
Sign in is the only way to view articles now? Fuck that.
WWF said in a 2013 statement: “If, at some stage in the future, polar bear populations become so diminished by climate change and habitat loss, and/or if international trade presents a greater threat, we would want to revisit the Cites listing issue. But we’re not at that point.”
Yeah lets wait until it’s too late for the species
Well, I'm not saying it is not true, but I looked up in internet and no news site has echoed this specific information. The article doesn't even say how WWF is involved. Where is the proof? It appears to be misinformation against WWF.
I am a sceptic so appreciate the scepticism but someone has to be the first to report on something and I'd consider them a fairly reputable source.
https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/polar_bear_position_cites_cop_15_final.pdf?
There are links all over the article
I've red them. They basically say that polar bears aren't endangered enough to get the highest level of protection (Appendix I, CITES), but at the same time they give a lot of recomendations to stop hurting their poblations.
And we can agree that polar bears should have the highest level of protection. In my opinion WWF should grant them that status, it seems a little bit unethical fron a "green" organization to say that is ok to trade with polar bear furs.
That is one thing. But to say that WWF is benefitting from trading with polar bear furs? Like wtf, it seems like a HUGE misconception argued in bad faith. As I said, where is the proof?
It’s not “WWF is benefitting from..”, it’s “WWF helping facilitate trade in polar bear fur, investigation reveals”. “Investigation” here refers to the article published in guardian. The proof is the lobbying WWF did. They’re complicit in allowing this, sadly. Other NGOs stood strongly against WWF: https://ssn.org/app/uploads/2019/03/Cop16_PolarBear_EN.pdf
I could see allowing it for animals that had to be put down for other reasons, like that poor lost soul who ended up in Iceland.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/23/climate/polar-bear-shot-iceland-intl-scli/index.html
all 20 comments