On the WWF website there is a special dedicated section in which it reads “Help us to save the polar bear”, but now the association has been accused of supporting the hunt for this animal in the process of extinction.
An investigation published by the Guardian rekindled the debate on trade of polar bear furrevealing how the WWF has repeatedly supported policies that allow its international sale. This is despite the species, which counts less than 30,000 specimens throughout the planet, both among the most threatened by the climatic crisisfrom the reduction of marine ice and the growing difficulty in finding prey.
According to the data collected by the British newspaper, Every year between 300 and 400 polar bear skin are exportedlargely intended for Chinese marketwhere the value of a single skin can reach 60,000 dollars. The Canada remains the only country to allow the commercial hunting of these animals, After the United States, Russia, Greenland and Norway have banned it.
The Guardian investigation He also analyzed the role of WWF in international negotiationsin particular in the meetings of Cites, the International Commerce Convention of Extinction threatened species. In 2010 and 2013, the organization explicitly recommended to delegates not to vote for a total ban, contributing to the failure of the proposals made by the United States with the support of Russia. The same position was also maintained in 2022, when the WWF reiterated that Commerce does not represent a significant threat to the global population of polar bears.
This position, however, appears in contrast with other statements by the organization, which recognizes the climatic crisis as the main threat to the survival of the species and admits that some populations of polar bear in Canada they could suffer an unsustainable withdrawal. Despite this, WWF has continued to support the regulated management of hunting, stating that trade could bring economic benefits to indigenous communities.
The investigation also highlighted another contradiction: on the one hand the WWF uses images of polar bears to raise funds and raise awareness of their protection, On the other hand, he has systematically defended the trade in their skins in international locations. The organization stated that, if trade became a more serious threat to the species, it would review its position, but to date it has never promoted any initiative to increase the protection of the polar bear on a global level.
The responses of the WWF International
Faced with the accusations, the WWF International rejected the idea of ​​supporting the trade in polar bear skin, clarifying that Its position is based on scientific principles and on the protection of local communities. The organization reiterated not to oppose the regulated hunting programs, provided that they are based on reliable scientific data and that they do not put the survival of the species at risk.
In an official declaration, WWF stressed that the real danger to polar bears is climate change, which is quickly reducing their natural habitat. According to the organization, the regulated trade of the skins, and the indigenous populations inuit, who practice this hunt for generations, must be able to continue to draw economic benefits from natural resources in a sustainable way.
However, the Guardian’s investigation highlighted how this position brought the WWF to oppose the prohibitions proposed in the meetings of Citessiding on the side of Canada and representatives inuit, which feared a negative economic impact from a possible restriction of trade. This choice has aroused strong criticism from numerous NGOs and conservation experts, who believe that the WWF is underestimating the combined effect of hunting and loss of the habitat on polar bears.
The position of the WWF Italia
We also wanted to know the position of WWF Italia, contacting Gianluca Catullohabitat manager and protected species.
The polar bear is included in the Appendix II of Cites, therefore under control, but not at risk such as to totally prohibit trade. The main threat to the species is climate change, not the regulated hunting. Today the estimated specimens are between 21,000 and 30,000 and the scientific data indicate that The controlled withdrawal does not represent a critical threat.
Catullus also highlights the role of local communities:
The Inuit coexist with bears and already undergo the impact of climate change. An absolute ban would risk encouraging poaching and losing their support in conservation. In addition, trade is strictly controlled: every skin exported by Canada It must be accompanied by a CITES certificate issued by a scientific authority. The official data on the quantity of exported skin are public and often lower than the numbers reported by the media.
If science shows that trade is harmful, The WWF will support a change of position. Our mission is the conservation of the species and the habitat, based on scientific data and on a pragmatic approach. The next Cites conference, in 2025, could bring new discussions on the matter. The conservation is complex and you cannot decide in front of a coffee: you have to analyze all aspects and feel the experts to find the most effective solutions “.
The Guardian investigation brought to light an ambiguous WWF position against the trade of polar bear fur. The organization claims not to promote this practice, but its interventions in international locations demonstrate active support for hunting regulation, even in a context of growing threat to the species.
The WWF continues to reiterate that the real emergency for polar bears is climate change, but in the meantime it has never supported measures to limit the commercial hunt. The contradiction between his commitment to public awareness and his political actions ascertain questions about the coherence of his conservation strategies.
While the population of polar bears continues to decrease and global warming accelerates the transformation of the Arctic, it remains to be wondered whether the WWF approach is truly effective for the protection of the species or if the time has come for a revision of its policies.
