WWF’s Controversial Role in Polar Bear Fur Trade Exposed

A recent investigation has revealed that the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has been actively supporting the international trade of polar bear fur, despite its public conservation efforts. This has sparked criticism, as the charity frequently uses polar bears as a symbol of climate change awareness while backing policies that allow for their commercial exploitation.

Polar Bear Hunting in Canada

Canada is the only country that permits commercial polar bear hunting, exporting 300–400 skins annually, mainly to China, where a full pelt can sell for $60,000 (£48,000). Polar bear populations, currently estimated at 22,000 to 31,000, are severely impacted by climate change, with shrinking sea ice reducing hunting opportunities, leading to weaker, fewer, and shorter-lived bears.

WWF has long supported a policy of “sustainable utilization”, which promotes the controlled hunting and trade of certain endangered species, arguing that it can benefit conservation. The organization has stated, “We’re not opposed to hunting programs that present no threat to species survival and contribute to conservation and local communities.”

WWF’s Influence on International Policy

At multiple CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) meetings, WWF has lobbied against stricter protections for polar bears. When the U.S. and Russia proposed banning the trade in 2010 and 2013, WWF opposed the motion, arguing that polar bears had not yet met the criteria for full protection.

WWF’s Colman O’Criodain reaffirmed this stance at a 2022 CITES meeting, stating, “I don’t think so in terms of the numeric criteria.” The organization also contends that banning trade could harm Indigenous livelihoods, though this claim remains debated.

Backlash from Conservationists

Indigenous voices have also challenged WWF’s stance. Robert Thompson, an Iñupiat polar bear guide from Alaska, stated, “We didn’t sell these animals for 10,000 years, and that’s why they are still here.” He advocates for eco-tourism as a sustainable alternative: “There can be a good income by taking people to view the animals.”

Former WWF director Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud criticized the charity’s role, stating, “I think the public will be shocked. WWF has influence, and this is difficult to accept.”

Beyond polar bears, WWF has also opposed full protection for elephants, rhinos, hippos, and giraffes, notably pushing for downgrading Namibia’s white rhinos’ CITES status in 2022, despite opposition from 80 conservation NGOs.

This revelation has raised serious concerns about whether WWF’s conservation policies align with its public image and the expectations of its supporters.