Animal

Some hope remains on Canadian polar bear trophies: U.S. official Last Updated: Friday, May 16, 2008 CBC News A high-ranking U.S. official says there may be hope that American sport hunters can bring home the polar bears they hunted in Canada's North, while American hunters scramble to deal with a ban placed this week on importing polar bear trophies. The ban came into effect when the U.S. government listed the polar bear as a threatened species Wednesday under its Endangered Species Act. The threatened status automatically makes the polar bear a "depleted" species under the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act, meaning it cannot be hunted and imported into the U.S. But Lyle Laverty, the U.S. assistant secretary of the interior for fish, wildlife and parks, told CBC News that there is some hope that an exception could be made for polar bear trophies, even though polar bears are now a threatened species. "What we're going to have to do is work with the Congress," Laverty said Thursday. "I don't want to say it's simple, but with just a little amendment to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, [Congress] can make a provision that would permit the importation of a trophy from Canada." Laverty said he cannot say how likely this could happen, as U.S. officials will have to meet to discuss the matter. Import ban being challenged in court He noted that it's a plus that Canada manages its polar bear populations and sport hunts well — something that may help in lifting the ban on polar bear trophy imports. Meanwhile, the import ban is being challenged in court by American hunters. Polar bears remain a species "of special concern" in Canada, which is a less serious classification than "threatened" and "endangered." The U.S. government's move to list polar bears as a threatened species was based on findings that bears' Arctic sea ice habitat, vital to their survival, has dramatically melted in recent decades. The decision means all U.S. federal agencies now have to ensure nothing they do jeopardizes the bears' survival or the sea ice on which the bears live. However, polar bear sport hunts bring in about $3 million a year to Nunavut and the Northwest Territories. They form a significant source of income for many Inuit guides, as hunters pay around $30,000 to $40,000 to hunt a polar bear. American hunters in Nunavut this week began scrambling to find a way to get their polar bear trophies across the border in light of the new threatened status. 'A risk that we were willing to take' While some had delayed their travel plans as they waited for the U.S. government's decision, others, like Tim Walters of Cornell, Wash., embarked on their northern hunts anyway. "Yes, it was a concern, very much so, and a risk that we were willing to take," said Walters, who was on a stopover at the Iqaluit airport Thursday after hunting a polar bear in Resolute Bay. Walters said he came north to experience being in the Arctic, not just to kill a polar bear. At the same time, he said he believes a lot fewer U.S. hunters will want to hunt polar bears in northern Canada because of the import ban. "I certainly would hope that our government would make some type of exclusion to allow those bears who have been killed up to this point. You cannot put them back on the ice and I see no sense in leaving them somewhere in storage indefinitely." Ethel Leedy, a 79-year-old hunter from Delta Junction, Alaska, said people must recognize that Inuit have hunting quotas and will still hunt polar bears whether there is a sport hunt or not. "I think they should let us take them across because the natives are going to take them anyhow," said Leedy. "They get the permits and that's how they have their income, it gives them extra income." Both Leedy and Walters said their polar bear trophies will stay with Canadian taxidermists until they find a way to get them across the Canada-U.S. border. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2008/05/16/bear-ban.html

ILLINOIS: Ban lifted, foie gras is back on the menu in Chicago 15.may.08 New York Times Monica Davey CHICAGO — Foie gras, run out of town with great fanfare two years ago, is, according to this story, being allowed back. On Wednesday, Chicago’s aldermen voted, 37 to 6, to repeal their ban on sales of the controversial delicacy, the fattened livers of ducks and geese. Since 2006, when this became the first major city in the United States to enact such a ban, it had been mocked by critics, including Mayor Richard M. Daley, who wondered whether aldermen should really be devoting precious time to telling Chicagoans what to eat. The banning — and subsequent un-banning — of foie gras here seemed to say more about classic Chicago politics than it did about dinner. One alderman, Joe Moore, who has long fought to outlaw the sales, arguing that foie gras is a product of animal cruelty, angrily denounced what he said was the sudden use during Wednesday’s council meeting of an obscure political rule to dump the ban without debate. Mr. Moore was cited as saying he tried, pleaded, yelled to be allowed to speak, but Mr. Daley did not call on him. “This is a sad day for good government in Chicago,” Mr. Moore was quoted as saying later, adding that he believed many of his colleagues had simply been embarrassed by the crush of national attention. “There was a feeling among many that they just didn’t want to deal with this anymore.” But another alderman, Tom Tunney, a restaurant owner who pressed for the repeal, accused supporters of the ban of some equally fancy political maneuvering. When the aldermen voted 48 to 1 to outlaw foie gras in April 2006, it was part of a larger package of items, Mr. Tunney was cited as saying, and some aldermen (including, he said, himself) did not even realize that they were approving the ban until it was too late. In the end, some restaurateurs here agree, Chicago may have spent more time talking about foie gras than many of its residents ever did eating it. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/us/15liver.html?_r=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Alaska trying to get polar bears off U.S. threatened list Last Updated: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 CBC News The state of Alaska will sue to challenge the listing of polar bears as a threatened species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, Gov. Sarah Palin said Wednesday. Palin said there's insufficient evidence to support the threatened status, which U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne announced on May 14. Kempthorne said the best available science indicates that the bears' primary habitat — Arctic sea ice — was shrinking and likely to further recede. But Palin maintained that polar bears are well managed and that their numbers have dramatically increased over the last three decades. "The state maintains that there is insufficient evidence to support a listing of the polar bear as threatened for any reason at this time," stated a news release issued by Palin's office Wednesday. "Polar bears are currently well-managed and have dramatically increased over 30 years as a result of conservation measures enacted through international agreements and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. A listing of the polar bear under the [Endangered Species Act] will not provide additional conservation measures." Conservation groups say the increase in Alaska's polar bear numbers is due to measures that halted overhunting, but that populations are likely to diminish as summer sea ice shrinks. Palin said her state's attorney general will file a complaint under the U.S. Administrative Procedure Act, arguing that Kempthorne's decision was so arbitrary that it violates the act. The state will also draft a 60-day notice of intent to sue under the Endangered Species Act, Palin said. Conservation groups also plan court battle Meanwhile, American conservation groups also want to take the U.S. government to court over the polar bear's threatened status. Groups like the Center for Biological Diversity argue that the government had no right to insert a special regulation exempting greenhouse gas emissions and oil and gas industry activities from the rules protecting the now-threatened polar bear species. "We have filed a court challenge to that special regulation, asserting that it violated the law," Kassie Siegel, a lawyer with the Center for Biological Diversity, told CBC News on Tuesday. "We hope that it will be overturned in short order and that we will be left with the good parts of the decision while overcoming the bad parts." The Endangered Species Act was designed to identify threats to a species, then put measures in place to reduce those threats, Siegel said. The exemptions are contradictory and break the law, she argued. U.S. hunters are also challenging the threatened status in court, as the decision has banned them from bringing home polar bear trophies from hunting trips to places like Canada's North. With files from the Associated Press http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/05/21/alaska-bears.html

Polar bear hunters say they'll seek new markets after bears declared threatened May 24, 2008 Inuit who lead American clients on polar bear hunts say they've already lost money as a result of Wednesday's decision in the United States to add the Arctic predators to a list of threatened species. And although the Inuit hunters say they'll try to bring in customers from other countries, American outfitters who organize such trips don't hold out much hope. "There's more Americans who want to shoot polar bears than any other nationality," Gregg Severinson, director of Cabela's Outdoor Adventures, a major U.S. outfitter and gear supplier, said Thursday. Still, Nathaniel Kalluk, who has been a polar bear guide based in Resolute, Nunavut, for 10 years, is hoping to replace his American clients with hunters from other countries. "We'll probably go overseas or something like that," he said. "We've got one client from Austria already coming up in a couple days. Him and his wife are coming up to see what it's like and we'll take it from there." On Wednesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced it is declaring the polar bear a threatened species. The decision is based on the reasoning that the bears' primary habitat - arctic sea ice - is shrinking as a result of climate change. The listing means American hunters will no longer be able to bring bear hides into the United States. Kalluk said he's already had one cancellation - a US$27,000 hit that affects not only him, but the local co-op that provides supplies and women who sew caribou parkas and pants the hunters use. "He was going to come up on the 17th if (the hide) was importable," Kalluk said. "But when it's not importable any more he cancelled out." The entire industry is worth about $2.5 million a year in Nunavut - big bucks in tiny, remote communities where working for the government is often the only other option. Kalluk expects a few Americans to still come hunting. Some have friends or businesses in Canada where they can leave the trophy. But don't look for very many, Severinson said. He looks back to the 1990s, another period when Americans weren't allowed to import their polar bear hides. "We booked no Americans and maybe five foreign hunters a year." Kalluk, who employs four guides, has 20 tags to sell. And he's got lots of bears to hunt. "More than ever now," he said. "In fact, four times hunters got their bears the first day they (went) out." Kalluk, a 53-year-old grandfather, also offers muskox and caribou hunts and also takes a few non-hunting tourists around in the summer. But muskox numbers are declining and nothing pays as well as the bears. "It's disappointing, but life goes on." Severinson scoffs at the decision to list the bears and suggests sport hunting is not why some bear populations are in decline. "It's managing emotions, not wildlife," he said. Kalluk agrees. "(It's a) game only." And even though he's faced with scrambling to keep his livelihood, Kalluk's thoughts are with his clients and fellow hunters. "I am very sorry for the hunters of the United States. I'm sorry for them. They want to get a polar bear. And when they get one they want to take the hide home and they cannot do that any more." http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5i9JgWmJNOEI_vyrROhIsxCVgQXsQ

May 27, 2008 ST..JOHNS (CBC) - Newfoundland and Labrador's rapidly growing mink farming industry has little enforcement to deal with manure and rotting carcasses, a new report has found. The report, completed in March by Halifax-based researchers with Dalhousie University's School for Resource and Environmental Studies, found that the majority of fur farmers bury dead animals at local landfills. As well, the researchers found that some farms have piles of manure that are not properly covered, not all farmers are cleaning cages properly, and some farms do not have a large enough buffer zone with their closest neighbours. "Due to the overall lack of enforcement of waste management practices, mink farming has become what some consider a non-controlled industry," the authors concluded. CBC News obtained the report through provincial access to information legislation. The mink industry burst from having just 1,000 breeding animals in 2001 to 60,000 in 2007, the report said. Direct sales now top $17 million annually, and the industry is valued at $38 million. The report calls for better regulations that can be enforced, and suggests that the Newfoundland and Labrador government cap the number of breeding animals. As well, the report said the provincial government needs to ensure that farmers start composting dead mink on their own farms. The report, which was completed for the provincial Department of Natural Resources and Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, was launched after neighbours of some farms complained about strong odours and infestation of flies. Ross Wiseman, president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Fur Breeders Association, said rules are needed to govern the industry, which he said could grow to be worth $60 million this year. However, Wiseman cautioned against over-regulation. "It's up to us now to achieve some level of balance between what they put out as a report and what the needs of the industry might be, and what it takes to move the industry forward without being encumbered by regulations and the costs associated with regulations," he said. "The industry has been moving and developing very rapidly here, and in fact, it's been hard to keep up with it, quite frankly, from a regulatory perspective," Wiseman said. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/080527/canada/stjohns_mink_farms_2

L'Institut de la fourrure du Canada annonce le gagnant du Prix de la conservation (Ottawa, le 26 mai 2008) - M. Pierre Canac-Marquis, biologiste de la faune au ministère des Ressources naturelles du Québec, a été nommé récipiendaire de l'édition 2008 du Prix de la conservation des animaux à fourrure d'Amérique du Nord. http://www.fur.ca/index-f/news/news.asp?action=news&newsitem=26_may_2008

C'est une très bonne question Valou ! Il faudrait s'informer auprès de nos «gestionnaires de la faune»

J'espère que les manifestants seront très nombreux !

Wowwww ! C'est pas cher en + !

Est-ce parce que la population est en augmentation ou bien parce que la population a augmenté sa consommation ?

Je présume que ça doit tuer beaucoup d'animaux sauvages-Pourtant, chez-nous, on n'en parle pas !

Quel gâchis !! Qu'ils laissent donc la nature faire son oeuvre !

C'est tout simplement abominable ! p.s.: Ce ne sont pas n'importe qui ont écrit cet article !! Denis-Richard Blackbourn docteur en écoéthologie à Paris-V et en ethnozoologie au Musée national d’Histoire naturelle (MNHN), Jean-Marie BROHM professeur de sociologie à Montpellier-III et Laurence Werli doctorante en histoire des sciences à l’EHESS de Paris.

C'est enrageant !! Et dire qu'on continue de vendre des animaux dans les animaleries

Pauvres martyrs !!!!!!!! Déjà que le Centre de recherche et protection où ils vivent habituellement fait dur !!!!!!!!!!!! J'ai vu un reportage l'année dernière de ce centre. Les pandas vivent dans des cages et ils sont constamment manipuler par ceux qui s'occupent d'eux (inséminés, testés, etc. etc.) Ils n'ont accès qu'occasionnelment à un petit terrain situé à l'arrière du centre

Il ne manquait plus que ça !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

C'est évident que cette nouvelle mesure n'enlèvera en rien leurs souffrances et qu'elles seront quand-même abattues Elles se retrouveront peut-être dans de la viande à chiens... ou pour des animaux élevés pour leur fourrure, ou dans des zoos... p.s.: Ils parlent de «boeufs» mais ce sont surtout des vaches laitières qui finissent en «steak haché» !

Merci pour l'adresse Ranëwen Pas sûre que je pourrai tout suivre (nous sommes dans les travaux à la maison)

Tu as du courage ma belle hop ! Je ne sais pas si j'aurais été capable de me retenir de la ramener avec moi. Mais bien sûr, si elle mange à sa faim et qu'elle semble heureuse là où elle est, alors on peut quand même se réjouir. Je lève aussi mon verre à sa santé et à ton courage

Au Japon, ils font même des «burgers» à la baleine !

C'est clair, net et précis !

quelqu'un a-t-il l'adresse de son blog ?