{"title":"北极熊运动狩猎:加拿大对国际北极熊协议的错误解释","authors":"M. Simpson","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2019.1654198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 1973 the five polar bear range states (Canada, Norway, Denmark, the United States, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) entered into the International Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears and Their Habitat (“the Agreement”). The Agreement’s intention was to protect polar bears through conservation and management measures including, inter alia, prohibiting the taking of the carnivore. The implementation and enforcement of the Agreement was left to each individual country, resulting in differing management practices and legal frameworks among the signatory states. This is particularly stark in the context of sports hunting, with all nations except Canada outlawing the practice. Canada, striking out on its own, chose to interpret the provisions of Article III of the Agreement in such a way as to allow their provinces and territories to enact legislation to regulate the sports hunting of polar bears. This article argues that sports hunting is not a traditional right of Canada’s indigenous peoples and, therefore, Canada’s interpretation of the Agreement is critically flawed.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Polar Bear Sports Hunting: Canada’s Flawed Interpretation of the International Polar Bear Agreement\",\"authors\":\"M. Simpson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13880292.2019.1654198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In 1973 the five polar bear range states (Canada, Norway, Denmark, the United States, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) entered into the International Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears and Their Habitat (“the Agreement”). The Agreement’s intention was to protect polar bears through conservation and management measures including, inter alia, prohibiting the taking of the carnivore. The implementation and enforcement of the Agreement was left to each individual country, resulting in differing management practices and legal frameworks among the signatory states. This is particularly stark in the context of sports hunting, with all nations except Canada outlawing the practice. Canada, striking out on its own, chose to interpret the provisions of Article III of the Agreement in such a way as to allow their provinces and territories to enact legislation to regulate the sports hunting of polar bears. This article argues that sports hunting is not a traditional right of Canada’s indigenous peoples and, therefore, Canada’s interpretation of the Agreement is critically flawed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2019.1654198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2019.1654198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Polar Bear Sports Hunting: Canada’s Flawed Interpretation of the International Polar Bear Agreement
Abstract In 1973 the five polar bear range states (Canada, Norway, Denmark, the United States, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) entered into the International Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears and Their Habitat (“the Agreement”). The Agreement’s intention was to protect polar bears through conservation and management measures including, inter alia, prohibiting the taking of the carnivore. The implementation and enforcement of the Agreement was left to each individual country, resulting in differing management practices and legal frameworks among the signatory states. This is particularly stark in the context of sports hunting, with all nations except Canada outlawing the practice. Canada, striking out on its own, chose to interpret the provisions of Article III of the Agreement in such a way as to allow their provinces and territories to enact legislation to regulate the sports hunting of polar bears. This article argues that sports hunting is not a traditional right of Canada’s indigenous peoples and, therefore, Canada’s interpretation of the Agreement is critically flawed.
期刊介绍:
Drawing upon the findings from island biogeography studies, Norman Myers estimates that we are losing between 50-200 species per day, a rate 120,000 times greater than the background rate during prehistoric times. Worse still, the rate is accelerating rapidly. By the year 2000, we may have lost over one million species, counting back from three centuries ago when this trend began. By the middle of the next century, as many as one half of all species may face extinction. Moreover, our rapid destruction of critical ecosystems, such as tropical coral reefs, wetlands, estuaries, and rainforests may seriously impair species" regeneration, a process that has taken several million years after mass extinctions in the past.