7.2
The Origins of the Polar Bear Agreement
Concerns for the wellbeing and conservation of polar bears is not a phenomenon of
recent times but has emerged already in the wake of the Second World War. During
the war, the Arctic regions had become significantly easier accessible due to the
leaps in technology—a development which would continue in the times after the
war. This meant that apart from military personnel, also private citizens were now
able to access the Arctic regions much better, putting Arctic living resources,
including the polar bear, in much closer reach of humans. Of course, polar bears
had been hunted for centuries by the Arctic’s indigenous population, but the
commercialisation of polar bear products, especially its hides, paired with highpowered rifles and other military technology put increasing pressure on polar bear
populations. In addition it became clear that also indirect threats were becoming
increasingly strong in the Arctic: pollution from non-Arctic sources as well as the
first signs of a warming Arctic started to show their first effects.
During the 1960s it became clear that polar bear populations were declining to a
degree that put their long-term survival at risk. At that time, however, Arctic
cooperation in its contemporary form did not exist and research and scientific efforts
on the polar bear were scattered. Also the bipolar geopolitical landscape made a
collaborative scientific effort difficult. In spite of this, the United States took the
initiative to set a process in motion that would lead to the conclusion of an agreement
on scientific cooperation and ultimately conservation of the polar bear. The first steps
were taken in September 1965 when the First Scientific Meeting on the Polar Bear
was held in Fairbanks, Alaska. Representatives of the polar bear range state
governments, research and management institutions attended the meeting along
with the IUCN. Although the meeting could not agree on concerted research efforts,
particularly because of the opposition from the Soviet Union, the final statement
3
nevertheless encouraged the range states to exchange scientific findings on the polar
bear in order to be able to put a management regime in place. Until this would
happen, the final statement encouraged each range state to take individual action it
considered necessary to protect polar bears. While this was a rather general point of
departure without much concrete action, we must bear in mind that the meeting
comprised delegates from western states and the Soviet Union. From the outset,
negotiations and exchange of information was difficult in these muddy geopolitical
waters. It is ever more positively surprising that the meeting agreed upon a concrete
course of action: the protection of polar bear cubs and females accompanied by cubs
throughout the year.
A crucial role in the further advancement of information exchange was afforded
to the IUCN. The IUCN has had a reputation of impartiality and its focus on
conservation was considered non-political. Therefore, the first meeting suggested
the IUCN to be the information hub of polar bear research and that polar bear range
states were to submit their research findings to it. It was therefore the IUCN which
3 PBSG (2009).
158
7 The International Legal Framework for Polar Bears
The Origins of the Polar Bear Agreement
Concerns for the wellbeing and conservation of polar bears is not a phenomenon of
recent times but has emerged already in the wake of the Second World War. During
the war, the Arctic regions had become significantly easier accessible due to the
leaps in technology—a development which would continue in the times after the
war. This meant that apart from military personnel, also private citizens were now
able to access the Arctic regions much better, putting Arctic living resources,
including the polar bear, in much closer reach of humans. Of course, polar bears
had been hunted for centuries by the Arctic’s indigenous population, but the
commercialisation of polar bear products, especially its hides, paired with highpowered rifles and other military technology put increasing pressure on polar bear
populations. In addition it became clear that also indirect threats were becoming
increasingly strong in the Arctic: pollution from non-Arctic sources as well as the
first signs of a warming Arctic started to show their first effects.
During the 1960s it became clear that polar bear populations were declining to a
degree that put their long-term survival at risk. At that time, however, Arctic
cooperation in its contemporary form did not exist and research and scientific efforts
on the polar bear were scattered. Also the bipolar geopolitical landscape made a
collaborative scientific effort difficult. In spite of this, the United States took the
initiative to set a process in motion that would lead to the conclusion of an agreement
on scientific cooperation and ultimately conservation of the polar bear. The first steps
were taken in September 1965 when the First Scientific Meeting on the Polar Bear
was held in Fairbanks, Alaska. Representatives of the polar bear range state
governments, research and management institutions attended the meeting along
with the IUCN. Although the meeting could not agree on concerted research efforts,
particularly because of the opposition from the Soviet Union, the final statement
3
nevertheless encouraged the range states to exchange scientific findings on the polar
bear in order to be able to put a management regime in place. Until this would
happen, the final statement encouraged each range state to take individual action it
considered necessary to protect polar bears. While this was a rather general point of
departure without much concrete action, we must bear in mind that the meeting
comprised delegates from western states and the Soviet Union. From the outset,
negotiations and exchange of information was difficult in these muddy geopolitical
waters. It is ever more positively surprising that the meeting agreed upon a concrete
course of action: the protection of polar bear cubs and females accompanied by cubs
throughout the year.
A crucial role in the further advancement of information exchange was afforded
to the IUCN. The IUCN has had a reputation of impartiality and its focus on
conservation was considered non-political. Therefore, the first meeting suggested
the IUCN to be the information hub of polar bear research and that polar bear range
states were to submit their research findings to it. It was therefore the IUCN which
3 PBSG (2009).
158
7 The International Legal Framework for Polar Bears