Police have shot and killed a polar bear that came ashore in northwestern Iceland, the first sighting of a polar bear there since 2016. It might have hitched a ride from Greenland on a floating iceberg.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
18 points

That’s a lot of justification for killing something that can go fishing for food.

permalink
report
reply
99 points

polar bears will absolutely hunt humans for food without a second thought. And you will not be able to outrun them or scare them away.

This one came quite close to homes, which is a reason for almost all towns with polar bears in the area to shoot them.

That this bear was the first in quite a while is a sad thing, but it’s understandable that the town doesn’t want a bear mauling people for a snack

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

This reads like it’s justified.

We destroy their habitats so they need to come to us to survive only to get killed by us.

Sounds like we are just bad guys.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

It is justified.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

If it’s black, fight back. If it’s brown, lie down. If it’s white, good night.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points
1 point

Read the article. They don’t even go onto that. They have a shoot on sight policy regardless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If you can see a polar bear it’s a threat.

They really aren’t like other bear species. They are an apex predator in an area where basically nothing other than another polar bear can even harm them. They see most things as food, including humans.

As a bonus, Iceland has a pretty wonky ecosystem that needs protecting as is and polar bears aren’t native to the island. They have to swim extreme distances to get there, making relocation extremely difficult and expensive, plus if they leave it be it will entirely disrupt other wildlife in the area, to say nothing of the human population.

As others have said, it sucks that it got shot, but Iceland especially has very limited options on how else to deal with it. Shoot on sight is, unfortunately, a very reasonable policy for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Yes. Because they’re not going to wait until someone got turned into kibble for something to do

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

Except that’s not how Polar Bears prefer to hunt. They prefer to hunt by holes over pack ice, where they wait for animals like seals to surface for air. When there’s no pack ice, which is what is happening thanks to global warming, they hunt for whatever they can on land. And if that land is inhabited by humans, that means humans.

I would say the potential to kill and eat humans, including infants, is excellent justification.

Does it suck that this is our fault to begin with? Absolutely. That doesn’t mean that human lives should be put at risk as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Humans have lived in polar bear territory for centuries though. So we know it’s possible. Shooting endangered animals on sight because you don’t want to learn how to co-habitate a region is just peak shitty human.

And they’re bears they can absolutely find other sources of food without killing humans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

How the fuck do you imagine “co-habitating” with polar bears??? That’s like starving a wolf and telling it to “co-habitate” with a baby.
Yes, it sucks that we have forced polar bears out of their natural habit and that they now have to hunt humans for food, however if something starts hunting humans for food it’s just gonna get killed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Brother you are literally required by law to carry a firearm in svalbard if you go outside of longyearbyen because if polar bears. Its pretty shitty if iceland(400k people) suddenly have to deal with the mess.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yes, and those people all have guns to shoot polar bears.

https://www.sysselmesteren.no/en/weapon/

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

So tranquilizers and trailers don’t exist in Iceland? They couldn’t just send it back to Greenland?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So no map? You said it wasn’t an immediate threat. Where’s your evidence?

Also, why are you assuming it came from Greenland and why are you assuming that it would survive just being dropped off in some random place in the humongous island of Greenland anyway?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So polar bears are basically dingos?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Dingos would hunt at packice holes if they had access to them?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

…no?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points

I wouldn’t say it’s sufficient justification, to be honest. I guess it depends on the population to some degree. But since we caused this problem, I would say moving even a whole village out of polar bear habitat is worth the cost of shooting even one, and we can suppose there will be more to come. I think we have a responsibility to get the hell out of their space, even at a huge cost to us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

Sorry… you think an entire village needs to be moved when a polar bear is seen in Iceland? How would that even work?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Villages live in polar bear territory in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Scandinavia, and Russia just fine. So Iceland has to learn some new rules. It’s no reason to contribute to the extinction of a species.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

but can they actually go fishing for food? If a wild animal is wandering into human territory, there is usually a resource-limiting reason for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

According to Iceland the entire island is human territory. I’m going to press F to doubt.

And they very much can. This was a rural home, not some suburb. But even that wouldn’t be the first time in the North.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 249K

    Comments