The World Wildlife Fund (also known as the Worldwide Fund for Nature, or simply WWF) has been actively pressuring government agencies in the U.S., Europe, and Canada to increase the amount of testing that they require for pesticides and other chemicals. The result of the WWF’s lobbying has been the establishment of what threaten to be the largest animal-testing programs of all time.

And that’s not all. As one would expect of an organization founded by trophy hunters, the WWF does not oppose killing animals for sport. The WWF believes that culling (read “killing”) elephants and seals is OK, it supports the slaughter of whales by native tribes, and it refuses to speak out against steel-jaw leghold traps.

Surprised? Please click on the link below to learn more about why PETA thinks the WWF should change its name to the Wicked Wildlife Fund.

Click here to read more
http://www.wickedwildlifefund.com/index.html



They have also recenlty teamed up with the evil PROCTER& GAMBLE plus others :

http://www.bava.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/WWF.html


The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has been actively pressuring government agencies in the United States, Canada, and Europe to greatly increase the amount of testing that they require for new and existing pesticides and other chemicals. The result of the WWF's lobbying has been the establishment of what threatens to be the largest animal-testing programs of all time.

The WWF was the driving force in pressuring the US Congress to legislate the screening of chemicals for "endocrine (hormone) disrupting" effects and has subsequently been heavily involved in establishing the framework for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) massive chemical-testing program now under development. As its Web site points out: "WWF invested substantial resources in the EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee," which "agreed upon a set of tests to form the foundation for the screening and testing program." What the WWF neglects to mention, however, is that 10 of the 15 recommended screens and tests are animal-poisoning studies, some of which kill hundreds or thousands of animals at a time. According to scientific estimates, the WWF-backed endocrine testing program will kill up to 1.2 million animals for every 1,000 chemicals tested, and with environmental organisations pressing for tens of thousands of chemicals to be retested under this program, the toll in animal suffering and death will be staggering. The WWF is also pressuring government agencies in Europe to embark on a similar animal-testing program.

In addition to lobbying for more chemical testing, the WWF has teamed up with Procter & Gamble, S.C. Johnson, and other chemical companies to create an institute to pursue "basic research" on endocrine disruptors. On top of this, the WWF is now pushing the US Congress to pass a bill that would pour additional millions in public funds into endocrine research, much of which would likely be used to fund experiments on animals.

Unfortunately, the "endocrine disruptor" issue is not an isolated example. The WWF has been a major force in pressuring the European Union to amend its Chemicals Policy to require companies to test and retest as many as 30,000 new and existing chemicals. The British Institute for Environmental Health estimates that this process will kill upwards of 45 million animals if the standard battery of animal-poisoning tests is used. The WWF's US and Canadian offices are also calling for more testing of pesticides, despite the fact that more than 9,000 animals are already killed for each pesticide product on the market. The organisation has called for certain pesticides to be tested for "developmental neurotoxicity" (DNT) using a test that kills upwards of 1,300 animals each time it is conducted. This test has been heavily criticised by scientists, including the EPA's own Scientific Advisory Panel, which concluded that "the exposure of rat foetus/pups was not shown to be equivalent to human foetus/infant during equivalent stages of brain development" and that "the current form of the DNT guideline is not a sensitive indicator of toxicity to the offspring." In other words, WWF is calling for thousands of animals to be killed in a test that scientists admit is not relevant to humans!

In its defence, the WWF says that "in the absence of effective, validated alternatives, WWF believes that limited animal testing is needed for the long-term protection of wildlife and people throughout the world." However, there is nothing "limited" about the massive amount of animal testing that the WWF is endorsing. Dr. Joshua Lederberg, Nobel Laureate in Medicine, pointed out in 1981: "It is simply not possible with all the animals in the world to go through chemicals in the blind way we have at the present time, and reach credible conclusions about the hazards to human health." Now more than 20 years later, millions of animals are still dying in agonizing chemical toxicity tests, and we are no closer to getting dangerous chemicals out of the environment. In fact, despite killing hundreds of thousands of animals in painful chemical toxicity tests, the EPA has not banned a single toxic industrial chemical in more than a decade!

The WWF endorses the killing of wild animals, too. For information on this, and who you can complain to, please visit: www.wickedwildlifefund.com

See also: The Enemy Within

The National Wildlife Federation is another one. Many people who purchase their cutesy wildlife Christmas cards have no idea they are an umbrella group for numerous state hunting clubs.

Animal People News www.animalpeoplenews.org , is a great source of info on the many "wildlife" groups that actively support or even facilitate hunting.

Wow, I never knew. Thanks for posting this.

I also wasn't aware of this. I was curious to know what other animal groups also support things like this so I looked it up and found these helpful websites which list some of them. I was very surprised at the number of organizations listed on these sites.

http://www.deeralliance.org/prohuntingorganizations.htm

http://www.sort.org/help.php

Ignore this post. Sorry.

First, let me say, that is absolutely disgusting. Sickening. Just. Ugh. I'm glad I've never given them donations or anything.


Next, let me say that at first I thought you meant World Wrestling Federation :doh:. Heh.

If there ever is/was/will be a hell or bad place or punishment for people of some kind*, the people who conduct animal testing would go there/get it. There's no excuse for such horrendous abuse.

Thanks for posting this. I hope other VBers read this and stop funding the World Wildlife Fund if they are and put their dollars elsewhere.. like on companies that provide products that are free from animal testing. Dollars send messages.

*I'm trying to cover all grounds here and represent the multiple beliefs present on VB. :p

...wow


I wonder if I can request a refund for my donations.

There's no need to test pesticides. We know they are meant to kill. They are MEANT TO KILL! Therefore they are DEADLY.

There is no need for more deadly materials on this planet. WWF should call for a MORATORIUM on all DEADLY MATERIALS.

OMG this is unbelieveable.

WHAT F-ING HYPOCRITES.

I was surprised to hear about this recently & changed one of my credit cards form WWF to the ASPCA becuase of the hidden truths I learned about.

The WWF has never been on my list of preferred charities, but I had no idea that they actively supported animal testing and hunting. Now I'll remember to throw their junk mail right in the recycle bin.

I'd like to see some support for the allegations made in the article. :( The site claims that WWF is pro animal testing, but WWF says:
Part of this process requires focused chemical testing which WWF believes should rely on non-animal
methods wherever these are available. Even where non-animal test methods are not available, we oppose any
outdated or unnecessary animal testing. At the same time, we continue to call for increased funding to develop
non-animal tests as a matter of urgency. Underlying these views, WWF supports the swiftest possible
transition away from animal testing consistent with placing the fewest animals at risk of exposure to harmful
chemicals, whether in the wild or in laboratories.

You can also check out their website, www.wwf.org to see their statement on toxic chemicals, which do not call for increased testing, but a switch to less dangerous compounds.

Also, WWF was founded by a biologist from the UK, not "trophy hunters".

The WWF, in India fought *against* elephant culls, not for them.

There may be some truth on this website, but there's a lot of garbage as well.

Long before I knew about PETA's complaints, I questioned support of WWF based on their philosophy and actions. Perusing WWF's materials it is clear that WWF subscribes to the "hunter-conservationist" view of wildlife as resources.

Animal People News is an independent newspaper and a decent source for information on various organizations. Here are some articles of interest regarding the WWF and other groups:

http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/94/5/editorial.html

http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/keepingBarnum1200.html

http://www.animalpeoplenews.org//05/12/baboonploy12.05.htm

But honestly, I think one of the worst examples of WWF's wildlife policies is their support of the brutal Canadian seal hunt. I used to have a news clip about WWF's stance, but unfortunately the link was taken down. So instead here's this link:

http://www.canadiansealhunt.com/wwf.html

Is that the one with the cute panda symbol?

Yes.
http://www.panda.org/

Thats horriable! I didnt know the WWf supported the seal hunt. How can they say they are for animals? I feel the seal hunt should be banned, as a Canadian it is embaressing.

Thats horriable! I didnt know the WWf supported the seal hunt. How can they say they are for animals? I feel the seal hunt should be banned, as a Canadian it is embaressing.


What does the general Canadian public feel towards the seal hunt?

DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON THE INTERNET, without doing some research first.

DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON THE INTERNET, without doing some research first.??

??
See Jen's post.

Ah okay.

I think this is somewhat odd, from WWF's site (emphasis added):
WWF´s saga began in 1960, when eminent British biologist Sir Julian Huxley visited Africa to research a series of articles for The Observer newspaper. He discovered that many parts of Africa, which 50 years before were swarming with game, had become bare of wildlife.

Greenpeace keep coming up to me in the street, its getting annoying.
Anyone got any dirt on them so I can have a go, instead of mumbling "sorry in a rush" then legging it while they whine at me about how more important saving the world is than shopping!?

http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/aniamltesting03.pdf

Animal testing policy
8 July 2003
CORE FACTS AND WWF COMMITMENTS
There is now overwhelming evidence that ecosystems, wildlife and people are under threat from pervasive
and global chemical contamination. Around the world, wild animals have been found with deformities and
other developmental abnormalities. Numerous studies have established strong links between certain chemicals
and these effects in birds, fish, alligators, seals, and other species. Studies in humans have also uncovered
connections between the same chemicals and childhood cancers, premature births, and intellectual
impairment.
WWF is working to reduce and eliminate the world’s most dangerous chemicals by promoting increased
understanding, regulation, and use of safer alternatives. WWF has urged governments to identify, control, and
phase out the hazardous chemicals responsible for damage to wildlife and humans.
Part of this process requires focused chemical testing which WWF believes should rely on non-animal
methods wherever these are available. Even where non-animal test methods are not available, we oppose any
outdated or unnecessary animal testing. At the same time, we continue to call for increased funding to develop
non-animal tests as a matter of urgency. Underlying these views, WWF supports the swiftest possible
transition away from animal testing consistent with placing the fewest animals at risk of exposure to harmful
chemicals, whether in the wild or in laboratories.
WWF’S ADVOCACY OF ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING
Given significant recent strides in biomedical science, there is enormous potential for developing alternative
non-animal test methods. Examples of WWF’s commitment to promoting alternatives to animal testing and to
reducing the use of test animals include:
• In Europe, WWF has worked alongside animal welfare organisations in suggesting improvements to
chemicals policy reforms, such as the European Commission’s REACH initiative, and applying public
pressure on governments to significantly increase funding into alternatives to animal tests and to more
rapidly adopt existing alternatives;
• In the UK, WWF has urged the government to speed up the procedure for acceptance and validation of
currently available alternative methods;
• In the US, WWF has supported adding funds to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency budget to
support non-animal testing and the targeting of that agency’s endocrine disruption screening and testing
program on just 1-2 per cent of the potentially eligible chemicals (those that are likely to be most
dangerous);
• WWF has called for safety testing to be prioritised and tiered, initially focusing on non-animal methods
such as computer models, as well as tests for persistence and bioaccumulation, and existing data;
• WWF has pressed for increased sharing of safety data by corporations and governments to minimise
duplicate testing; and
• WWF has urged governments and the private sector to phase out the production and use of very persistent
chemicals (those that don’t break down in the environment) and very bioaccumulative chemicals (those
that build up over time in animals and humans) without any toxicity testing, because these chemicals are
clearly undesirable.
As a result of these actions and others by concerned citizens and decision makers around the world, WWF
looks forward to the day when future generations of humans and wildlife are safeguarded from chemical
threats, and animal testing is committed to the annals of history.
PROPOSED REACH PROGRAM
The European Commission is developing proposals for a new system to regulate chemicals, commonly known
as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals). The proposed system would create
far-reaching changes in how chemicals are regulated in Europe, phasing out existing chemicals of high
concern in favour of safer alternatives while preventing new chemicals of high concern from entering the
market. In addition, the burden of proof would be placed squarely on industry to demonstrate the safety of
chemicals already on the market. Discussions of REACH often assume that 30,000 chemicals will be tested,
and that tests on this scale will be carried out on animals. In fact, far fewer chemicals are likely to be tested,
and existing EU law already requires that non-animal tests be used wherever reasonably and practically
available.
PROTECTING WILDLIFE AND PEOPLE - FOR TODAY AND TOMORROW
WWF is committed to protecting the diversity of wildlife species for future as well as present generations. As
the world’s leading voice for nature conservation, we are extremely concerned by the risks to thousands of
species – human beings among them – that are subjected to an uncontrolled chemical experiment of global
proportions through daily exposure to hazardous substances. Ending this cruel experiment would be an
enormous victory not only for wildlife, but for everyone concerned with animal welfare. Toward that end, we
will continue to work with individuals and organisations sharing our broader view, as part of a collective
effort directed at an urgent common cause – protecting life on Earth.
For further information, contact:
Supporter Care, WWF-UK, 01483 426333, supportercare@wwf.org.uk

http://www.harpseals.org/hunters/wwf.html

WWF also agree with the Canadian seal culling and also the elephant culling,

and they are only interested in conserving certain animals, the ones that they can use as hunting trophies.