In a statement at news, biologist Per Espen Fjeld does his part to ensure that the walrus Freya’s life ends tragically. With exclamation points, he insists that Freya should die. Why? Yes, because it is “in line with how we usually treat” wild animals if they are the least bit in our way. I suspect that Fjeld’s real concern is not to have Freya killed, but to point out that we as a society unblinkingly kill large numbers of wild animals for a number of bad reasons. Or out of sheer carelessness through climate change and natural destruction. In that case, the attack on Freya is a solid boom shot. The way Oslo municipality and the Directorate of Fisheries have guided people in meeting Freya – with respect and consideration – is exemplary, and invaluable for the attitude-creating effect: Wild animals must be given space to live, we ourselves must adapt and take account. This is the practice that should follow from the fine UN speeches that heads of state give at increasingly shorter intervals. This is a change in attitude that creates the basis for a world where we no longer trample through nature while the animals lie lifeless strewn in our footsteps. Freya – and everyone who now pays attention to her – creates the change that environmental scientists are diligently researching how to bring about: How to change behavior so that we humans can value nature and animals more than our own short-term gain? It does not seem that Fjeld sees Freya as a guide to the care he calls for for the walruses in the north, which are losing their habitats due to environmental destruction. Fjeld points to examples of how we “displace animals in large numbers” and kill wild animals for the smallest thing. He points to deadly habitat destruction, the shooting of endangered predators and the so-called killing of everything from birds to badgers in the spring when the animals have young. It shines through that Fjeld is very critical of this reckless behavior towards wild animals. But why does he nevertheless present it almost as an example to follow? Norway’s treatment of endangered carnivores is unparalleled internationally, in a negative sense. We systematically violate the Bern Convention on Wild Species. Just a few weeks ago, NOAH won an important victory over the state in the Court of Appeal; shooting critically endangered wolves in the wolf zone was illegal under Norwegian law. When it comes to killing wild animals during the breeding season, NOAH has contributed to a new wildlife regulation in 2020, which tightens the practice – and we are constantly upheld in complaints that save woodpeckers, otters, badgers and geese. Wild animals in Norway still have far too little legal protection. The authorities still haven’t realized that we have a natural crisis and a climate crisis – and that it also affects many, many more than us humans. But people are starting to see this, and caring for Freya as an individual goes hand in hand with realizing how important it is to give wild animals more space on our planet. A commitment to wild animals is growing in Norway. And that is exactly what we need in the face of the nature and climate crisis. We need an increased understanding that other than ourselves are also valuable – an understanding that other animals have a claim to our respect and care both as individuals and as species. Follow the debate here:
ttn-69
Boom shot against Freya – Speech
