Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

223 | 224 | 225

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Mooncalf2

mooncalf2

Tujunga, CA
February 2005

AUG 25, 2005 01:44 PM

STOP 2006 CANADIAN SEAL HUNT...
Canada Will Announce the Quota for 2006 Seal Hunt...
Spoken Amount is 350.000...
PLEASE JOIN OUR INTERNATIONAL PETITION!!!
(Forwarded from Sea Shepherd Conservation Society)


Dear Friends,


925,109 is the number of “baby seals” slaughtered in the years 2004-2005. This is the largest slaughter of marine mammals in the world and the seal pups are often clubbed in front of their mothers and skinned alive just for their fur.


Even though the “Canadian Products Boycott” is building up all over the world, in autumn this year the Canadian Government will announce the quota for the 2006 season for slaughtering seals. The expected number is 350,000 “baby seals”.


Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (www.seashepherd.org) has started an “International Petition” against the Canadian slaughter of seals. As “Volunteer Turkiye” of Sea Shepherd, Seals.Gen.Tr will follow up with the same petition through the Internet. The signatures collected will be sent to the necessary Ministries and Embassies by both Sea Shepherd and Seals.Gen.Tr.


It is the time “to beat as one heart" We all live underneath the same big sky.


This world, this ecosystem and these creatures are not owned or possessed by any single person or nation.


To sign the petition visit


http://www.seals.gen.tr/index.php

We do not have too much time until autumn!


It will be too late after the quota has been announced!


Please.....Help.......

cerebro

cerebro

Australia
August 2005

AUG 25, 2005 01:47 PM

We should also have a thread asking people to denounce and stop the hunting of them "Aye-rhabs" too.

But yes, stop killing the little cute seals frown

Rickets

rickets

Seattle, WA
March 2003

AUG 25, 2005 01:51 PM

Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?

Rickets

rickets

Seattle, WA
March 2003

AUG 25, 2005 01:51 PM

I mean as a species, not as individuals.

imustbestopped

imustbestopped

I'm lost
January 2004

AUG 25, 2005 01:54 PM

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?



No. The population of Harp Seals is around 5 million.

hadees

hadees

Austin, TX
December 2003

AUG 25, 2005 01:55 PM

I always wanted to sell an Ivory seal club.

cerebro

cerebro

Australia
August 2005

AUG 25, 2005 02:03 PM

i can understand hunting big grown up ones, i wouldnt have the heart to kill a baby one. A bit like why i wont eat veal. Dont care if its tender its a baby :/ Mind you, i dont eat a lot of red meat anyway... well... hardly. cept maybe in a deli sandwich.

whats the meat used for?

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 02:03 PM

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]

cerebro

cerebro

Australia
August 2005

AUG 25, 2005 02:07 PM

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



frown

imustbestopped

imustbestopped

I'm lost
January 2004

AUG 25, 2005 02:25 PM

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



It's illegal to skin the animal when it is alive.

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by imustbestopped]

hadees

hadees

Austin, TX
December 2003

AUG 25, 2005 02:26 PM

badr said:

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



frown




you sure they are alive? I would think getting the shit beat out of them with a club would kill them.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 02:33 PM

hadees said:
you sure they are alive? I would think getting the shit beat out of them with a club would kill them.


You'd be shocked. Frequently, they're clubbed, then dragged on board boats with hooks while they scream, then killed by either their skulls being bashed in or their necks being crushed under foot.

Rickets

rickets

Seattle, WA
March 2003

AUG 25, 2005 02:34 PM

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



No. No, I don't.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 02:36 PM

imustbestopped said:

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



It's illegal to skin the animal when it is alive.


And yet it continues to happen. Go figure.

The Canadian government issued a statement in 97 stating "minimizing inhumane harvesting" as a goal in their push to promote seal harvesting. Note the word "minimizing," not "eliminating." This is because they're on boats off the coast of Newfoundland and Greenland. It would be next to impossible to enforce such a ban.

Keith

Keith

Oklahoma City, OK
August 2002

AUG 25, 2005 02:39 PM

925,109 frown mad

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 02:44 PM

Keith said:
925,109 frown mad


And do you know why that many were slaughtered? Because the Canadian government sees seal hunting as a valuable enterprise. But just in case they can't win over public support through pumping up the income the brutal slaughter of seals generates, they got two fishing industry "scientists" (who actually worked for the Canadian government) to write a report which was never published claiming that seals are devastating the cod population and thus the cod fishing industry. They've been citing that report for years, even though it's totally bogus. They've done everything they can to promote that load of crap, including getting the CBC and Globe & Mail to publish stories about how bad seals are for cod fishing. Based on that, they pushed for a great increase in seal hunting (you know, to save the fish).

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]

cerebro

cerebro

Australia
August 2005

AUG 25, 2005 02:44 PM



<3

Merry

Merry

Saint John, NB
December 2002

AUG 25, 2005 02:48 PM

If the seal hunt was ended completely it would devastate a lot of Inuit communities in the far North who have no other source of income.

I'm not saying bludgeoning baby seals is by any means acceptable, but this issue is more complex than many would lead you to believe.

Personally I think enforcement of existing laws is a better solution.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 02:51 PM

Merry said:
If the seal hunt was ended completely it would devastate a lot of Inuit communities in the far North who have no other source of income.

I'm not saying bludgeoning baby seals is by any means acceptable, but this issue is more complex than many would lead you to believe.

Personally I think enforcement of existing laws is a better solution.


Seal harvesting in Canada is a multi-multi-million dollar industry ($20mil in 97), and much of that money goes to the Canadian government. It is complex, but we're not talking about a small Inuit village in the far North with no other means of survival, here.

Enforcement of existing laws is wishful thinking. How on Earth do you propose they enforce those laws, put a government monitor on every fishing boat in the North Atlantic?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]

AndrewB

AndrewB

Victoria, BC
August 2003

AUG 25, 2005 03:11 PM

Regardless of what many people think of Peta, they have video footage of the seal hunt on their website. In my opinion seeing it in action makes a far stronger impact on people than an article.

http://www.peta2.com/TAKECHARGE/t-streamvideo.asp

The Chinese fur farm video is also quite horrible.

Merry

Merry

Saint John, NB
December 2002

AUG 25, 2005 03:15 PM

bean said:

Merry said:
If the seal hunt was ended completely it would devastate a lot of Inuit communities in the far North who have no other source of income.

I'm not saying bludgeoning baby seals is by any means acceptable, but this issue is more complex than many would lead you to believe.

Personally I think enforcement of existing laws is a better solution.


Seal harvesting in Canada is a multi-multi-million dollar industry ($20mil in 97), and much of that money goes to the Canadian government. It is complex, but we're not talking about a small Inuit village in the far North with no other means of survival, here.

Enforcement of existing laws is wishful thinking. How on Earth do you propose they enforce those laws, put a government monitor on every fishing boat in the North Atlantic?


We have a Coast Guard as well as a Department of Fisheries and Oceans who are in charge of enforcing these kinds of laws, but they're grossly understaffed and underfunded. Some more money for them would be a good start.

And why aren't we talking about small villages? Aboriginal hunters and their communities are a huge part of this equation. The vast majority of people living in Canada's far north where the seal hunt takes place are Inuit, so I don't think it's fair to exclude them from this debate. They may be employed by heartless corporations who in turn pay taxes to the Territoral and Federal governments, but if the hunt is outlawed, it's hunters and their families who will be hurt the most.

The Canadian government isn't moving on this only because it's a cash cow for them (although I agree that's certainly part of it), it's also because there's little in the way of alternative employment for many seal hunters. The Canadian government has a history of telling Aboriginal people that they're not allowed to hunt anymore. Unfortunately, stuff like this tends to be the result, so I can see why they're slow to cave to outside pressure to end the hunt.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that I don't think it's fair to expect the government to outlaw the seal hunt until there is enough infrastructure in remote areas to allow alternative industries to develop.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 03:37 PM

Merry said:

bean said:

Merry said:
If the seal hunt was ended completely it would devastate a lot of Inuit communities in the far North who have no other source of income.

I'm not saying bludgeoning baby seals is by any means acceptable, but this issue is more complex than many would lead you to believe.

Personally I think enforcement of existing laws is a better solution.


Seal harvesting in Canada is a multi-multi-million dollar industry ($20mil in 97), and much of that money goes to the Canadian government. It is complex, but we're not talking about a small Inuit village in the far North with no other means of survival, here.

Enforcement of existing laws is wishful thinking. How on Earth do you propose they enforce those laws, put a government monitor on every fishing boat in the North Atlantic?


We have a Coast Guard as well as a Department of Fisheries and Oceans who are in charge of enforcing these kinds of laws, but they're grossly understaffed and underfunded. Some more money for them would be a good start.

And why aren't we talking about small villages? Aboriginal hunters and their communities are a huge part of this equation. The vast majority of people living in Canada's far north where the seal hunt takes place are Inuit, so I don't think it's fair to exclude them from this debate. They may be employed by heartless corporations who in turn pay taxes to the Territoral and Federal governments, but if the hunt is outlawed, it's hunters and their families who will be hurt the most.

The Canadian government isn't moving on this only because it's a cash cow for them (although I agree that's certainly part of it), it's also because there's little in the way of alternative employment for many seal hunters. The Canadian government has a history of telling Aboriginal people that they're not allowed to hunt anymore. Unfortunately, stuff like this tends to be the result, so I can see why they're slow to cave to outside pressure to end the hunt.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that I don't think it's fair to expect the government to outlaw the seal hunt until there is enough infrastructure in remote areas to allow alternative industries to develop.



First off, the Mushuau Innu were set up for failure by relocation, not by being being told that they weren't allowed to hunt anymore. "...adverse social and cultural effects were precipitated by the fact that the Mushuau Innu were unable to access productive hunting, fishing and trapping grounds on the mainland for some five months a year during the freezeup and breakup, and by the virtual absence of alternative economic activities." (more here). I'm not going to assume to know more than I do about the resources up there, but this sounds an awful lot like it's suggesting that if they were in a different location, there would be alternative economic activities and other things to fish.

Secondly, this is the next chapter in the story of the Mushuau Innu. I'm not saying what happened to them is good or right, or even trying to play down the problems facing them, but they're adapting. They never should have been relocated to that barren inlet in the first place, and their future is looking a little more promising now that they've left.

The best lesson to be learned from all of this is that if the government is going to remove a primary economic activity from a society, they need to make sure they replace it with something else and provide assistance for helping that society adapt. We're a long, long way from that problem right now though.

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]

Mooncalf2

mooncalf2

Tujunga, CA
February 2005

AUG 25, 2005 03:49 PM

i believe that the number of seals is really high, and i'm not saying anything about not hunting them, or anything, i just don't want to see 350,000 baby seals clubbed and skinned alive, and have their rotting corpses left for all the mothers and fathers to see and get angry about (i doubt that they'll get angry and start attacking humans and take all over the world, but you know, it did happen in a simpson's episode)
you get my point.

FrankMask

FrankMask

Saint Paul, MN
June 2003

AUG 25, 2005 04:02 PM

bean said:

Rickets said:
Just curious. Not condoning clubbing of anything here, but I was wondering:

Are these seals particularly endangered?


Just curious. Not accusing you of condoning anything here, but I was wondering:

Do you think it's okay to skin an animal alive just for its fur and leave the bloody heap of dying animal in front of its mother, as long as the animal isn't endangered?

[Edited on Aug 25, 2005 by bean]



How does that have anything to do with his question?

I can't help but think that sooner or later people will realize that fur is itchy and uncomfortable and stop wearing it. Or just start farming seals.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

AUG 25, 2005 04:08 PM

This article is a little old (Spring 2004), but it's got a lot of good information in it.

http://www.newbuilder.co.uk/reports/sealcull.asp

Over the next few months, the vast seasonal fields of ice that extend off the Atlantic coast of Canada, from the Gulf of St. Lawrence out to Newfoundland and Labrador, will be the theatre for the annual ritual of the Canadian Seal Hunt, the largest directed hunt of marine mammals anywhere in the world.

The contemporary seal hunt in Atlantic Canada is conducted mainly by land-based sealers with commercial licences issued by the Federal Government. The vast majority of seals that die are young harp seal "beater" pups between 3 weeks and 12 months of age, killed by clubs, hakapiks, shotguns and high-powered rifles. Although the sealing season extends from November to May, in practice the majority of sealing occurs between early March and May in two major areas: the "Gulf" of St. Lawrence (starting in mid-March) and the "Front" off Newfoundland and Labrador (starting in mid-April). This year, up to 350,000 seals may be taken legally, while many more may be lost at sea, dying from wounds inflicted during hunting activities.

[...]

The economic rationale for continuing the hunt is also questionable. Since the 1983 EEC ban on the import of whitecoat pelts, long-term substitute markets for seal products abroad have failed to materialize. As a result, the millions of dollars that provincial and federal governments continue to invest in the form of sealing subsidies are barely covered by the revenue generated by the hunt.

The most concerning aspect of the hunt is its record on animal welfare. Provincial and federal governments and sealing organizations have dismissed the many documented episodes of inhumane sealing practices as unrepresentative of the hunt as a whole. This latter assertion, however, has been recently refuted with the issue of a 2001 report by an international team of veterinary experts who observed sealers at work and conducted post-mortem examinations of seals killed on the ice. Their findings were alarming: 79% of sealers did not check to see if a seal was dead before skinning it, and 42% of the animals examined had head injuries that were insufficient to have killed them outright. In effect, not only did these animals not die immediately, there is a strong chance that they were also skinned alive. If this study is representative of the hunt at large, more than 100,000 seals may die like this in 2004.

So, in its present form, the hunt would appear to be conducted inhumanely, managed ineffectively, unsound economically, and unsustainable ecologically. With so much going against it, why does it continue? Well, many Canadians (and foreign tourists) remain unaware that a large-scale seal hunt continues today, and assurances of effective hunt practice and management from the Government continue to suppress rebellion from within and concern from abroad. Certainly, the current Canadian government, in power for more than a decade, has never expressed anything other than support for the hunt, and it would be no surprise if they feel the need to continue funding this cultural bastion, more so today than at any time, because previous governments have let the people of the Maritimes down so badly by mismanaging their fisheries to the point of collapse.

[...]

Are there real alternatives to the seal hunt? Well, the economic argument for investment in tourism as a regional enterprise is compelling. For example, in 2001, the estimated landed value of 226,000 harp seals - about 205,000 of which were landed in Newfoundland and Labrador - was $5.5 million. In contrast, in 2002, the Newfoundland and Labrador economy received $300 million in expenditures related to tourism, a figure that had doubled from 1992. The question is: Will tourism flourish in the Maritimes if the hunt continues unabated?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next