The Canadian Seal Hunt Debate

[StrongHeartsWin]

I have moved this debate into a seperate thread from where it started at here (post #14) in the Canada Global Image thread. It continued there for several posts until post #33. If you are interested in catching up on the points and seeing some of the graphic images that they entail, some of which Prax takes issue with, then please do check out those posts in order to catch up to where we are now. From time to time I may repeat those points just to fill out this thread so that the issues become full here.

Praxius has taken issue with many of my points there and I will address them here. I am for an end to the seal hunt while Prax seems to support it. My reasons for being against sealing is that fur is no longer needed to keep us warm for survival, and, therefore, killing for that or fashion (or any reason other than the urgent situation of survival) is unecessary. If it is unecessary, then it is therefore unethical (based on the rights view) and cruel to cause killing and the suffering that that may entail.

Prax made a number of errors in facts and assumptions here, here, and here.

Initially I will address those.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Seal Fur is highly prized, and the system set up doesn't endanger the seal to extinction. I say let them, seal boots are a wonder to behold.

[Technosoul]

Well if Vicchio wants to endur the cold weather and if he wants to club those baby seals to death and then make a pair of shoes out of them, fine and dandy. But he should do it his self so that he can hear the cries of the baby seals being clubbed to death and so he can witness the fear in their eyes. Or else he could save time and raise a little bunny or pet cat and club it to death for his shoes. That way he can enjoy the the thrill of murdering small and helpless animals and walk his talk. He should experience and behold the wonder of a seal hunt first hand in order to enjoy his boots better.

I think a living seal is a wonder to behold and a shoe is just a shoe, which can be made to look wonderful without being covered in seal fur.

Hunting baby seals with clubs is one step lower then what animals would do to each other, because of the massive number of killings and because of what the fur is used for. How can anyone advocate that humans should behave worse then animals do. Should we not evolve in our thinking and conscience rather then devolving to a lower status then that of the animals?

[Slevin57]

I personally would not go hunting. I get no enjoyment out of killing something that would not try to kill me. Especially with a gun from a safe distance away.

I don't really see a problem with seal hunting, I agree with Technosoul.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Slevin57 I personally would not go hunting. I get no enjoyment out of killing something that would not try to kill me. Especially with a gun from a safe distance away. I don't really see a problem with seal hunting, I agree with Technosoul.

But beware as my last commuication gave mixed signals.

I recall one of my first hunting trips with my brother, he let me us a 22 rifle that was made for kids (shorter in size). I was so excited to prove my skills at aiming and hitting the target.

The first thing I saw in the trees was a tiny black bird and so I took aim and shot it, and it landed on the ground. We rushed over to the kill and it was not dead, I had only wonded it and it lay there looking up at me with it's eyes as if to say "why? why did you shoot me?". And it was making painful sounds as well. It was no longer just an object in my perception but a living thing that I had injured. My brother told me I must put it out of it's suffering, and so up close I had to end it's life by shooting it in it's tiny head.

I was feeling real guilty about the whole thing when my brother told me about the "native" law of hunting.,, you must eat what you kill. That night I had on my dinner plate a tiny little chunk of cooked blackbird to eat, less then a bite full and hardly worth the life I had taken.

I was then apposed to hunting and did not do it again. However my brother pointed out that every hunter must experience that sort of thing so that they will learn not kill wildlife just for the fun of it, but only because one really needs that life they take to insure their own survival of life. (we were poor back then and my brother kept food on our table by hunting and fishing a lot). That was before Welfare or foodstamps were invented. A good hunter takes only what he absolutly needs from nature he said, exponding upon traditional philosophy.

Now we must eat food and so their is not much point in thinking we can do so without consuming the life of something else. But we should respect nature in the process as well as to conduct they process in a way that is as painless for the animals as possible. The less intelligent a animal or fish is the less aware they are to what is happening.

But a pair of shoes... and just so someone can charge a big price for a pair of shoes when a cheaper pair would do just as good. I am not in favor of seal hunts at all. But people no longer experience that "hunter's guilt" which is an introduction to the facts of life. And that is why they have no philosophy about the proper use of nature. No real connection to what they are doing when they put on those seal shoes.

That was my point.

Nature is like the symbol of a snake eating it's own tail. Nature consuming nature but the circular design keeps the process going on and on forever. Somehow? Re; philosophy from India.

And so when we die we will go to this dimension that is dominated by gaint Kentucky Fired Chickens and they will peck us for an eternity like we were bugs. Oh oh, it is after midnight and I should be dreaming instead of posting junk here at Volconvo...good night, don't let the bedbugs bite.

[Mr.Vicchio]

I've killed plenty of critters, an while I am not a heartless bastard, I also realize that life ain't a bowl of rosie peaches.

I don't do teh bleeding heart bit.

For the record, the hardest thing I ever had to do was shoot a possum at a range of 2 feet with a twenty two, stare right into it's eyes before pulling the trigger.

Sorry Tech, the bleeding heart line don't work with me, some seals die, that's life.

Learn to accept reality instead of trying to create a fantasy.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Praxius Ok, looking further above, even that picture is screwed and just goes to show how uneducated the rest of the world is about the Seal hunt...... #3 - If that guy was really hunting seals, and in paticular the one in the picture..... don't you think buddy would have the spike pointing towards the seal, not the other way around?

Sealers often use the blunt end of the club for smashing the skulls of seal pups. The hook is often used for dragging. You can find many pics and video of sealers smashing and then flipping the clup to hook and drag.

Seal Hunt Video

frig you throw an idiot like Paul and his wife out there with all the baby seals for sympathy (Where it is illegal to hunt them in the first place, which shows that picture as flawed)

Why do you care if Paul or his former wife (they are separated, you know) comment on it? What have they said that is in error? Why are you averse to sympathy?

How do you know that where they are is illegal to hunt? Sure, they had took some photos with white coated seals, but they didn`t imply that those seals were presently being hunted. Those seals would be hunted within a few days, as soon as they started molting and become what is known as ragged jackets -- usually after 2 to 3 weeks of age. They are still however pups -- just not infants.

~ and everybody sucks up what the celebs say, even though they have no clue as to what's actually going on either......

Again, what have they said which is in error?

[Praxius]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Praxius has taken issue with many of my points there and I will address them here. I am for an end to the seal hunt while Prax seems to support it. My reasons for being against sealing is that fur is no longer needed to keep us warm for survival, and, therefore, killing for that or fashion (or any reason other than the urgent situation of survival) is unecessary. If it is unecessary, then it is therefore unethical (based on the rights view) and cruel to cause killing and the suffering that that may entail.

I'll start here for now and address further questions and concerns as I collect further data since this is getting into a more detailed dabate. I made errors due to me just going off memory....

Now for the above quote:

"My reasons for being against sealing is that fur is no longer needed to keep us warm for survival, and, therefore, killing for that or fashion (or any reason other than the urgent situation of survival) is unecessary. If it is unecessary, then it is therefore unethical"

It is necessary for survival of the remote locations where these hunters live. This gives them a form of income that they would not normally have year round.

Doing my own quick search for pros and cons of the hunt, there is a lot.... and I mean a lot of incorrect information out there.... ie: hunting them only for their penises "hunting of seals for various parts of their bodies, especially their penises, which are used in Asian "aphrodisiacs" and then they focus on the hunters as if that's the only reason why they're hunted.

The Atlantic seal hunt – FAQs

^ Here's a link for some FAQ about the seal hunt from CBC, which is of course a Canadian News Agency, which would probably have a better opinion on what's going on, then some other news agency from another country.

1. How big is the Atlantic seal hunt, where is it taking place, and what exactly is being hunted? There are federal quotas for three types of seals: harp seals, hooded seals and grey seals. Most of the hunt is for harp seals. The hunt usually opens in March in the "Gulf" areas around the Magdalen Islands and Prince Edward Island. The main hunt on the so-called "front" usually begins in April off the east coast of Newfoundland. It's pretty much over by May. The 2007 harp seal total allowable catch has been set at 270,000. That's down from the 2006 quota, 325,000, and about the same as the quota set from 1997 to 2002. Seal hunters do not always catch as many seals as they are allowed. The catch in 2001 was 226,000. In 2000, it was just 92,000 seals. Sometimes, hunters are allowed to exceed the pre-season quota: in 2002, the catch was 312,000 seals. The total allowable catch for harp seals is split between two areas: 70 per cent for the waters off Newfoundland and 30 per cent for the St. Lawrence Gulf region. 2. What about those cute whitecoat seals? Whitecoats are newborn harp seals. Most Canadians can recall pictures of whitecoated seal pups being clubbed. The images were so inflammatory that Canada banned all hunting of whitecoats and bluebacks (in fact hooded seals) in 1987. You'd never know that from some of the anti-sealing groups that still prominently display pictures of whitecoats on their websites and in fundraising materials. One site even features a downloadable video of people hugging whitecoats. The reality is that whitecoats can't be hunted anymore. It's also true that young harp seals lose their white coats (and their protection) at about 12 to 14 days of age. After that, they're fair game for hunters, although they're usually about 25 days old before they're hunted. Most harp seals taken are under the age of three months. Young yes, whitecoats no. 3. Isn't it true that the hunt is cruel and seal pups are often skinned alive? This is a frequent accusation levelled by hunt opponents. The International Fund for Animal Welfare says seals are routinely clubbed or shot and left to suffer on the ice until they're clubbed later. The IFAW also charges that seals are often "skinned before being rendered fully unconscious" and said its observers found that few sealers check for a blinking reflex to confirm brain death before skinning begins. Similar "skinning alive" accusations have also been made by other groups, with many citing studies claiming that up to 45 per cent of seals are "skinned alive." A 2002 report in the Canadian Veterinary Journal found that "the large majority of seals taken during this hunt … are killed in an acceptably humane manner." This study found that 98 per cent of hunted seals it examined had been killed properly. The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) cites this study among others as proof that the hunt opponents are wrong in their accusations of widespread cruelty. Regarding the "skinning alive" charge, the DFO says appearances can be deceiving. "Sometimes a seal may appear to be moving after it has been killed," the DFO says. "However, seals have a swimming reflex that is active, even after death. This reflex falsely appears as though the animal is still alive when it is clearly dead — similar to the reflex in chickens." Furthermore, the DFO says the club, or "hakapik," used by many sealers is "an efficient tool" that kills "quickly and humanely." The Royal Commission on Seals and Sealing in Canada found that clubbing, when properly performed, is at least as humane as killing methods in commercial slaughterhouses. Opponents say clubbing often isn't "properly performed." The federal government acknowledges that it has laid more than 200 charges against sealers since 1996, but argues that shows it's serious about enforcing its regulations. 4. Isn't sealing an important economic activity for an economically disadvantaged group? The economic value of the seal hunt is another one of those things that is open to interpretation. The federal government says the landed value of seals exceeded $16.5 million in 2005, providing a "significant" source of income for thousands of sealers — benefiting them and their families at a time when, according to the DFO, "other fishing options are unavailable, or limited at best, in many remote, coastal communities." The DFO says the 2005 seal catch ranked fifth in value of all the species it monitors, after snow crab, shrimp, lobster, and cod. Still, seal amounts to only a fraction of the $600-million Newfoundland fishery. But for some sealers, it represents up to one-third of their annual income. And in a province with jobless rates north of 15 per cent, they say that means even more. Not so fast, say the anti-sealing groups. The IFAW describes the contribution of sealing to Newfoundland's GDP as "trivial" and says after costs and indirect subsidies are taken into account (patrolling the hunt, upgrading plants, promoting the hunt, developing new markets for seal products and supporting research to find new products), Canadians would "likely find that the hunt actually costs the Canadian taxpayer money." It's a pointless activity, in the view of the IFAW, which says, "the only economically valuable part of the seal is its fur, a non-essential luxury product that no one really needs." The DFO flatly denies that it subsidizes the seal hunt. It also denies charges that the seal hunt is not sustainable. It says Canada's seal population is "healthy and abundant" at about five million animals and "triple what it was in the 1970s. " But the IFAW says the hunt has become a "cull, designed more to achieve short-term political objectives than those of a biologically sustainable hunt." For one thing, the group says Canada's management plan fails to account for wide variations in the natural mortality rates among seal pups. A critique from Greenpeace also said the quotas are "scientifically indefensible" because they don't take into account the actual number of seals killed in the hunt — including those that are "struck and lost," or discarded because of pelt damage. 5. We all know what's happened to the Atlantic cod fishery. Don't seals eat cod? Yes, harp seals do eat cod, among other things. But both sides now appear to agree that seals and cod can coexist. In March 2005, Greenpeace called on then federal Fisheries Minister Geoff Regan to "dispel the myth that seals are hampering the recovery of cod stocks." A letter from Greenpeace said, "the DFO has been a partner in perpetuating this myth." But the DFO says sealing opponents are setting up a straw man (or seal, in this case) and then knocking it down. The federal government says anti-sealing groups are wrong to suggest that it's allowing the hunt to help cod stocks recover. "The commercial seal quota is established based on sound conservation principles, not an attempt to assist in the recovery of groundfish stocks," the DFO says. "Seals eat cod, but seals also eat other fish that prey on cod."

So this report corrects my comment about the Cod.

[Praxius]

Here is an additional link to a PDF supplied by the Government of Canada and lists 6 facts about the Seal Hunt:

http://geo.international.gc.ca/canad..._17jan05-e.pdf

Here is some futher information with both pros and cons:

Pelts, Pups and Protest: The Atlantic Seal Hunt - Politics and Economy - CBC Archives

[Praxius]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Why do you care if Paul or his former wife (they are separated, you know) comment on it? What have they said that is in error? Why are you averse to sympathy?

Because they still used the fluffy white coat seals for their propaganda and using them for emotional goals. They don't know all the pros and cons, they just hear what they hear from animal rights groups, which are always biased towards anything relating to humans killing or using animals.

How do you know that where they are is illegal to hunt? Sure, they had took some photos with white coated seals, but they didn`t imply that those seals were presently being hunted. Those seals would be hunted within a few days, as soon as they started molting and become what is known as ragged jackets -- usually after 2 to 3 weeks of age. They are still however pups -- just not infants.

Then use photos of seals of age for hunting and stop decieving the public.

[Praxius]

If you view the quote above from the FAQ, many of your questions are answered.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Praxius If you view the quote above from the FAQ, many of your questions are answered.

Geeesh, Prax, I am here debating you, not a looooong faq list! Should I just copy and past a looooong faq list and say,"There is my argument that answers all your questions." Geesh.

Couldn`t you choose one or two points and then quote smaller bits so that the discussion can evolve in digestible bite sizes?

[sevendogs]

I question who is shown on the picture? That guy who is just about smash a baby seal? He looks very much like an animal rightist posing for the picture serving their agenda of sensitizing more people...

[Praxius]

Quote by: sevendogs I question who is shown on the picture? That guy who is just about smash a baby seal? He looks very much like an animal rightist posing for the picture serving their agenda of sensitizing more people...

I wouldn't put it passed them.... and what he's wearing doesn't appear to be the normal attire for a hunter, but more like someone who's gonna be out there for just a few hours.

Did anybody else notice the picture is no longer viewable since the above post? Hmmmm.....

[Praxius]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Geeesh, Prax, I am here debating you, not a looooong faq list! Should I just copy and past a looooong faq list and say,"There is my argument that answers all your questions." Geesh.

Well geez, why don't you complain about everything else? It takes not even 2 mins to read that, which is actual facts and figures.....

In the other thread you complained I didn't have anything to backup my claims, and now I do and you complain you want to hear my view, so make up your dam mind and which is it?

I took the time to reference your links and images you supplied, I would expect you to do the same and at least humor me so at least next time you decide to debate me you know what you and I are suppose to be debating over.

All your questions you asked me previously are answered in the links I supplied, which I believe, so what's the point of me retyping the same thing in my words, just so you can try and find something that doesn't match so you can go off on some tangent to try and make me look like I am wrong?

Couldn`t you choose one or two points and then quote smaller bits so that the discussion can evolve in digestible bite sizes?

Uh, no, because you asked me plenty of questions in the past thread, as well as more questions here, so I decided to answer and comment on as much as I could, so the debate could be up to date..... I didn't think a few minutes of reading at one time would stress you out so much.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Praxius In the other thread you complained I didn't have anything to backup my claims, and now I do and you complain you want to hear my view, so make up your dam mind and which is it?

Can`t you read that FAQ, internalize it, comment, and then snip some pieces of it out and post a link?

I took the time to reference your links and images you supplied, I would expect you to do the same and at least humor me so at least next time you decide to debate me you know what you and I are suppose to be debating over.

That`s the point. You posted a FAQ with a debate embedded in it. Why should you and I debate one another if we are going to post others debating the issue?

All your questions you asked me previously are answered in the links I supplied, which I believe, so what's the point of me retyping the same thing in my words, just so you can try and find something that doesn't match so you can go off on some tangent to try and make me look like I am wrong?

The point is so that we don`t become dueling FAQ list posters. That is ridiculous.

Uh, no, because you asked me plenty of questions in the past thread, as well as more questions here, so I decided to answer and comment on as much as I could, so the debate could be up to date..... I didn't think a few minutes of reading at one time would stress you out so much.

A little reading doesn`t bother me in the least. But, I am not debating the creator of that FAQ list -- I am debating you. But let me tell you something about the information in this FAQ list put forth by the CBC (by the way...is that a government funded/run news org?); It all comes from the DFO, The Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Why do you think such a FAQ list from the department that sanctions and promotes sealing is going to answer in a negative way against something they are promoting? It is a litany of "the DFO says this, the DFO says that," ... ad nausium.

Prax, what if President Bush put forth a FAQ list on the questions dogging U.S. involvement in Iraq, that would simply read, "The office of the Pres of the United States says this, ...The office of the Pres of the United States says that, .... ad nausium explaining away all the violence or misconduct of U.S. forces, would that convince you? Would you just say, "Hey that settles it all. The person in charge of the debacle is telling me the truth of the matter why it is so or not so and that should be good enough for me. All accepted." ??? Well, would it?

You`ve just given me a FAQ with a debate embedded in it between the opponants of sealing and the promoters of it.

[brien]

This type of seal hunting is barbaric and is cruel and inhumane. One doesn't need to be a member of PETA, or even be a vegetarian to see why.

If the market supports seal skins, then let them be raised in a sensible and humane manner. And have them euthanized in a sensible and humane manner as well.

Canadians, and anyone else who protects this hunt, should be ashamed of this barbaric practice.

[Praxius]

Sigh.....

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Can`t you read that FAQ, internalize it, comment, and then snip some pieces of it out and post a link? That`s the point. You posted a FAQ with a debate embedded in it. Why should you and I debate one another if we are going to post others debating the issue? The point is so that we don`t become dueling FAQ list posters. That is ridiculous.

I felt I didn't need to type out my comments again, because I've listed everything in the other thread here:

Canada takes No. 1 spot in global image poll:

You commented there, you made this thread and posted a link to those comments in the first post.... so now you want me to re-write it all out again. You asked for information to back up what I was saying in the previous thread, I supplied it, then you complain about me issuing you a FAQ link to read.... which was suppose to be the information you asked for, now you're complaining I'm not explaining my view..... You're not making much sense.

And now you're trying to argue I didn't give you an opinion on the matter and using the fact that you split this conversation into two different threads to your advantage.

A little reading doesn`t bother me in the least. But, I am not debating the creator of that FAQ list -- I am debating you. But let me tell you something about the information in this FAQ list put forth by the CBC (by the way...is that a government funded/run news org?); It all comes from the DFO, The Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Why do you think such a FAQ list from the department that sanctions and promotes sealing is going to answer in a negative way against something they are promoting? It is a litany of "the DFO says this, the DFO says that," ... ad nausium.

Anything anybody says or has an opinion on is biased, always.... even in the slightest, even your organizations you hold dear to are pretty biased in themselves.. no matter where you get your information or by who, there's always going to be some sort of bias..... my opinion isn't just from the report I supplied, but also from interviews and me asking hunters personally about it who live near where I live.

Prax, what if President Bush put forth a FAQ list on the questions dogging U.S. involvement in Iraq, that would simply read, "The office of the Pres of the United States says this, ...The office of the Pres of the United States says that, .... ad nausium explaining away all the violence or misconduct of U.S. forces, would that convince you? Would you just say, "Hey that settles it all. The person in charge of the debacle is telling me the truth of the matter why it is so or not so and that should be good enough for me. All accepted." ??? Well, would it?

Please don't take me for some sheep who follows whatever everybody else says without actually looking into it... if anything your comments of which you cite from your organizations (Which isn't much of an opinion either if you ask me.... kinda hypocritical) are not only stating only the information they want you to hear, but perhaps if you could supply further information outside of the Animal Rights groups, and a group that throws in both the animal and human equation.

As for your above questions:

I don't believe a thing Bush says anyways, so bad example. You first have to have some faith in the person or organization supplying you the information, then you have to confirm it from a third party, as I do. If none are available, then I have to use my own judgement and see if their information sounds logical and/or true for me to believe.

It doesn't really matter, because no matter what information I explain, you'll complain I have no sources.... and as soon as I get sources, you complain about their credibility, so it's pretty pointless if you're gonna keep doing that.

[Praxius]

Quote by: brien This type of seal hunting is barbaric and is cruel and inhumane. One doesn't need to be a member of PETA, or even be a vegetarian to see why. If the market supports seal skins, then let them be raised in a sensible and humane manner. And have them euthanized in a sensible and humane manner as well. Canadians, and anyone else who protects this hunt, should be ashamed of this barbaric practice.

What's wrong with Barbarians?

I love how you all just ignore the overpopulation factor and limited preditory aspect of the whole thing.

If you raise them in a farm, the ones in the wild are still over populating and then you got more in a farm.....

And how do you propose one would euthanize them, in an effective yet affordable manner? Do they euthanize cattle and other farm animals? How do they?

Last clip I seen in a slaughter house was a bunch of idiots, who cornered this rather large pig into a corner with a chainsaw and saw his head off as he squirmed and screamed with blood shooting everywhere, while these idiots were laughing their asses off watching the body wriggle around on the floor........

^ Now I imagine, or I hope at least, this isn't the normal practice in slaughter houses, because it's far far worse then what these seals endure..... but when you see something like what I seen, it makes you ask questions about what's going on, much as you are trying to do here with the seal hunt..... the only difference is there are ligitamate answers provided and you don't acknowlege them.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio ... the system set up doesn't endanger the seal to extinction.

Actually, this isn't true. The population surveys and population models used by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans are woefully inadequate and are incapable of detecting anything but massive population changes. The population of harp seal would have to decline by about 80% before the DFO would detect it with its present system.

The DFO science and monitoring is so poor, and the Total Allowable Catches so high since the mid-90s that the population of seals is likely much lower than DFO's current estimate of between 5 and 6 million animals.

This year, likely as a result of climate change, the natural mortality in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence was almost 100%. Nevertheless, Canada continued sealing.

If Canada managed its seal herds using the methods acceptable under the US Marine Mammal Protection Act, the TAC for harp seals would be around 50,000 not the current 275,000.

It's worth noting that Canada's DFO has yet to manage even one commercial marine species sustainably.

Regards
S.