Da Legal Stuff...

All commentaries published on Web Talk are the opinions of the contributor(s) only and do not necessarily represent the position of any other individuals, groups or organizations.

Now, with that out of the way...Let's Web Talk.

Friday, March 17, 2006

Confusion Rampant in Sealing Debate

When it comes to the Atlantic Seal hunt, I have to wonder when enough is enough, as far as public opinion polls go. In the battle between the anti and pro hunt sides, opinion polls are used like an AK-47’s to spray the general public, in the hope that some of the bullets will find a vulnerable target.

The recent spate of polls quoted by the media, the government of Canada and various animal rights groups are a great example of polling gone mad. The result is a situation where it doesn't seem to matter which side is right but rather which one has the best promotional staff. Caught in the middle are the sealers and the seals.

Some experts claim that opinion polls by their very nature can be self fulfilling. If you tell everyone that 80% of people refuse to eat blueberries because they cause tooth decay, that by itself may be enough to convince a large segment of the population to stop eating blueberries. In the I.T. world this is what’s known as an “endless loop” and it isn’t a good thing.

Others, including the founder of one the world’s largest polling companies, have recently said that today’s poll are often suspect at best. At one time “cold calling” for public opinion returned a response rate of over 90%, today that number is likely below 30%.

This change in response is primarily due our evolving lifestyles. Many people today simply don’t want to take the time to answer questions and because cell phone usage makes it much more difficult to reach householders, only limited result sets are captured in many polls.

Experts say this can lead to skewed results since the numbers may be largely based on the opinions of a small segment of the population who don’t have much else to do but answer questions, or who are largely averse to advances in technology or other areas. If the belief is true, i would certainly narrow the playing field.

Questions around polling accuracy certainly don’t stop special interest groups on either side of a debate from touting the poll that favors their opinion. Proponents often tend to brush aside any polls that support an opposing view while promoting those that do. As a result we are a public that is only made aware of the specific opinions presented in the article, commentary or news item we are exposed to. I guess the hope of proponents on either side of the issue is that the numbers they present will be the ones that will “self fulfill” themselves.

Let me give you an example.

A March 16, 2006 article, written by Chris Cutter of the International Fund for Animal Welfare, quotes a 2005 poll. This poll supposedly found that 69 percent of Canadians were opposed to the commercial seal hunt. The case being made of course was that Canada should stop the hunt because its citizens are against it. Similar numbers, likely from the same poll, were quoted by musician Paul McCartney during a recent interview on Larry King Live.

On the other side of the debate we find the Department of Fisheries and Oceans recently quoting a February 2005 Ipsos-Reid poll which concluded that 60 per cent of those surveyed were in favor of a “responsible hunt.”

Who is right?

Adding to the confusion of these hand picked results are situations where non-scientific polls are actually manipulated by special interest groups in order to reflect that group’s views. A good example of this is a seal hunt poll conducted on the CTV website. The poll was open to the general public, but there was no concerted effort by CTV to ensure it that the poll was widely publicized. As a result, while members of the general public who wished to express an opinion were left of either find the poll or not, the Animal Alliance of Canada took it upon itself to “rally its troops”, in an effort to control the poll’s results.

The following was contained in an email dated March 16 and written by Karen Levenson, Program Director for the Canadian Seafood Boycott, of the Animal Alliance of Canada. The email was sent to the organization’s mailing list members and states in part:

"Hi Everyone,

CTV has a poll on the Seal Hunt. Please click on the link below. It Will take you to the CTV.ca home page…”

“Please vote "No".

“Please distribute this poll to as many people as possible.”

The email was clearly intended to manipulate the poll’s results. The motive for this action was no doubt to ensure results that could later be used in promotional materials intended to sway public opinion to organization’s side of the debate, the “endless loop” once again. Ms. Levenson didn't even identify for her recipients precisely what the poll question was, she simply asked them to “vote No”.

So what is the real truth? Who should we believe when it comes to the true level of support for Canada’s seal hunt? What do Canadian’s really feel about the issue? I don’t mean, "what does either side want the public to believe" or "What does either side want to make the public believe", simply what do Canadians actually believe.

That, unfortunately, is something we may never know, but I recently came across the results of yet another poll that at least on the surface seems to reflect my belief. I figure that if everyone else is publishing the results of polls that reflect their personal points of view then why shouldn’t I.


This recently released poll highlights the overall lack of knowledge that exists around the entire subject. According to the poll nearly 70% of Canadians admit to having very limited knowledge about the hunt and say they know little about the how it is conducted.


Like other polls I suspect that this result should be taken with a grain of salt, but having said that, I have to admit that the numbers don’t surprise me. With the level of misinformation being published by various media outlets and spread by other means, it wouldn’t be a great shock if the public were more than a little confused over the issue.

Beyond the lack of public understanding suggested in the poll, there is another reason this particular result caught my eye. It interested me because it made me wonder, if we are to believe the results then should we not call into question the results of those other polls, or at the very least take the opinions of those responding to the issue with a large truck load of salt.

Remember, public opinion polls published by various animal rights groups show that 69% of respondents are opposed to the seal harvest. Polls presented by DFO show that 60% of Canadians actually do support the harvest? Yet a recent poll shows that most Canadians admit not really knowing much about the hunt at all. In this light I have to wonder what the people responding to either of the first two polls were basing their opinions on.

With all of these opinions going around it really is confusing but I’d like to share my own opinion on the subject before I sign off.

As far as I’m concerned, if 70% of Canadians don’t actually know the facts surrounding the seal hunt, then their opinions aren’t really of much value one way or the other. At the very least they don’t provide a solid argument for either side to hang its hat on.

51 comments:

NL-ExPatriate said...

These ARA's probably have 30 million people on their mailing lists world wide which is the population of Canada. When you consider that the worlds population is up around 6 and a half Billion these internet polls are a farce to be saying they represent in any way shape of form Canadian public opinion.

On top of that these internet polls can be swayed by one or two individuals running scripts or a good knowledge of how their computer works. They should be totally disregarded, and like you mentioned about the official pollsters and their contacts 70% don't even know what the seal hunt is or the issues surrounding it.

These ARA's know they can't win a rational debate over the seal hunt so their best weapon is public opinion, disinformation and political pressure.

I don't know why we or our governments aren't taking these protestors to court on the Canadian fish boycott. By their own ommission in their commercials they are causing Canadian fishermen 160 million in lost crab sales against a totally legal government sanctioned and veterenarian approved humane hunt.
It wouldn't do us any good to start a propaganda war against these people because no matter what way you slice it killing animals is a messy business, but if we took them to court they wouldn't gain from the media exposure which is what they really want for fund raising and exposure while at the same time hitting them where it hurts the most in the pocket book.

Balanced Nature not Balanced ARA check books!

Anonymous said...

Blueberries? Higgins--how out of touch are you?


Friday, March 17, 2006 9:00 AM
Subject: Maritime sealers question if hunt still worthwhile


Maritime sealers question if hunt still worthwhile

SYDNEY (CP) - Sealers from northern Cape Breton are questioning if this year's harp seal hunt is worth the aggravation.

The 117 licensed sealers from the Scotia-Fundy and Southern Gulf area, who usually sail from northern Cape Breton communities, have been allocated two per cent of this year's harvest or 1,820 animals.

The sealers also include fishermen from Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick.

Osborne Burke, president of the North of Smokey Fishermen's Association, says with all the protests against the harp seal fishery and the low catch limits, many are questioning their participation. Burke also says if fishermen abandon the hunt then they wouldn't have to worry about their fish products being boycotted.

Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn announced this year's harvest of 335,000 seals will be done under a quota system. No date for the hunt has been announced, but it is normally held after the beginning of April.

"It's very frustrating for fishermen here in northern Cape Breton who have traditionally harvested seals for many generations," said Burke.

Burke said the DFO management plan reduces the allocation for the Maritime fishermen to next to nothing.

Increased quotas went to the lower North Shore of Quebec and probably the west coast of Newfoundland, he said.

Newfoundland fishermen have exclusive rights to the harp seal harvest on the Front, off Newfoundland and Labrador.

They also harvest about 70 per cent of the seal quota in the Gulf of St. Lawrence based on history. Quebec harvesters also get a large share of that quota.

Burke blamed the meagre allocation for this region on incorrect historical data collected by the department.

Seals harvested in the southern Gulf are not recorded here, but on the Magdalen Islands or Newfoundland where the buyers are based.

Patriot said...

So what is your point Anon? For one thing the bluberry reference was intended to provide a silly example of how polls can self fulfill, (Believe it or not I do realize that there was no poll on bluberries, at least as far as I know).

The article I wrote is neither pro or anti hunt but I'm sure it will be read as such which speaks to how some people can twist things to their own advantage.

You also added a copy of an article that really doesn't say anything about wether or not the hunt should be stopped.

The headline reads "Maritime sealers question if hunt still worthwhile" however this is only related to the size of thier particular quota, not if the hunt itself should be stopped or not. It is purely a matter of economics.

I really don't see any point made by your comment Anon.

Anonymous said...

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/?ltl=1142623771

Not a poll but petitions. The #1 and #2 petitions on the site, one approaching 100k.

Myles--you already know the answer of whether the hunt should be stopped. Soon, information will be released that will really damage your government with regard to public opinion on the "hunt" and with regard to what it is costing the fishing industry.

Anonymous said...

Here is a news item on the CTV website:

Seal hunt pales next to Iraq slaughter: Senator

Updated Fri. Mar. 17 2006 11:21 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Canada's annual seal hunt pales in comparison to the slaughter of innocent Iraqis at the hands of the U.S., according to a Liberal senator who defended the hunt to an American family.

The McLellan family of Minnesota sent a letter to all Canadian senators, describing the seal hunt as "horrible" and "inhumane."

The family also said they were so appalled by the seal hunt that they cancelled plans to vacation in Canada, despite the fact they love the country and have Canadian ancestry.

Senator Celine Hervieux-Payette penned a terse response to the McLellans, suggesting they should be more concerned about their own government's treatment of Iraqis.

She didn't limit her comments to the war, however, pointing out that the true crimes being committed in the world are "the daily massacre of innocent people in Iraq, the execution of prisoners -- mainly blacks -- in American prisons, the massive sale of handguns to Americans, the destabilization of the entire world by the American government's aggressive foreign policy, etc."

Hervieux-Payette told Montreal's La Presse that Americans should worry about their own country's behaviour before pointing fingers at other nations.

She sent a copy of her blunt response to other senators, and told La Presse "all senators received the letter from the McLellans and I was the only one to respond."

Sir Paul McCartney's recent high-profile protest of the seal hunt brought international media attention to the issue. McCartney and his wife, Heather Mills McCartney, led an entourage of media and animal rights activists onto a Newfoundland ice floe earlier this month, where they posed with harp seal pups.

That led to a debate on CNN's Larry King Live between Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams and the McCartneys. Williams later said the couple was badly misinformed about the hunt.

In her letter, Hervieux-Payette told the McLellans the centuries-old seal hunt is an important part of the economy for eastern workers and native hunters who rely on the proceeds from the harvest.

"This activity allows the livelihoods of our people in a region where they have been living for centuries," she wrote.

The Liberal caucus has not issued an official response to the senator's letter.

Former MP Carolyn Parrish was kicked out of caucus by former prime minister Paul Martin for her comments against U.S. President George W. Bush. Parrish also stomped on a doll of the U.S. president.

Hervieux-Payette was appointed to the senate in 1995 by former prime minister Jean Chretien.

In 2004 she introduced a private member's bill to outlaw spanking of children.

Anonymous said...

< Press Releases




IFAW President challenges Premier Williams to a televised debate on Canadian seal hunt





March 16, 2006





(Yarmouth Port, MA – 16 March 2006) Today, IFAW President Fred O’Regan challenged Danny Williams, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, to a televised debate on the Canadian seal hunt. In an official letter O’Regan wrote, “Let us give the people of Canada what they deserve: a full and factual public debate on the commercial seal hunt which has done so much damage to Canada’s image at home and abroad.” The full text of that letter is below.










Dear Premier Williams,

Thank you for your reply to my letter of March 7th, which sought to correct various inaccurate comments you made regarding the International Fund for Animal Welfare during your appearance on Larry King Live on CNN March 3rd. I welcome your willingness to engage in dialogue on the important issue of Canada’s commercial seal hunt and I share your concern about the many inaccuracies currently in the public domain.



Additional distortions. Unfortunately, the many inaccurate statements you repeat in your letter only add to this problem. Two particular statements demand retraction and you have addressed neither:



Your continuing insistence that veterinarians funded by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) have said the hunt is humane and well managed is simply untrue. Neither has so stated. In fact, following your assertions on CNN, you received a letter from the authors of the veterinary working group report expressing their concern about such claims.



IFAW has today posted that letter, a link to the full veterinary working group report, and complete, unedited copies of your and my correspondence on our website at www.ifaw.org. I hope you will demonstrate a similar commitment to transparency and make the same documents available on the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador website.



The second allegation that demands retraction is your attempt to link IFAW to FBI terrorist investigations. The full written transcript and video record of your CNN appearance are clear. This was said by you in front of millions of people, and it should be retracted.



Canada deserves the truth. But rather than continuing this debate in writing, let us give the people of Canada what they deserve: a full and factual public debate on the commercial seal hunt which has done so much damage to Canada’s image at home and abroad. You have represented yourself as Prime Minster Harper’s spokesperson on this issue. You have said you believe Canada’s seal hunt — the largest commercial slaughter of marine mammals in the world — is well run, and not cruel. And you have continued to make inaccurate statements about IFAW in the media, refusing to offer an apology.



Ready to debate the facts? I hope you will live up to your strong rhetoric and agree to debate the merits of Canada’s commercial seal hunt with me on national television. As the seal hunt is ultimately a Federal issue, the debate should take place in Ottawa. I would be pleased to meet you there for a nationally broadcast debate at your earliest convenience.



I look forward to hearing from you and to debating these issues face to face.

Sincerely,

Fred O’Regan
President, International Fund for Animal Welfare



About IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare)
Founded in 1969, IFAW works around the globe to protect animals and their habitats and to create a better world for animals and people. To learn how to help, please visit www.ifaw.org.
###

Anonymous said...

Telegram - Williams rejects TV debate with IFAW president

Williams rejects TV debate with IFAW president
The Telegram (St. John's)
Fri 17 Mar 2006
Page: A3
Section: Metro/Provincial News
Byline: Rob Antle
Source:


Premier Danny Williams is saying no to a request by the president of
the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) for a televised debate
on the seal hunt.


"Premier Williams has no intention in engaging in a nationally
televised debate with an organization whose goal is to raise money on
the backs of Canadians," Elizabeth Matthews, a spokeswoman for the
premier, said in a statement issued late Thursday afternoon.


Stands by comments


"The facts speak for themselves regarding the seal hunt and Premier
Williams stands by his commentary to date.


"The IFAW took in donations of approximately $77 million US in 2004,
and a national debate would only serve to be a fundraiser for that
organization. We will continue as a government to put forward the real
facts in a more meaningful and constructive manner."


IFAW president Fred O'Regan had challenged Williams to the TV encounter
in a letter sent Thursday.


"Canada deserves the truth," O'Regan wrote.


"But rather than continuing this debate in writing, let us give the
people of Canada what they deserve: a full and factual public debate on
the commercial seal hunt which has done so much damage to Canada's
image at home and abroad."


Williams debated former Beatle Paul McCartney and his wife Heather
about the seal hunt on CNN's Larry King Live March 3.


The McCartneys went to the Gulf of St. Lawrence for a photo-op
organized by another anti-sealing group, the Humane Society of the
United States.


IFAW subsequently demanded an apology for comments made by Williams on
CNN - comments the organization says linked it to FBI domestic terror
probes.


The premier's office has rejected those claims, and indicated that no
apology will be forthcoming.


An IFAW spokesman said last week the organization was pondering its
legal options.


O'Regan again called for an apology Thursday.


"The full written transcript and video record of your CNN appearance
are clear. This was said by you in front of millions of people, and it
should be retracted."


Earlier this week, Ottawa announced a total allowable catch of 325, 000
harp seals in 2006. That's about the same level as the past three
years.


The hunt is expected to begin in the Gulf by the end of the month.

Anonymous said...

Wonderful solution, Patriot.

If 70% of the people of my own country think I'm wrong, well clearly they're opinions don't matter.

Nice spin. Truly creative.

The Canadian Government asked if people support a commercial hunt for fully independent, mature adult seals that was sustainable and humane - 70% said yes. Surprising (cough, cough) the Canadian Government refused to ask if the Canadian People thought 1) the current hunt was humane and 2) if they thought seals between the ages of 12 days and 12 weeks were fully mature, independent animals.

The IFAW by contrast asked "do you support the commercial hunting of baby seals" and 69% said no.

So, yeah, clearly, the Canadian people are confused.

NL-ExPatriate said...

See you in court where only the facts will be presented and your rhetoric, spin and disinformation will be useless.

Be sure to keep that 160 million$ on hand for the verdict.

Anonymous said...

What court are you talking about?

Anonymous said...

Blueberries, Iraq, non-scientific polls...anything to change the subject. Ever heard of "mutually exclusive?"

Anonymous said...

Here's evidence that the NL-politics group encouraged their subscribers to vote for the seal hunt

Fred Harris wrote:
To: NL-politicsFrom: Fred Harris
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:37:22 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [NL-politics] Please VOTE in online poll!

You misread results Ward...
I hope we are hitting supporters everywhere!

Fred

I bought a seal skin change purse at Signal Hill in
December!

--- Ward Pike wrote:

> Done sir. As of this moment, 68% are in favor of
> the
> seal hunt.
>
> This, despite the best attempts of both Liberal TV
> networks (CTV and CBC) to show the hunt in nothing
> but
> the worst possible light.
>
> brgrds
>
> Ward>
>
> --- Liam OBrien wrote:
>
> > http://www.ctv.ca/canadaam
> >
> > Do you support the seal hunt?
> > Yes
> > No

Anonymous said...

Liars figure and figures lie! Yes, I support the hunt.

Anonymous said...

Glenn,

What the hell does that even mean?

I don't lie, by the way.

Tootles!

Anonymous said...

It means those that are willing to lie for their beliefs will figure out a way to manipulate the figures (stats or polls) to do the lying for them.

Do you support abortion without limitation? See the real truth @ http://www.abortionno.org/ These are the pictures that should be shown every night on the evening news and Larry King Live. But then these so called activists wouldn't be able to buy their Benzs and Saabs, nor their condos with the heli-pads. Saving seals is big business, saving humans or the cod isn't hip.

Do you support Euthanasia?

Do you support Capital Punishment?

Anyone can claim to not lie if they believe what they are saying to be truth.

Liars figure and figures lie.

Myles, you and NL have allies.

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2006/03/on_baby_seals_a.html#comments

TTFN

Glenn

Anonymous said...

Keep changing the subject....that is fine, further proof you are losing, which you are.

http://www.seashepherd.org

Check out International Day of Protest.

Did you pick up the new People Magazine? Check out page 26.

Anonymous said...

I am not changing the subject. I am calling you a liar. Seal pups are big money for your terrorists groups. You really don't want it to end, you just want the awareness to increase since it is a direct corelation to your bank accounts. The proof is in your giddiness to point out People magazine page 26, you can't hide your anticipation of dollar bills flowing in from the free publicity. Now is a great time of year to buy stocks in high end vehicles and other pricey goods since the influx of new cash will need to be spent. Same as when Geldoff and the boys have their Live Aid concerts. Only this time it is Paul Watson instead of Geoffrey Sachs. Victimization is big business and business is good, especially if the perceived victim is a baby seal.

Anonymous said...

Well, I publish as anon because it is the likes of you that I fear. You are the only person in my life that has called me a liar. This campaign has been a life changing experience, another first.

I am a volunteer and am paid nothing and if you think that the leaders in these orgs enjoy watching this slaughter, get some therapy. Have you read Rebecca Aldworth's journal?

Keep up the good rhetoric, Glenn. You have already lost. Tick, Tock.
That is what makes me giddy.

Anonymous said...

Better yet, Glenn, get your misguided soul out to the ice. You still have time.

Anonymous said...

One more thing, Glenn. Before you start packing, what do you think I lied about?

Curious as I am sure there will be entertainment value.

Patriot said...

I really get a kick out of these over zealous folks who are trumpeting the end of the hunt with comments like "you've alread lost". I applaud their enthusiasm but I wouldn't count my chickens (or seals) yet.

Ever since the 1960's decades of protestors and their celebrity pitchmen have tried to stop the hunt. Today, while this latest generation feels they have the end in hand, the seal quota has been increased and demand for seal products around the world is expected to bring the highest price ever achieved in the industry.

Sure doesn't sound like an industry on the way out does it?

Anonymous said...

The quota was increased out of indignance, which was to be expected and more and more countries are outlawing seal products.

Off to talk to more restaurants...

www.restaurantsforseals.org

Anonymous said...

Polls, are as you said tools used by interest groups to leverage there position. They are just as bias as the the statistics of epidemiology. I am not surprised that some people in Canada have little or no knowledge of this issue. As long as they can shop at Walmart and watch pablum-vision, they are fine. Sheep never lead, better to have someone make up your own mind, as long as Walmart and porridge-vision can be had.

Anonymous said...

Hang on, if you thought the McCartney's made a big splash a couple of weeks ago, "you ain't seen nothin yet."

Anonymous said...

opinioneditorials.com
March 16, 2006

When Canadians Go Clubbing
Rachel Marsden

For Canada to register a blip on the American media radar nowadays, it usually takes something really outlandish. So when CNN's Larry King devotes an entire show to chatting with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney and his wife about Canada, as he did recently, you know there has to be some major moronic activity registering north of the border.

Indeed, there is. In the next few days, some Canadians will cover their eyes while others, like myself, cringe in embarrassment as east coast Newfoundlanders kick off their annual clubbing season. Not because they have the rhythm of a first round reject from American Idol, but because some Newfies' idea of getting jiggy with it consists of hitting the ice floes and driving giant spikes through the skulls of fuzzy little newborn seals.

Is there no McDonald's or Taco Bell in Newfoundland? Is food so scarce in during the wintertime that these folks have to chow down on seal meat? Hardly. The seal hunt exists for a single reason: So Gucci, Versace, Prada, Marni, and Petit Nord can deck out their runway models in seal fur or skin, and impress the last remaining twenty or so mouth-breathing morons with more money than brains who haven't heard of faux-fur.

You won't hear much criticism of the seal hunt in the Canadian media-if only because no one wants to be accused of picking on a group of people about whom there are already enough jokes to fill five HBO Dennis Miller pay-per-view specials.

If Newfoundlanders want to curtail the Newfie jokes, may I suggest refraining from whacking defenseless critters over the head just because someone pays you to do it? A lot of things pay well-sliding naked up and down a brass pole in front of a beer-chugging audience, for example-but, come on, whatever happened to moral standards and a sense of decency?

Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams argued on the King show that the seal population is booming and there aren't enough fish for both Newf and seal. Does this guy even realize what the heck he's saying? Biology 101: If there were no fish, the seals would be dying, not thriving. Nature had no problem balancing itself out long before God created Newfies.

But for the sake of argument-given that this was a major point of debate between Williams and the McCartneys during the King show--let's say the seals really were handing you your butt on a platter during fishing season. How about showing a tad more gamesmanship? Why not rip a page out of the Survivor playbook and try to "outwit, outplay, and outlast" the seals, rather than, say, showing up at the first tribal council, bashing in the skulls of all your competitors, and then sitting back and cracking open a Budweiser. If you're trying to dispel the stereotype of the "lazy Newfoundlander", this isn't helping your cause.

Between 300,000 and 400,000 seals are brutally and senselessly slaughtered every year because my country-the same one that so righteously views itself as a global defender of justice and humanity--can't bring itself to keep whack-happy Newfs off the ice floes. Others like Italy, the USA, Greenland and Mexico have already banned seal products, yet Canada continues to demonstrate its inhumanity with one of the few issues over which it has absolute control.

Our government also doesn't have a problem with free assembly-as long as the gathering doesn't happen to occur between a seal hunter and his target. Eleven members of the Sea Shepherd Society were recently sentenced to 22 days in jail as a result of hanging out too close to the slaughter.

While the previous Liberal government may have allowed the hunt for east coast vote buying reasons, the new Conservative regime under Prime Minister Stephen Harper has missed a prime opportunity to act on all that "respect for life" talk. I didn't think that Harper would be quite so quick to cop-out and hide behind Williams' hip waders-sending a provincial representative to speak on behalf of the Prime Minister, on an internationally televised program, about an issue that reflects so poorly on all Canadians.

And Harper isn't the only self-described right-winger to play the hypocrite on this issue. It amazes me how so many of my fellow conservatives who, last year, advocated rewriting the law to keep a brain-dead Terri Schiavo alive, and who demand respect for unborn fetuses, also happen to be in favour of this useless killing spree.

This is one of the few issues where I consistently see right-wingers acting like liberals. Either you're a conservative who respects life, or you aren't. Smarten up.

-------------------

Rachel Marsden is a political columnist and the Canadian Correspondent for "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News and a political columnist with the Toronto Sun.

Anonymous said...

And we're supposed to care what Rachel Marsden thinks about anything? A right-wing wack-job with a major history of harassment charges, arrests, and restraining orders, and pretty much ostracised from the Canadian Conservative Party. The O'Rielly Factor is a perfect place for her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Marsden#Harassment_controversies

Anonymous said...

And we're supposed to care what Rachel Marsden thinks about anything? A right-wing wack-job with a major history of harassment charges, arrests, and restraining orders, and pretty much ostracised from the Canadian Conservative Party. The O'Rielly Factor is a perfect place for her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Marsden#Harassment_controversies

Anonymous said...

Always changing the subject. Good for those that oppose the "hunt," keeps your eye off the ball.

She hit it the nail on head, regardless of what happened 11 years ago.

Stop behaving like Neanderthals, "Newfies."

Anonymous said...

Oh, and wake up folks, she has more credibility and is listened to and read more than you. When are you going to get it?

No wonder you cruelly slaughter these animals. You continue to communicate in a way that is shockingly ignorant.

Glenn...how did I lie, did I miss your piece?

Anonymous said...

Indignance is a word?

Anonymous said...

It is now. You folks are the gift that keeps on giving.

Tories won't meet with Bardot over seal hunt


>
> French actress Brigitte Bardot won't be getting a warm welcome from
> politicians when she travels to Canada this week to protest the seal
> hunt.
>
> Both Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Fisheries Minister
> Loyola Hearn have refused to meet with Bardot on her visit to Ottawa
> Wednesday.
>
> "I think giving people like that attention and publicity just furthers
> their cause," Hearn told CBC News.
>
> --
> full story:
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/03/20/bardot-seals060320.html

Anonymous said...

What nail on what head? What subject? What credibility?!! The article is a littany of standard accusations and oversimplifications, to which you know the rebuttals a thousand times over. Post something substantial for once.

Marsden is bitter at Canada be cause she can't get a job here. I mean, who would want anything to do with, let alone hire, a well-known serial harasser and malicious liar? Well, besides belicose Canada bashers like the O'Rielly Factor. None of these people have a shred of credibility w here animal rights or welfare is concerned. But they do happen to have a vendetta against Canada for its contrary position on the Iraq War and other right-wing causes. This is the line of cynical right-wing bilge you've tapped into.f

Anonymous said...

"Tories won't meet with Bardot over seal hunt"

And why should they? She's a foreign movie star! What right does she or any other have to demand the ear of a foreign head of state?

Anonymous said...

Hey morons, wake up. She has not been on an overseas flight since she was last visiting your pathetic, barbaric hunt. You don't think she is the worst thing to happen to you since the McCarthy's? God, you are an ignorant bunch. Get an education, get a life, get a brain, for God's sake. The world is watching, what do you not get about that?

Anonymous said...

If I type slowly, will it sink in? It is not about the Iraq war, or blueberries, or the Conservative or Liberal party or whatever the frick you dream up.

It is about your barbaric, draconian, pathetic, disgusting, inhumane (should I go on?) seal, not even a hunt but like shooting fish in a barrel, slaughter.

Lets see, International film star or Danny Boy Williams? I need to go take some more Mylanta. This audience is most truley the most ignorant bunch I have ever tried to communicate with in my life and a testimonial that it is a true waste of my time.

Anonymous said...

Published on Sunday, March 19, 2006 by the lndependent/UK
Canada Defends Seal Cull While World Calls for a Trade Boycott
The annual slaughter of cubs, shot or clubbed to death, faces the strongest protests for decades

by Geoffrey Lean, Jonathan Owen and Marie Woolf

Hunters are preparing to kill more than 300,000 baby seals this week despite growing international protests against the world's largest massacre of marine mammals and a new threat to the animals from global warming.

A seal pup is seen on the ice floes before the start of the seal hunting season, in the Gulf of St-Lawrence, Charlottetown, 02 March 2006. Canada's fisheries minister Loyola Hearn announced a kill quota of 325,000 seals this year for its controversial hunt. (AFP/David Boily)

Canada's bloody annual slaughter - the most controversial for decades - takes place as calls mount for a boycott of the country's products. But the long-term future of the cull and the seals themselves looks increasingly likely to be dictated by climate change.

Hunters and protesters are heading for the Gulf of St Lawrence and the north-east coast of Newfoundland, waiting for the Canadian government to give the go-ahead for the cul. It could start as early as tomorrow.
Ministers have already authorised the slaughter of 325,000 baby harp seals, the second highest number ever. It will be the third successive year in which more than 300,000 of the cubs have been clubbed and shot; by the end of the cull, the death toll since 2004 will top a million.

But the cull faces the most determined opposition for decades. Attempts to launch a global boycott against Canadian exports start in Britain this week. Major supermarkets will tomorrow receive letters urging them to stop stocking Canadian produce, and vigils will start outside travel agencies in 20 cities, trying to persuade Britons not to holiday in the country.

The supermarket campaign is being led by Lady (Sally) Stratford, widow of the former Labour minister Tony Banks, who was an ardent opponent of the cull. The former Tory minister Ann Widdecombe has also written to retailers to urge a boycott, and 188 MPs have signed an early day motion to support it.

The campaign has been boosted by the decision of Sir Paul McCartney and his wife, Heather, to travel to the floes this month to call for the cull to be called off. His daughter, the designer Stella McCartney, will give some of the proceeds from sales of a special T-shirt to the campaign.

The boycott began last year in the United States, supported by more than 400 restaurants, supermarkets and seafood wholesalers. This year it is expected to spread to France, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Mexico, Japan and the Netherlands.

The protesters are hoping to repeat a boycott of the early 1980s, which pushed Canada into banning the killing of the youngest pups, called whitecoats. But the hunters now evade the ban by waiting a few days until the seals begin to moult and their coats turn grey.

Canada is vulnerable to a boycott. It exports fish and seafood worth £1.6bn to the United States every year, while its fish exports to Britain are worth £56m, far outweighing the £9m value of seal skins and other hunt booty.

The Humane Society of the United States, the country's leading animal protection charity, claims that the value of Canadian snow crab exports have dropped by £85m since the boycott began last year.

Many scientists, though, claim the real danger to the seals comes from climate change. Water temperatures off Newfoundland are 4.5C warmer than this time last year and the ice is already beginning to melt. Dr Kit Kovacs, who is to take over as chair of the main international scientific group monitoring seals in June, said: "Harp seals are a numerous Arctic species. But there is concern because of climate change and things don't look good in the long term."

The danger to the hunters will also increase as they venture out on ever-thinning ice. That could mean an end to one of the most chilling images deployed by the anti-cull campaigners, for the Canadian government says hunters will soon be unable to get close enough to many of the pups to club them. Instead, more will be shot.

THE CASE FOR A CULL ...

METHOD The majority of seals are already shot, not clubbed to death. In 2002, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association issued a "Special Report on Animal Welfare and the Harp Seal Hunt in Atlantic Canada", which concluded that virtually all harp seals are killed "humanely".

POPULATION Harp seals are not an endangered species. There are currently 5.8 million animals and the herd is three times the size it was in the 1970s. Culling quotas are set at levels designed to keep the herd sustainable and stable.

NECESSITY The seal hunt supports about 15,000 sealers and their families in eastern Canada, and also brings economic benefits to remote, coastal communities where there are only limited employment opportunities. Sealing has become an increasingly important economic activity , especially in Atlantic Canada, because overfishing has depleted fish stocks and there has been a moratorium on cod since 1992.

PUBLIC OPINION An opinion poll in February 2005 concluded that 60 per cent of Canadians are in favour of a responsible seal hunt.

... THE CASE AGAINST

METHOD Seal cubs are clubbed to death or shot, many while still conscious. A veterinarian report in 2001 found that almost half of the seals it examined seemed to have been conscious when skinned, causing "considerable and unacceptable suffering". In the past three years 97 per cent of seals killed were less than three months old.

POPULATION More than 300,000 seal cubs are to be slaughtered this year. Almost one million pups have been killed in the past three years.

NECESSITY In Newfoundland, where more than 90 per cent of the sealers live, the cull accounts for less than 1 per cent of that province's GDP and amounts to only 2 per cent of the value of the province's fishery. Only 4,000 fishermen, out of a population of half a million, take part in the hunt.

PUBLIC OPINION Recent polling for the Humane Society International suggests that 48 per cent of the public would support their supermarket boycotting Canadian seafood in an effort to stop the annual cull.

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
###
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
© Copyrighted 1997-2006
www.commondreams.org

Anonymous said...

For those of you idiots who think the hook not spike on the end of the Haka-pik is used to kill seals your ignorance shows through on this subject.

The hook is used to pull the dead seals not kill them. The Haka-Pik is also a safty device for the sealers in case they fall in they ca use the stick to help them get gabco out of the frezing water and not be crushed by the ice.

If your going to agurue something at least get your facts right Annoy-nomouses.

Anonymous said...

You guys are too funny. I love it when activists fall back on things quoted here like,

"Hey morons, wake up. She has not been on an overseas flight since she was last visiting your pathetic, barbaric hunt. You don't think she is the worst thing to happen to you since the McCarthy's?"

Or

"Lets see, International film star or Danny Boy Williams?"

What a crock. First the McCartney's are not the worst thing to happen to the hunt. Just another superstar and his wife protesting. That's been going on for decades.

Second, Who the hell is Bardot or McCartney that everyone believes every syllable dripping from their lips. You talk about them like they have all the answers to the world's problems on the tips of their tongues.

I guess the comparison between Bardot and Williams was intended to show who everyone would listen too and that alone is embarrassing for you.

The reality is that Williams, being involved in the debate for more than just a quick photo op and a few headlines, like these media stars generally are, probably does know a great deal more about the issues than them, not the opposite.

I hate to stereotype, but the sort of celebrity love going on here where you feel "they can say or do no wrong" is typical of what a lot of people see as a major fault in many Americans.

Patriot said...

As always, when this issue is raised, there's quite a range of comments and tactics. Always interesting.

Oh, bye the way, welcome back Marie from Huskerville. interesting to see you slant on things even if they are as an anon these days.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone else noticed that anonymous (a.k.a. Mt. Hood on another board) has long since given up any kind of science or fact based critique of the hunt, and hides SOLELY behind puplic opinion (exaggerated at that), the opinion of celebrities, and boycott threats?

If that alone is grounds for stopping something, then yes, Hood, it IS about the Iraq war as well, and you'd better start petitioning your own government to listen to the far greater majority of people on this planet who think the Americans should go the f**k home out of it. But no, instead you repeat the twisted lies of Bush and Rumsfeld, showing us all what a sick little hypocrite freak you really are.

Anonymous said...

The seal hunt: A red stain on the Canadian ice

By Paul Glendenning
The Hamilton Spectator
(Mar 20, 2006)

The Canadian government has unleashed its new plans in its apparent war
against Canada's seals.

Waiting until March 15, the International Day of Protest against the Seal
Hunt, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans finally revealed a new
five-year plan. This plan also reveals the quotas for the grey seal hunt,
which already occurred this year despite devastation by storms and poaching.

This year, the quota for the harp seal is 325,000. In addition, in what
appears to be an attempt to consolidate native support, an additional 10,000
are to be killed by aboriginal hunters. The quota for hood seals is again
10,000.

Yet the report also reveals they are considering a return to killing
"bluebacks," which are pups still being weaned and whose hunting became
illegal at the same time "whitecoat" harp seal hunting was banned. The
distinction is small but significant for although both categories protect
baby seals for only 12 days at the most, the banning of killing pups that
young was what reduced international pressure to end the hunt.

The quota for grey seals is set at 10,400. This number is, in fact, higher
than the original 10,000 proposed two years ago for 2005-06. This is also in
spite of the fact that the government estimated 75 per cent of grey seal
pups were lost to severe storms.

According to a report prepared for the government by the Canadian Veterinary
Association, 2 per cent of the seals taken may be inhumanely killed. This
percentage was calculated on the basis that clubbing and shooting baby
seals, is on the whole, humane killing.

For this year, that 2 per cent would mean inhumane suffering by 208 grey
seals, 6,700 harp seals and 208 hood seals. Seal defenders believe the
numbers are much higher.

Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn is well known for his support of seal
hunting, a popular activity in Atlantic Canada when the fishing season is
closed. When he was fisheries critic for the Opposition, he was quoted as
saying there are "too many seals" and that the "rapidly growing herds" need
to be dealt with, as they are a "serious source of (fish) predation.'' Since
becoming minister, he has defended the hunt and criticized recent celebrity
calls to end it.

Hearn also supported a 2005 study that recommended keeping northern cod off
the endangered species list, aggressively promoting the expansion of markets
for seal products and increasing seal hunt quotas in accordance with market
conditions.

Support for the seal hunt by fishermen appears to be due to their belief
that seals are in competition with them for fish and are the cause of
dwindling fish stocks. This is supported by many politicians and some media,
but not by science.

While politicians such as Hearn divert Atlantic Canada's hostility about
fisheries management onto vulnerable seal pups, Department of Fisheries and
Oceans scientists disclaim any notion that seals are the cause of fishery
decline and fish stock collapse. Seals eat a wide range of sealife,
including the predators of valued fish such as cod. What is not being
adequately explored is the lack of protection for cod from foreign
overfishing and the use of trawling technology. It took the collapse of the
cod fishery to acquire much protection for this endangered fish and complete
protection is still avoided by politicians.

In addition, Canada has sided with countries such as Portugal to fight a
United Nations ban on bottom trawling. Portugal has the distinction of being
the country most cited for fishing violations in Canadian waters.

Trawling involves the use of weighted nets to scrape the ocean floor. This
environmentally destructive method destroys the integrity of the ecosystem
and is a major, if not the primary, cause of fishery collapse and the lack
of proper recovery.

Canadian fishermen do not use bottom trawling, but Canada gains much income
from allowing it to take place in Canadian waters. In 2001, bottom trawling
brought in about $500 million to the Canadian government, 28 per cent of the
total landed value of the fisheries.

Meanwhile, the seal hunt continues to damage Canada's reputation. Countries
such as Britain, the U.S., Mexico and Greenland pull away in disgust at the
brutality and ban all seal products. An international boycott of Canadian
seafood is also on the rise, begun by seal defenders in the hope of removing
the hunt's economic value.

Only when Canada faces the true causes of Atlantic poverty and desperation
will Canada recover.

The furor over the seal hunt appears to be masking real improvement and its
end would be a strong step in the right direction. But there is a long and
winding road ahead to fix years of mismanagement and misdirection.

There is a new government in power and with it a chance to start in a new
and sustainable direction.

Should Prime Minister Stephen Harper decide to let the hunt continue to
rise, a true opportunity will be lost and foreshadows a bleak future ahead
for both seals and sealers alike if not for all of Canada.

Paul Glendenning lives in Hamilton

NL-ExPatriate said...

Seeing as the annoy-nomouses are regurgetating other peoples thoughts I just thought I would throw up some propaganda.

Protecting rights of cute animals hypocritical

By Randy Wood / Columnist
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 2006

Those damn Canadians. I am absolutely outraged! Right now, as you're reading this article, an absolutely despicable thing is going on. Canada's seal hunt is underway. Hunters are going to kill hundreds of thousands of seals mainly for their pelts. Why am I so disgusted by this practice? Because I can't find a way to get a license!

Before I get started, let me first say that if you are a die-hard PETA supporter and you truly believe that "animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment" then I completely understand your disgust for the seal hunt. I really hope those people understand that I have nothing but respect for someone who is willing to give up meat, leather, gelatin, and all other animal products because of their beliefs. I may think that they're nuts, but at least their logic is sound. What makes me laugh so hard is the anti-hunter wearing leather shoes and talking about "animal rights."

So do animals have rights? We hear animal rights talked about so much that I would argue most people don't even consider the implications. The great thing about the seal hunt is that it should force people to decide how they view animals. Should we as humans be allowed to kill and eat them? Is there a difference between wild domestic animals? What about wearing a fur coat? Even more complicated, should we conduct medical experiments on animals? These are all questions that people should ask themselves before they decide how they feel about people hunting any animal.

I think Dennis Leary summed things up quite well when he suggested that we have "animal auditions." The cute animals we'll let go and the not-so-cute animals we'll eat! What his profanity-laden bit explains is the almost-complete detachment people in modern society seem to have from the animals they consume. I hate to run the risk of sounding patronizing, but the fact is all the meat you buy in a grocery store or a fast-food restaurant was once a living, breathing animal. Now I understand that a lot of people don't want to be bothered with having to kill and butcher their dinner, but that doesn't mean you can pretend it doesn't happen. When we discuss issues that relate to hunting, we must all understand that even though we may not "pull the trigger" every time we order a hamburger, we contribute to the death of an animal.

So what does all of this have to do with the seal hunt? The main objection to the practice is that seals are killed for fashion, not food. While as a conservationist I appreciate the argument that we should use the entire animal, I have a hard time condemning people who want to have a seal fur coat. I concede that there is absolutely no reason why a person "needs" to wear a fur coat. However, I also believe that people don't "need" to eat meat in this day and age. It might sound awful, but it is very possible to live a perfectly healthy adult life eating veggies and tofu. If we look down on fur because it's a luxury, then we must also look down on that thick juicy steak.

This leads us back to the argument that people object to the killing of some animals and not others strictly because some are deemed cute and some are not. In America, cows, pigs and chickens are killed without a second thought. At the same time, the thought of killing a deer is more offensive to some and the thought of killing a seal is extremely troubling to most. This sort of arbitrary value that seems to be placed on different species of animals makes me think that talk of animal rights is not a well-developed concept. I don't pretend to have all the answers -- certainly when hunting I try to avoid causing animals I kill unnecessary suffering. Yet at the same time I think that if we can save the lives of humans by torturing some monkeys, I say have at it.

The point of this article is not to convince people that they should want to club a baby seal. (Not done since the late '80s.) I would just like to challenge readers to consider why certain animals should be treated any better than others. If you don't like hunting, then don't do it. But in order to say that people shouldn't hunt a certain type of animal there needs to be a better reason than "they're just so cute."

http://www.easternecho.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?31257

Table Mountains said...

mean while back on the rock boats are gearing up,fueling up,and were ready to go sealing.

...now back to our regular programing......

Anonymous said...

Can we Americans just arrange for a minor B-2 accident involving a low grade atomic weapon, apologize to Mr. Harper, pay for the cleanup and be done with you sorry ass sons of bitches once and for all?

I mean, would anybody actually miss you?

Table Mountains said...

oh no! more collateral damage.

Anonymous said...

> Anonymous said...Can we Americans just arrange for a minor B-2 >accident involving a low grade atomic weapon, apologize to Mr. >Harper, pay for the cleanup and be done with you sorry ass sons of >bitches once and for all?

>I mean, would anybody actually miss you?

And you're a spokesperson for the ARA's? Unbelievable!!

Anonymous said...

http://www.animalrights.net/archives/year/2001/000085.html

Anonymous said...

There are many more hunts conducted throughout the world that doesn't seem to grab the attention of Animal Rights Activists. Shucks, I have read that there is a hunt within to good old USA. Maybe, if someone could lend some expertise in this area and give an accounting of the number of seals taken in other hunts throughout the world, maybe those who live in glass houses should keep the stone throwing to those who are upright and without blame.

If you feel that you can add good information to the issue, please take a look at Wikipedia and reference the Seal hunt article.

NL-ExPatriate said...

Here is an article which might spread some light on the ARA's and their confusion.

http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soyandbrain.html

H/T
http://rantand.blogspot.com/2006/04/its-all-starting-to-make-sense.html

Anonymous said...

If you ignorant seal hunt supporters/government officials want to bury your heads in the sand, er, I mean ice, then go right ahead. And if you are going to arrest protesters because they accidentally drifted too close to the big sealing boats with their blow up rafts while you ignored the fact that the sealers threw "seal guts" at the protesters, then you deserve whatever reputation you "savage newfies" get. Oh, and by the way, surrounding their hotel and not letting their helicopter take off is really intelligent, has a kind of pre 1980's communist Russian ring to it!

Anonymous said...

San Diego's Maritime Museum hosts fundraiser for fishermen-bashing Sea Shepherd



Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is holding a fundraiser at the Maritime Museum of San Diego Sunday, June 4, 2006 onboard the Star of India.

www.seashepherd.org/events.html



Event info states, "The Star of India is the world's oldest active ship. Museum docents will be available to answer your questions about the ship" but checks are to be made out to Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. www.tapasandtopsls.org/ticket_order_form.pdf



The mission of the Maritime Museum of San Diego is to serve as the community memory of our seafaring experience by collecting, preserving, and presenting our rich maritime heritage and historic connections with the Pacific world.



It is an insult to seafaring people around the world that the Maritime Museum of San Diego allows Sea Shepherd to use the Star of India to raise funds so they can disseminate vicious propaganda and attack fishermen, whalers, sealers and others who make their living at sea.



Sea Shepherd's leadership over the years has included:

Rodney Coronado (convicted ALF arsonist, now charged with disseminating literature in San Diego on how to create an incendiary device);

Jerry Vlasak who served as Sea Shepherd̢۪s treasurer until he was banned from the UK for quotes supporting the killing of researchers. He is currently facing charges in Canada over a confrontation with sealers;

Josh Harper, recently convicted in the SHAC court case for relentlessly promoting attack campaigns against medical researchers;

Alex Pacheco who co-founded People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA);

Paul Watson's wife, Alison Lance Watson, was caught lying to a grand jury about a truck she rented that was used in the commission of eco-terror crimes in the Pacific Northwest. (See www.activistcash.com profile on Sea Shepherd and www.furcommission.com/resource/pressConflictquotes.html and www.furcommission.com/debate/ownwords.htm for various quotes.)


You can log a complaint at www.sdmaritime.com/ContentPage.asp?ContentID=34; by calling the Executive Director at 619-234-9153, extension 104; or via info@sdmaritime.org or fax at 619-234-8345