From Beatles to Seals or “That’s No Lady, That’s My Wife”
We all know an ant can’t move a rubber tree plant, but can a Beatle save the seals?
The answer is probably not.
Late last week ex-Beatle Paul McCartney and his wife Heather visited the gulf region near PEI (although they thought they were in Newfoundland and Labrador). The photo op played itself out as those things usually do with doe eyed baby seals in the foreground being fawned over by even more doe eyed celebrities in the background.
The McCartney visit to the ice is the latest in a string of many others of its kind that have taken place over the decades with everyone from Martin Sheen to Brigitte Bardot. Although there was really nothing new about the visit, one that has become an annual right of passage for every eco-centric, “hurray for everything” activist on the planet, the publicity following it was perhaps a little more pronounced than most.
The level of attention isn’t really surprising however since that was obviously the intention of the Humane Society of the U.S. when they invited the McCartney’s to, as Paul said, “Witness the event.” Of course nobody is quite sure exactly to which event he was referring since neither he nor Heather actually witnessed anything except perhaps for some questionable film footage and a few cuddly looking seal pups. As a side note one of those cuddly looking seals proved it wasn’t really that cuddly after all when it tried to bite the hand of the latest Missus M.
During the visit both Paul and Heather found the time to hook up with CNN for an appearance on the Larry King Live program where the former Beatle and the former guest host of the program were both given the royal treatment by the obviously liberal leaning Larry. Although King was very careful to not appear as to be a proponent for either side of the issue he and his producers did see fit to allow the McCartney’s a clearly unfair advantage during the broadcast.
For the first half of the program the pop pseudo-royals were given free reign to discuss their personal point of view while multiple clips of seal hunt footage ran both before and after multiple commercial breaks. All of this took place prior to the McCartney’s facing any sort of rebuttal from the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. Add to this Larry King’s repeated reference to the McCartney’s as “Sir Paul” and “Lady Heather” and then addressing a Canadian Provincial Premier as “Danny” and the outcome was a forgone conclusion.
They say you can’t fight feelings with logical facts and by the time Premier Williams hit the airwaves the minds of most viewers had no doubt already been made up. When you add to this the elevated status given to the McCartney’s, the disrespect shown to Premier Williams (I bet Larry wouldn’t address a U.S. Governor on air as “Jimmy” or “Tommy”) and the un-lady like, argumentative and controlling manner of “She’s no Lady” Heather, and her constant interruption of the Premier and it’s obvious that the truth didn’t stand much of a chance of actually being heard.
Given the reality of Premier Williams being confronted with an obviously biased situation where he was intended to portray the villain of the piece, all in all he comported himself quite well and actually managed to score a few small points despite the eye rolling, facial expressions and total lack of volume control exhibited by Heather McCartney.
To the argument that most seals were clubbed Premier Williams replied that 90% are actually taken by firearms not clubs. To the view that the hunt has no purpose but to supply the fur industry Williams replied with a list of products for which seals are used, including fur, food, oil and omega 3 fatty acids (used for medicinal purposes).
Perhaps William’s best shot across the bow of the HMS McCartney (after clarifying for them that weren’t actually where they thought they were) was when he invited them to take up the cause of protecting the Atlantic Cod which, unlike the healthy seal population, has actually teetering on the brink of extinction for years.
Williams asked the McCartney’s for assistance in curbing foreign over fishing by European nations that has been a major impact to cod stocks for decades. (Isn’t Paul from somewhere over in Europe, hmmm?) McCartney’s response was less than stellar on that request when he replied, “One cause at a time Danny, one cause at a time.” I guess cod just aren’t quite cute enough, but in McCartney’s defense, it really is difficult to take a good publicity picture with a doe eyed cod fish, believe me I’ve tried it.
Of course the “pro-seal” arguments were nothing new in fact they’ve all been used before, including using emotion to negate actual facts. That said I did find the McCartney’s comments about the boycott of Canadian sea food by some U.S. restaurants slightly interesting. The McCartney’s quoted lost sales to Canada as over a hundred million dollars and said they couldn’t understand why the Canadian government wouldn’t simply shut down the seal industry (worth an estimated 16 million) in order to save those sea food sales. As I said, I those comments interesting but certainly not mind changing.
The McCartney’s are correct when they mention a restaurant boycott but I question if the actual losses quoted are correct. Yes, I concede that government sources say the boycott has resulted in lost sales in the U.S. but living in a fishing community where fish harvesters were on the water all of last season I have to say I haven’t actually seen any crab, lobster or shrimp rotting on wharves or piling up in fish plants. This is likely because U.S. restaurants aren’t the only market for these quality products and like any valued product when one market shuts down another one isn’t too hard to find.
No, I’m quite sure the Canadian sea food industry will survive despite a U.S. boycott, although the inferior products some of the restaurants involved may be forced to serve to their patrons could result in more than a few of them permanently closing their doors.
The truth is that even if there was a huge economic impact to Canada from such a boycott, that impact in and of itself wouldn’t be a valid reason to allow special interest groups to shut down a legal, sustainable widely accepted industry.
With the mind set of many U.S. citizens in mind I’m sure many (even those who oppose the seal harvest) can understand why you don’t back down when you honestly believe you are not doing anything wrong and you certainly don’t back down simply because someone is attempting to blackmail, intimidate or coerce you into doing so. An example of this is easy to find. I for one don’t like the fact that Heather McCartney is referred to as a Lady but I bet if I started a national boycott of steak and kidney pudding the Queen wouldn’t actually revoke her title. (Or would she? Hmmm, now there’s a thought.)
The visit by the McCartney’s didn’t do much to change opinions on the subject either in Newfoundland and Labrador or within the Canadian government. The aftermath of the event was also pretty much the same as it always is.
On my own website at www.freenewfoundlandlabrador.blogspot.com the comments are pretty much the same as always. The pro seal hunt folks continue to quote un-listened too facts to the activist contingent while many of the same people who cringe at the thought of harming any animal use vulgar language and threats to further their cause. According to the Premier’s office government email has been flooded with thousands of correspondence. Most of it is supportive of the Premier’s stance while some of it (I’m betting un-supportive ones) includes threatening and even violent comments.
If nothing else was accomplished because of the Larry King Live program at least it woke up our federal politicians. Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn has since extended an invitation to Sir Paul to actually visit Newfoundland and Labrador (for real this time) and meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper (or as Lady Heather refers to him, “Steve”).
I like the idea of federal representatives finally stepping up to the plate. In reality the seal harvest is a Canadian industry taken part in by other Atlantic Provinces and Quebec. It isn’t just a Newfoundland and Labrador issue. The appearance on Larry King Live by Premier Williams was simply evidence that there is at least one government official with enough intestinal fortitude to take it on the chin for the national good.
I doubt the McCartney’s will actually take the government up on the offer since they’ve probably already moved on to more pressing business like saving children in Haiti or stopping child prostitution in Thailand (oh that’s right they aren’t involved in those less important causes are they?). Never the less I hope they do accept but maybe this time around Paul should try doing what he said he was open to doing, listening to all sides of the issue. Perhaps he might also want to consider leaving Heather (or as I’ve come to refer to her: Yoko the sequel) back at their humble home in Switzerland. That way someone besides the good lady might actually manage to get a few words in side ways.
85 comments:
So Paul and Yoko2 breeze in, find a whitecoat, have their peeps hold the mother at bay while they snap some photos before flying off to the studio to tell Larry King how self-righteous they are. What's wrong with that?
Just because it is illegal by section 7 of the Marine Mammals Act to disturb the harp seals. Two counts actually, one for the posse keeping mother seal at bay and the other for Yoko2 trying to pet the whitecoat like she's just found a dog with no legs.
There's also the fact that Yoko2 has hosted Larry King on occasion so we know there would be no bias there.
Well there's also the fact that they show ten year old video footage which is not relavant to the hunt today.
...and they show photos of whitecoats which are not hunted.
...and of course footage of clubs which are not commonly used.
... oh ya there's the fact that Paul could buy and sell any of us; all the while saying how insignificant a couple thousand bucks is to someone's income.
...and there is the sponsorship by the Humane Society of the US that in fact has their own seal hunt.
...and the fact that the UK as a European country is a member of a union of like minds with countries that have all but obliterated the fish stocks off our coast. A greater concern than our own fishing habits and the seals diet. An overfishing that Yoko2 screams is the reason Seals are swimming up fresh water rivers to eat fish.
...and the fact that the mass amount of funding comes from the general masses who eat veal and lamb and wear leather, pump their lips with collagen and fly to Spain to see the bull fights.
Besides the fact that Larry King thinks we are in "NewFinland" and Paul thinks we are PEI.
...and the bloggers here must resort to name calling in leui of sensible debate.
Other than that I don't see any hypocrisy or mis-information involved.
Oh my... I can only imagine the deluge of comments this article will receive...
Widely accepted?
Are you out of your mind?
The only people who "accept" this industry are the barbarians who participate, the politicians who prostrate themselves to provide sealers better access to their rectums and the "columnists" like you who think your little corner of the world is all that matters.
If this industry was "widely accepted" you wouldn't have nation after nation lining up to condemn this slaughter and ban your products.
Widely accepted?
I assume you are talking about your ass, Myles. You are certainly talking out of it.
Yeah, BNB, its the Europeans who killed your fish and we Yanks kill more seals than you do.
I hate to tell you this - MYLES IS A MORON!!!
You want to better yourself and your station, try listening to someone who doesn't get his every opinion force-fed by corrupt, incompetent politicians.
And I am astonished that such strong, proud men could all be scared so shitless by a one-legged, strong-willed Lady. God, if only your women knew how to read, and could spell the words "Betty Friedan", how different and better your lived would be.
To GP of Baltimore who said:
"The only people who "accept" this industry are the barbarians who participate, the politicians who prostrate themselves to provide sealers better access to their rectums and the "columnists" like you who think your little corner of the world is all that matters."
In response I actually don't think its that bad that the people involved in the hunt, the politicians who regulate the industry and columnists who are actually aware of the facts support the seal harvest. Having said that, it might be worthwhile to note that there are indeed some people outside the this "little corner of the world" who also have a problem with the type of mis-information being spread by people like the McCartneys.
You might want to read the following article published at the University of Alberta (just in case you also come from the same school system that gave geography lessons to Paul and Linda, Alberta is almost as far away from the seal hunt as you will get in North America.)
Here is the article:
McCartney's don't have a clue about seal hunt
Scott Lilwall
I suck at Clue. You know what I mean, the classic board game where players gather clues to discover who killed the unfortunately named Mr Body. I always lost at the game, because I had a fundamental flaw in my playing style—I never waited until all of the facts were in before I made my accusation. I’d get a hunch on who committed the dastardly deed, and would prematurely make my predictions. And in the game, just like in real life, falsely accusing someone of murder-most-foul isn’t looked upon kindly. My point is that my career as a brilliant detective was always cut tragically short because I couldn’t stop from running my mouth off, even when I had no idea what the hell I was talking about (a habit that I have since transferred to the pages of the Gateway).
Luckily, I’ve found that I’m in famous company with this problem. Paul McCartney, former Beatle and current ex-Beatle, has caused quite a stir in the past week by publicly protesting the controversial Canadian seal hunt. Paul and his wife, Heather Mills, have taken part in photo-ops with the seals, and have been calling for a full international ban on the sales of seal fur—an industry that employees over 15 000 Eastern Canadian hunters. The McCartneys contend that the hunt is barbaric, and that the Canadian government could buy out the hunters to ease the loss of the income in an area already stricken with high unemployment.
The issue here isn’t really the seal hunt, which has been debated in Canada for many years, with valid arguments made by both factions. The question is, instead, much simpler: how the hell does playing in a British band 40 years ago make one an expert on the seal hunt?
Of course, you could argue that the McCartneys are like anyone else on the planet, entitled to their opinion on any subject that pleases them. And I agree—they can think whatever they want about the seal hunt. But what Paul McCartney has to realize is that he’s a celebrity, and he has the ear of many, many more people than does an average schmo like you or me. As such, before he goes off talking about a subject, it would be nice if he could, I don’t know, gather a bit of accurate information?
The McCartneys’ ignorance on the subject was revealed on Larry King Live, when the husband-wife duo got in to a heated debate with Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams, with the show’s well-known host/reptile having to play referee between the two sides.
Williams argued that the seal hunt is humane, despite comparisons the singer-songwriter made between the hunt and the long-abolished slave trade. (Yes, that’s right: slave trading.) Every comment made by the premier detailing the laws that are in place to keep the hunt humane, and explaining that the statistics show the vast majority of animals are hunted in accordance with these laws, was shouted down by Heather McCartney (who was obviously drawing on the environmental expertise that comes from marrying a guy who sings really well).
Notably, the McCartneys have never come up with an answer with what should be done when the seal population grows too large for its food source. (Even now, with the hunt still going on, the seal population has tripled since the ’70s, growing faster than the fish the seals eat.) Will the McCartneys be so eager to have their photo taken with starving seals when their food source becomes overwhelmed by an unchecked seal population?
No one’s going to say that McCartney isn’t allowed his opinion. The simple point is that if he’s going to go around on television and in newspapers calling the seal hunters barbaric and comparing them to slave traders, he should at least attempt to understand the relevant facts, instead of talking out of his ass. Just because you’re famous, doesn’t mean you know what you are talking about. And that’s clear. As clear as Colonel Mustard in the Study with the Candlestick.
Wait, I mean, Miss Scarlet. Fuck. Professor Plum?
Wanna respond? Send your feedback to gateway@gateway.ualberta.ca.
Update:
According to VOCM News:
It doesn't look as though Sir Paul McCartney will be making another visit to the province.
Federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn invited the former Beatle to Newfoundland and Labrador for a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to discuss the seal hunt.
A spokesperson for Hearn says the Humane Society of the United States reports that Sir Paul politely indicated that he didn't want to speak to them.
(Well, unlike his public comments on Larry King, Paul and Heather actually aren't open to listening to all the facts. Go figure. I guess a meeting behind closed doors with those who regulate the industry that would give him an opportunity to hear their side as well as push his own "save the seals" agenda just aren't as important to Paul as a photo op and an appearance in international television.
It makes me wonder if he Paul is more concerned with the actual sealing situation or simply in his own self promotion. Maybe his CD sales are slipping these days and as they say, "Any publicity is good publicity".)
Yes Greg Yanks do kill seals (I didn't say more seals, just seals); and yes Greg Europeans kill our fish. Google "Turbot Wars" + "Brian Tobin" if you are bored.
As a side note, did you know that more poeple, worldwide, watch Rick Mercers Monday Report than Larry King Live? I didn't, but apparently the CBC did their homework and Larry King only attracts about 700,000 viewers.
I guess, after episodes like last Friday's, it's easy to see why nobody would really tune into see Larry King, since on occasion, Larry's shows have very liitle truths to them.
I guess even Americans can see through Larry King Live for what the show really is: Bull Shit!
ABC
I read the article as you requested, Myles.
Now find me ONE THING in that article that Paul didn't have a clue about?
The food source? Quite to the contrary, while Williams continued to parrot the "its possible the seals ate the cod" Heather properly responded that 1) you all killed the cod, which even know you refuse to take responsibility for, and 2) when there were 24 million seals, they didn't have any problems surviving.
Misinformed? Used? Unaware of "the facts"?
The seal hunt is not brain science. If it was, it would take a people other than Newfies to do it.
Man - club - seal - money. How freaking hard is that?
Yeah. I can see why us over-educated, over-paid limousine liberals are so completely out of our depth with half-employed, uneducated fisherman.
Come on.
Heather's a smart lady - a bit abrupt, and confrontational, but remember, she spends a lot of time in the States and we're like that. In America, she's not rude - hell, this is the land of Ann Coulter and Nancy Grace.
Danny lied repeatedly and aggregiously and Heather called him out for being the useless politician that he is.
And of course, for lying about the FBI having an open terrorist file on Greenpeace (they don't) and accusing one of the smartest, most influential and successful men the world has ever seen of being puppet of the Humane Society, Danny's approval goes through the roof.
Is it any wonder the rest of the world shakes its head at you?
What should scare you all, just a little - and to his credit, Myles picked up on this in his previous column - is that no Federal Official was willing to go on TV and attach Harper's Federal Government to the Seal Hunt.
That sound you're hearing, fellas, are the bells.
Larry King averages between 1.5m and 2.25m viewers (Nielsen ratings).
And Patriot - PAUL MCCARTNEY IS AN F*N BEATLE!!!
How much more self-promotion do you think he can possibly need?
Ha, Ha, without stereotyping all Americans I love how some of you idolize your celebrities. It's just too funny to seek GP from Baltimore talk about how intelligent Heather and Paul are. Even going so far as to say that Paul was:
"one of the smartest, most influential and successful men the world has ever seen"
Geeze GP I had no idea you knew so much about Heather and Paul's intelligence levels. I guess you must be the same sort of celebrity follower who elected Sonny Bono to the senate or Ronald Regan to the White House or maybe like the ones who made Arnold a Governor.
I guess if you see these people either on T.V., at the movies or hear them on CD they must be super intelligent and know everything about everything.
As far as getting your head out your ass you might want to try doing that and stop your mindless idol worship.
HA!
Shows what you know!
Reagan, Bono and Ahnuld were all elected in California!
Here in Maryland we stick to third generation Kennedy In-Laws!
one of the smartest, most influential and successful men the world has even seen
Wow! What are you smoking and where can I get some? I won't argue on McCartney’s influence; however calling him one of the smartest people in the world is going a little overboard. I guess his intelligence doesn’t span into the world of geography, since he did not even know where he was during the interview. Paul should stick to what he does best, which is living a lifetime of writing songs that come second to anything that Lennon ever wrote ;)
Save a Seal, Club a Beatle
Trying not to be as petty as you GP but I didn't say you had elected them, what I said was "you must be the same sort of celebrity follower who elected" and "like the ones who made Arnold a Governor".
Is it that you don't have the mental capacity to understand concepts like "Same sort" or "Like the ones"?
You're really a great debate artist GP. Bye the way do you understand the concept of sarcasm?
Oh, I almost forgot, in response to anon who said:
"And Patriot - PAUL MCCARTNEY IS AN F*N BEATLE!!!
How much more self-promotion do you think he can possibly need?"
Maybe you're right anon. I guess he doesn't need any promotion. In fact I can only assume it's a pure coincidence that he decided to take up a cause close to the hearts of liberal leaning Americans at the same time the world is hearing about his new album release.
I found an article just today dated March 3rd (the very same day he appeared on Larry King show bye the way) which states:
"PAUL McCARTNEY SET TO RELEASE FIRST NEW STUDIO ALBUM IN FOUR YEARS...
“CHAOS AND CREATION IN THE BACK YARD”..."
I guess his decision to appear on U.S. tv rather than in Europe also had nothing to do with the 37-city “US” Tour that will follow the albums release.
Just my stupid "Newfie" paranoia again I guess. I'm sure wish I was as smart as all you folks who actually know there is no connection between these two events. Thanks for the enlightenment.
"I guess his decision to appear on U.S. tv rather than in Europe also had nothing to do with the 37-city “US” Tour that will follow the albums release."
Did he hype his tour on Larry King? LK asked if he would tour again. Paul said yes. Never gave dates, or times, or anything of the sort. Read the transcript.
AND GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS!!!
The guy is a Beatle. He is a billionaire. He's probably the most famous entertainer in the entire world.
People in the Amazon know all the god damn words to Let It Be in 17 different Native Languages.
You think he needs LARRY FUCKING KING for publicity?
YOUR ENTIRE POPULATION WAS LINING UP FOR AUTOGRAPHS!!! READ YOUR OWN DAMN NEWSPAPERS!!!
Your argument is so pathetically stupid, I'm astounded that you would allow those words to escape your fingers.
You guys seem to think that because Paul is a rich, famous pop star, artist and composer that he is somehow uninformed, unconcerned and stupid.
Do you think its possible that the reason Paul is a rich, famous pop star, artist and composer is because he is informed, concerned and smart?
How is it that only the single most uneducated industry in Canada is capable of understand a sadist act that requires all the moral intelligence of the Neanderthals you never evolved from?
Myles,
How come none of your regular newspapers have published either of these columns?
Are you being censored or are these web-only? Just curious.
Thanks
http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/index.cfm?sid=1734&sc=1
His brush with McCartney was unbelievable for 24-year-old Patrick Crossman of Summerside.
He was at the Delta with a Junior Achievers convention Friday when he found out the McCartney’s were going to be taping CNN’s Larry King Live show there that very afternoon.
Crossman also plays the guitar, piano and drums and when the couple came down from the 10th floor (which they had taken over entirely), he and a small group of fellow Junior Achievers were astounded.
“This is surreal. I’m so surprised I’m shaky,” he said. “He is so huge, this is really wonderful and especially for the reason he is here. I think it is great when celebrities use their status for causes such as this. I think it is really important that it be him because music is such a universal language, there is a bond among people because of that,” he said.
Crossman was on the board of the Youth Environmental Network of Canada.
“I’ve seen some of the videos of the seal pup slaughter and I have seen how inhumane it can be. I understand that the sealers feel it is their right, but I really appreciate celebrities who come in like him (McCartney) and raise the awareness of people,’’ Crossman said in an interview.
“Because without their status, nobody takes any notice, and the issue is out of sight, out of mind,” he said.
Sorry, Myles. Guess you lost one.
Proceed with the trashing of Mr. Crossman! Stupid? Misinformed? Used by he animal rights community?
Or maybe just raised properly?
"I have to say I haven’t actually seen any crab, lobster or shrimp rotting on wharves or piling up in fish plants."
Does the word, "freezer" mean anything to you?
Or the numerous reports of lost sales in Canada? If there were new Markets, there would be new sales. Thus - no lost revenue.
Duh?
American importers are buying less snow crab because they have stockpiles already frozen that nobody's buying. Simple as that.
To Anon who said:
"How come none of your regular newspapers have published either of these columns?
Are you being censored or are these web-only? Just curious."
Not at all anon. Some of the papers and sites are largely interesting in political commentary rather that an issue like this and may not publish it. Others likely will publish the commentary. I just sent this latest commentary out today so you might see it around tomorrow. As for the previous article that was not issued to other agencies but just used on this site.
Cheers
PS, to the anon who was wondering if I knew about freezers. The fact is everone recognizes "Lost U.S. sales" but that doesn't necessarily tranlate into actual lost sales. (thus the other markets)
I guess that concept is a little complicated for you to grasp. You folks like to see everything as black and white while I and many others recognize that there are many shades of grey to any subject.
Myles,
Put a poll on your front page:
Is the seal hunt humane?
Yes or No.
Thanks, Myles, for answering my question.
I don't agree with the seal hunt, but I thought both columns had valid points and deserved to be published. I was just hoping that the newspapers weren't afraid to put them in.
I think that there are a lot of different aspects to this whole debate that need to be talked about without all the name calling and accusations of being used by this group or that.
I don't see why everything has to be either or. I guess emotions get in the way of solutions.
Anyway, thanks.
Harold Wilkes, Scranton PA
Thanks, Myles, for answering my question.
I don't agree with the seal hunt, but I thought both columns had valid points and deserved to be published. I was just hoping that the newspapers weren't afraid to put them in.
I think that there are a lot of different aspects to this whole debate that need to be talked about without all the name calling and accusations of being used by this group or that.
I don't see why everything has to be either or. I guess emotions get in the way of solutions.
Anyway, thanks.
Harold Wilkes, Scranton PA
Hi Anon,
I did put a poll on my site a number of months ago for a laugh. Are you foolish enough to think a poll setup on a website discussing the seal hunt that is visited only by people with a deep interest in either side of the subject would result in a valid answer to that question?
If you do then you are likely a very nieve person.
Have seen several polls in Canadian newspapers....you already know the outcome. Several studies have been done. You asked if it should be banned, this is asking if it is humane. Myles, do you think it is humane? Y or N.
And Myles, have you witnessed a "hunt" yourself? Y or N.
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Time to stop the seal hunt
Tom Hennessy
Columnist
Long Beach Press Telegram
Americans are not perfect.
We have politicians in our penitentiaries, pedophile protectors in our
churches, fear mongers on our airwaves.
Thus, we are hardly in a position to point fingers at others,
especially those in a country with a history of being hospitable to the
United States.
But frankly, I have had it with Canada.
More precisely, I have had it with the maritime provincials who conduct
the annual death orgy known as the seal hunt.
No, the slaughter of a million baby seals over a three-year period is
not our planet's greatest outrage, as many Iraqi mothers will attest.
But it ranks pretty high on the world list of stupid and Neanderthal
pursuits, with practitioners who adhere to the No. 1 rule of
barbarians: No creature is too small or helpless to maim or kill.
Dumb, more dumb
To be blunt, I'm tired of writing about the seal hunt. You, I suspect,
may be tired of reading about it.
I've been doing both for 30 years. For the last 29 of them, the
hunters themselves have not said a single thing that is new. Each
year, they simply whine that they will be unable to get through life
unless they are allowed to kill seals and sell the pelts.
Actually, they may be right about that. They seem to lack the
initiative and/or the smarts to create another industry. Heaven
forbid, they should turn to cheese-making or, say, the manufacture of
medical equipment.
Whale-watching, now on the rise elsewhere on the Atlantic coast, has
been suggested to them, as have other forms of tourism. But such
ventures would require thought, initiative and real work. Killing a
baby seal requires nothing but a club and the absence of a conscience.
The hunters say they have been killing the seals since 1700 or some
such date, as if that makes it acceptable. Well, there were times when
we went barefoot and relied on the medicinal power of leeches.B We got
past those times.
The hunters also say that if they don't kill the animals, the latter
will populate to excess, as if, in time, Toronto subways will be jammed
with community seals.
Oh, Canada!
Its barbarity aside, another thing that bothers me about the seal hunt
is that it is so well, un-Canadian.
Canadians, at least those I have known, are a great people. And they
have been good to us.
Remember the brave Canadian diplomats who, at great risk to themselves,
helped six Americans escape Iran during the 1979-1980 hostage crisis?
Remember broadcaster Gordon Sinclair's great defense of the United
States 33 years ago? It still appears on the Internet as if he gave it
yesterday: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the
Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated
people on all the earth," he said.
Personally, I love Canada. From visits there, my wife and I have fond
memories of its people. A couple of years ago, for example, I wrote how
a Winnipeg couple once invited us into their home after we met in a
restaurant. We exchanged Christmas cards for years after.
This is the country we came to love. This is the Canada whose good name
needs to be rescued from the handful of Ottawa officials who condone
the seal hunt.
And the larger handful of barbarians who conduct it.
To Anon who asked me if I feel the hunt is humane and if I had ever actually witnessed it. Unlike all of the name calling and emotion running through some of the comments here you have asked two very good questions. Thank-you for the opportunity to set the record straight.
Let me start by saying that I have been accused of making money from the hunt, of working for the fur lobby and a bunch of other things by activist groups and their followers. None of this is true and one of the reasons that lead me to believe that they are quite capable of bending or ignoring the facts to suit thier own agenda.
I do not make any money from the hunt and neither does anyone in my family. I have nothing to gain financially or in any other way by defending the seal hunt.
To answer your question. No, I have never witnessed the hunt directly but I have seen the same film clips and heard the same infomation from both sides that many of the people on both sides of the arguement have seen. I have also seen video footage and documentaries that show the pro-hunt side. (I'm willing to bet many who oppose the hunt either haven't seen those or simply refused to watch them with an open mind).
Unlike those opposed to the hunt who listen only to activist groups that stand to make millions in donations I prefer to listen to the people who regulate the hunt and more importantly those who take part in it. You may see this as stupid but I would prefer to believe these people for a number of reasons.
The primary one being that they are the same people I see every day and who go to church on Sunday, donate to various charities, help their neighbours and so on in communities around the area. These are people who I recognize as good, honest and hard working individuals, not barbarians, and who I would prefer to believe over those who seek publicity and donations.
To your next question, whether or not I beleive the hunt is humane. The answer to that is as I've said before, not black and white but varied shades of grey.
I believe it is not as humane as some animal huntiing/harvesting practices but more humane than others. I believe that it is much more humane now than it was a few decades ago and every year it is becoming more so. Is it perfect? Of course not, but that is not a reason to ban it, simply a reason to improve the practices where possible.
I know I will be accused of "going off on a tangent" as everyone who says what I am about to say is accused but I don't believe it is a tangent.
The fact is that hunters kill millions of deer, bear, moose, elk, etc. for food and sport. Every year billions of chickens, pigs, cows and sheep are slaughtered for food and other products. To me the use of these animals is no differnent than the use of seals with one exception.
Unlike deer or mooose hunting, when seals are killed it is not hidden away in the woods where only one or two hunters can see it.
When seals are killed it is not hidden away in a slaughter house where only the employees working there can see the blood. Yes, red blood on white snow is not pretty but neither is gutting a deer or lopping the head off of a live chicken or killing a cow by ramming it in the skull but by and large these are the practices and they do not raise the ire of people who continue to eat the meat of those animals and to wear leather.
I for one would not want to go to the ice and kill a seal. Neither would I want to kill a deer or moose. I would also not want to work in a slaughter house where throats are cut and animals are quartered. I never have and never will but that is my choice and it is because those things are not somthing I would be comfortable doing. Does that give me the right to force the same sensibilities on someone else and to try to force them to bend to my will? I don't believe it does.
The major problem I have with protest groups and their followers should be pretty clear from my previous statements but let me clarify just a little.
I defend the hunt not because I have a vested interest or because it matters directly to me whether it goes ahead or not.
I defend the hunt because I do not believe that simply because someone finds the hunt emotionally taxing it gives them the right to coerce and blackmail an industry into submission.
Generally the individuals and organizations who do this are far removed from the actual activity and have no direct connection to the process. They have nothing to lose when an industry or practice is stopped but, in the case of the organizations protesting, everything to gain by opposing it.
When the practices or industries I've already mentioned are stopped from doing what they do (whether it be hunting animals for food and sport or industries such as sealing or beef production) peoples lives are directly impacted even if this is of little concern to those who try to force the closure.
The incomes of employees and their families are impacted whether they are the harvesters or those working in the secondary processing industryies or periferal business such as furriers, food distributors, medical suppliers, tanners, etc., or in the case of sport hunting the tourist, hotel and restaurant industries). Peoples lives are affected, millions of dollars are removed from an economy and products leave the market place. These are only the obvious impacts but they are never the less important ones.
I always like to ask protestors of the hunt if they wear leather belts, shoes or a coats. If they eat meat. If they wear wool or drink milk. If they take suppliments such as Omega 3. If they eat pate or for that matter even if they have ever used white glue.
I also wonder how many of those people have ever benefited from medications or medical procedures that were developed through animal testing. All of these things and many, many more are based on animal usage. It's not necessarily pretty but the world is not a pretty place and that's the straight story.
Once again thanks for asking two very good and hopefully honestly asked questions. Perhaps another good question would be do I think the way all animal industries are conducted can be improved, and the answer to that is yes.
Like any industry there is always room for improvement. I support the hunt because I am a realist.
I know my packaged meat didn't just appear at the local supermarket magically and I know my belt used to be the hide of a cow. My personal sense of reality lets me know that there are things many of us don't want to witness personally but that doesn't make them any less valid.
My belief is that as long as other animals are used for products around the world by the billions everyday there are many areas where improvements can be made and there is no reason to single out or stop the seal hunt while that is happening.
In light of what I just said, the only reason to stop the seal hunt would be if it were causing an extinction of the species. This is not the case. Yes I have a problem with the black market hunting of white rhinos for example but the seal herd is growing every year and only about 2 or 3 percent are being utilized.
I would also say my believe is that activists would be much better served to work toward improving practices rather than screaming for an end to the hunt.
While I concede there is room for improvement in any industry, there are other industries that I would try to improve long before targeting the hunt. The practice wrapping geese in wire and force feeding them for pate is one example. Another example are the practices used in the veal industry and the list goes on.
To close I just want to say that I have nothing to gain from an active seal hunt but then again activist groups have nothing to lose by trying to shut them down.
My fear is that destroying a sustainable industry simply because it upsets someones sensibilities may become more and more prevelent if it is allowed to gain a foot hold. In a scenario like that we all stand to lose a lot since most of the world's population would prefer not to be vegans. Then again I doubt that will happen since the groups usually go after easy targets rather than attacking major industries that have the funds and connections to fight back in any real way.
Thanks again for the questions and I'm sure my answer will be picked apart, taken out of context and perhaps specific parts published in other places where it will be made to look like I agree with the activist groups. I don't really care but I am glad to give my personal pespective and hopefully you were glad to get it.
Myles
PS. Excuse any typos as I just rattled this off without worrying too much about grammar or spelling. I wanted to ensure that I wrote exactly what I felt rather than self censoring myself and perhaps altering the content in some way.
My apologies. I have removed my last post because at the same time I posted it Myles had posted his. Mine was likely to spawn negative responses and I would like instead for people to respond to Myles.
Thanks for the consideration bnb. It is much appreciated.
I would also like to hear honest comments on my note but don't let that stop you or anyone else from speaking up and saying what you need to say. This is as much your forum as it is mine and that also goes for people I disagree with as well.
Thanks again,
Myles
Like all sealers and their advocates, you use more red herrings than a May Day Breakfast Buffet to cloak your argument in non-existent moral equivalency.
Its an old argument, and the same argument, so no use rehashing.
My biggest problem is with this statement - "I defend the hunt because I do not believe that simply because someone finds the hunt emotionally taxing it gives them the right to coerce and blackmail an industry into submission."
Why not? Is that not the right of any individual, to organize and protest against that which we find offensive? Slavery was such an industry. Liquor was such an industry, whaling, gambling, any dozen of others. And in most cases, those industries were abolished through protest, and in many cases they returned through protest.
There's an old quote from Wilde "The Indefensible in the pursuit of the inedible". He was talking about fox hunting. He just as well could have been talking about sealers.
I don't understand why you would argue that someone is morally obligated to support an industry they loathe. It is my right to pass the "Product of Canada" seafood and buy a better product at a better price from better people. If I find the seal hunt abhorrent, and those who participate barbaric, it is not only my right, but my obligation.
I'm sorry, but this sounds like the same old, whining, "we're poor and this is our way of life so leave us alone" crap sealers have been spewing for decades.
You are not entitled to anything, so quit bitching and behaving like you do. You do not have the right to kill seals, the right to our supermarkets, the right to my commerce. It is not a right, but a gift, and one I, and millions of others, choose to offer anybody else.
That's my position.
Thanks for your opinion GP. I agree, you are entitled to your opinion just as I'm entitled to mine. The difference with me is that if I don't like a product or a practice I don't buy that product (as you said you have the right to do). Where we differ is I don't then try to push others to do the same or try to cripple the industry. Perhaps a fine line for you to understand but my opinion is my opinion and I have every right to it correct?
Also, your quote shows just how much you know about the hunt. When you quoted Wilde who said "The Indefensible in the pursuit of the inedible". In fact seals are quite edible and quite good. They are eaten regularly by many in the area. Perhaps you should come to the area after the hunt has taken place and try some baked seal or some flipper pie. It is a delicacy I'm sure you would love (if you didn't know what it was before you tasted it anyway).
If seals are so edible, why is so much of the meat - damn near ALL of the meat - left out on the ice?
Patriot, I completely respect your opinion, your differentiation and your defense of your province.
My question for you would be, why don't you try and convince others to follow your lead? Are you so free market that Laissez Faire has infected your conscience?
I don't expect everybody to agree with me. I don't believe I alone can cripple an industry. But I also believe immoral industries deserve to be crippled. If something is wrong, the attitude "I'm not going to do anything because its just my opinion" is both self loathing (in that you don't believe your opinion does matter) and self defeating (since you do nothing while immorality rages around you).
And quite frankly, reading some of your past columns, I don't think that IS your position, since you are clearly out to discredit and destroy several organizations and individuals with whom you disagree, as you have been doing with Paul McCartney and his wife.
So far from taking the position of "tolerance", it seems you just use the word to cloak your support for one practice while blatantly engaging in the disparagement of those of whom disapprove.
And that's not an opinion. That's hypocrisy.
Myles. that was a great post and I might just have to copy it for future reference if you don't mind.
Every spring I have to deal with coworkers, friends, and many individuals I meet on my travels that when they find out I'm from canada and newfoundland the topic of the seal hunt usually comes up.
Not very long into the "conversation" I find it hard to stop myself from grabbing people by the scruff of the neck and giving them a slap. They insult and demean your country, your province, your family, thousands of workers and basically anyone else supporting the hunt. For someone to categorize a whole group of people like that without actually knowing anything about newfoundland, other than that they hunt seals, I find very close to being racist.
Anyway, I was about to go off on a tangent, listing, starting with racisit comments, all things more deplorable than hunting seals but I could be here for a year.
People just need to stand back and, trying not to bring emotion into it, rationally analyze and understand the hunt, then take your conclusions and measure it against what else is going on in the world. REALLY and TRUTHFULLY measure it against everything else thats out there. It would probably be very sobering.
My mother is a retired nurse. My father is a university professor and a leader in the church for over 30 years. Well educated, good people. Come March or April they are waiting for the call from there friend saying "Just got me flippers, dinner at my place". Are they barbaric?
My parents grew up in isolated communities where in the 1950's still used outhouses. Where a good winter was one where grandfather got a couple of moose and snared a few rabbits. Where the melting of the ice in the spring brought the coastal boats with fresh supplies. And where a good meal of seal was like eating at a five star restaurant.
My uncles fished all their lives. Getting up at 4 am, fishing all day, 7 days a week until the season for that particular fish was over. Hard working, simple men. Cutting and hauling their own logs to mill and build their own homes. Building their own boats. What they made barely gave them a somewhat comfortable life until the fishing in the 80's went to almost a standstill.
What do you tell you two kids when they want a bike or a doll for christmas and its that or heating your home?
What do you tell your kids when you want to build a better life for them and make sure they get a good education so they can get away from the harsh life that they had to endure but can't help them out with one penny? Sorry son.
A few of my relatives now enjoy a better life because my uncles went on the ice floes. They have good jobs, a great family where they can send their kids to summer camp and go on a trip every now and then, all because the opportunity was there for their fathers to make extra money(and get a few good meals) from the seal hunt.
THAT my friends is what pisses me off when celebrities and protesters speak of how its not really important financially and that the hunters are barbaric, stupid, bad people.
Do not judge from sitting in front of your computer in the middle of Iowa.
Do not judge from your coffee shop in downtown Seattle or Toronto.
Do not judge from your cushy condo and your 50-100K year salary where it gives you the luxury of paying whatever price you can for organic tomatoes and that gortex ski jacket.
Do not judge sitting around playing the bongos with your friends on the street corner begging for change and "finding yourself"
Sorry for the rant. First post ever on the inernet.
CR
So because generations of your family lacked the initiative and good sense to educate themselves and provide the best possible life for their families, because your relatives willingly chose a life in an industry they themselves helped destroy the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to what most everyone considers an immoral slaughter?
When is anyone in your Godforsaken Province going to stand up and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!!!!
Sealing may well be a way of life. What does that say about you? Generations may follow their fathers into the dying fisheries. What does that say about you?
Everyone in America is a descendant of immigrants, and every one of them came here to better themselves.
Hundreds of thousands of Mexicans come to this country every year to pick avocadoes in sweltering heat for peanuts. You think they do it so that their children can follow in their footsteps?
Grow. Up. Become Men. Do Yourselves Proud and Learn a Skill. Being poor and uneducated is not an excuse, its motivation.
And until you do grow up and better yourselves, the world will treat you exactly like a whiny, petulant, ignorant barbarian should be treated.
Like shit.
Hello CR. It may have been your first post on the internet but it was one that clearly expressed your point and I give you my congrats. As for copying my article feel free to use it as needed.
I'm sure your words will be turned against you as is usually the case in these situations but don't let that get to you. You made some valid points.
As for GP who said:
"If seals are so edible, why is so much of the meat - damn near ALL of the meat - left out on the ice?" the answer is because of the biases of people like you. In this province it is eaten but we have a small population and that has an impact on how much is marketed. This situation is being remedied. As I said before, there is room for improvement in any industry.
I would like to point out an article that coincidentally appeared just today on the VOCM news web site containing the following text:
"...Fur breeders say protesters are having little or no effect on the price of fur products - including seal skin. Merv Wiseman of the Fur Breeders of Newfoundland and Labrador, told VOCM Backtalk with Bill Rowe that prices continue to climb, despite an advertising blitz by the anti-hunt movement.
A resident of Ferryland says there's a great future in the seal meat business. Gerard Kavanaugh told VOCM Open Line with Randy Simms he's started his own company, Kavanaugh Meats, which processes seal meat for sale..."
"...Kavanaugh says his products do quite well, especially his flavoured sausages. Kavanaugh says the potential is there in the seal meat processing industry for 25-hundred jobs to be created in the province. Kavanaugh says the Marine Institute and National Research Council are helping with his new found enterprise and he believes the market is limitless."
Also GP, you ask me why I don't try to convince others to see or follow my point of view. I ask you, where the hell have you been and what are you smoking?
The whole point behind this site and the comments I make is to get my views across and try to get others to move in my direction or at least to listen to my side of the issue. As I said before, that's your right as well but that doesn't mean I try to force the issue by creating embargos or try to ruin business ventures by promoting boycotts. Once again you don't seem to get the concept that it is one thing to have an opinion and share it with others in an effort to move public opinion to a point where your views are accepted and acted upon by the people involved. It is quite another thing to force your views down someones throat with financial threats and industrial blackmail. Subtle shades of grey once again my friend. Subtle shades of grey. I hope you can understand that.
Myles, you openly campaign to discredit organizations that oppose the seal hunt. While you may be a little too adept to openly say "don't give them money" that is undoubtedly your purpose, so don't get all and high mighty, cause if that's your standard, you're just as big a whore as the people organizing the boycott.
Different sides of the same coin.
And how is not wanting to eat something a bias? I don't like fish and am pretty damn sure I wouldn't like whale. Does that make me biased against the japanese?
Your government poured $20 million into developing seal markets and came up with squat. Mr. Kavanaugh best familiarize himself with Canadian Bankruptcy law.
And if pelt prices are so - who's buying them? the Russians? Norwegians? Chinese? you just lost a 3rd of your market with the Danes, with more markets closing all the time.
You think maybe the fact that he's a NFLD furrier might cause him to shade the truth just a wee bit?
Nah. Of course you don't.
thank you once again GP for proving that you actually don't understand the shades of grey. No, I don't care if you give your money to these groups. What I would prefer is that when you do you at least have the truth to base your donation on. I would also rather that these groups put the money to some use other than undermining industries that are valid.
Also, seal meat is quite good. There is a growing market for it. Fur prices are on the rise as a matter of fact they are worth a great deal more now than they were just a few years ago and it continues to increas in value. I don't know if you understand supply and demand but a rise in price usually means more people want a product than the supply chain can deliver. Think about that.
As for your not liking fish I bet you never went out and tried to force others not to eat it because you don't like it. You might want to try the same tactic with seals.
Please don't think for one minute you are making some great and wonderful arguement that only you can make. Believe me you have yet to come up with one unique thought or perspective to add to this issue. As I said in the article, nothing new under the sun.
We should be sealing the fate of an inhumane ritual
Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
Published: Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn quipped last week that Sir Paul
McCartney, if he thinks he can halt Canada's seal hunt, will be travelling a
long and winding road -- remember that Beatles song?
Hearn, a politician I've come to admire through years of interviewing, might
reconsider his smart-assed comment if he viewed some Internet footage on the
U.S. Humane Society's website. The video shows clearly why the hunt is
nothing but bad news and isn't worth perpetuating.
(Go to www.hsus.org/ follow the McCartney links to either the Video "Bearing
Witness..." or "Rebecca Aldworth's Journal...")
Seals that have been clubbed are shown writhing in their blood, waiting to
die. Their eyes are open. Every arduous movement of their bodies signals
mortal pain. These aren't involuntary post mortem twitches but sentient
mammals in agony, awaiting death's release.
This is the fundamental problem with the seal hunt. It's an exercise in
mayhem on ice floes.
It clearly isn't possible to station a fisheries officer on every ice pan to
ensure sealing regulations are respected.
Sealers don't execute quick kills and methodically collect the booty. They
often leave bodies behind, and when you're killing a moving herd on an
undulating chunk of ice in brutal weather, you cannot expect any hunter to
be systematic or particular about the way he practises his vocation.
As someone who reported in Newfoundland for years, I've in fact experienced
pack ice conditions in winter. I know whereof I speak.
Sure, let's have a seal hunt -- after all, we kill and butcher all manner of
animals; how hypocritical would it be to say we should kill chickens and
cows but not seals, because they're cuter. But in the name of all that is
right and decent, let's have that seal hunt only if we can do it humanely.
And we cannot. We prove that in spades year after bloody year. As a past
defender of the hunt, I've had to conclude that the hunt's conditions and
locations make quick, humane kills impossible.
McCartney may be another in a long lineup of know-it-all rich celebs who
spend a day at the front and pronounce from on high (in fact, I found his
analysis both respectful and thoughtful). But that doesn't, in and of
itself, make him wrong.
This issue goes to a principle. Do we as a society insist on harvesting
animals humanely? It's up to each individual to decide. But we must bear
witness before deciding, so I urge everyone to view the internet clips.
Two other points to consider once you've decided whether the hunt is humane:
(1) Seals are killed primarily for fur, not meat. (2) While the white-coated
seal pups aren't killed, they stop being pups and are open to kills after 12
days of life. Twelve days of life.
While this is our business, not McCartney's nor the world's, it's also our
welfare at stake in this fight.
Because the fuss over the hunt has escalated year by year, it has started
taking a toll on Canada's reputation globally and on its economy.
The annual landed value of seals is $16.5 million, providing small but
significant benefit to one per cent of Newfoundlanders. It's not known how
much Fisheries and Oceans spends regulating the hunt and cultivating
markets.
What is known is that Ottawa spends $78 million by way of a Canadian Tourism
Commission to rosy up our reputation for tourists. (Foreign tourists spent
$18 billion here in 2004.) Better to chop the commission's budget and hand
cash to the sealers.
Animal-rights groups are organizing a Canadian seafood boycott that's
escalating. They maintain the boycott -- launched in March of 2005 -- has
already cost Newfoundland $156 million in lost snow crab sales.
Some 400 restaurants and companies, mainly in the U.S., have signed on to
the boycott so far. The groups currently are putting pressure on Red
Lobster, with 670 restaurants, to stop buying Canada's seafood.
If the seal hunt were humane, Canadians should be telling these groups where
to go stuff it. But many who view the video footage will be disturbed.
At this point Canadians need to begin pondering whether we're acting out of
little more than bravado and defiance.
byaffe@png.canwest.com
C The Vancouver Sun 2006
GP you brush off facts like sand flys. Anonomous CR offered some context and history which you simply take as a story of the educated trying to make a living. CR also asks that you "REALLY and TRUTHFULLY measure it against everything else thats out there." That's a very valid point.
The truth is that the end result of your argument is simply "end the hunt". That is as far as you can see. In order for this to be the logical conclusion of this issue you cannot debate that anything with the hunt can be fixed or changed.
Therefore each arguments as in
a) The historical right/ privilage of humans to hunt these animals for sustenance. Be it Innuit or otherwise. b) the utility of the whole animal c) the humane treatment of the animals
d) humane harvesting of the animals
e) scientific data that can show support of a healthy population
f) the hunt provides an economic benefit or even an ecological benefit in the form of population management.
I'm not using any of these as my argument or claiming they are valid, but given the hypothetic resolution of each of these arguments would the seal hunt still need to end from your point of view?
If "YES the hunt must end in spite of all of these" - we are in a debate that can not be resolved for you.
If "No" - under what conditions would you accept the hunt to take place?
Paul McCartney actually thoought the seals were an endangered species when he came here. The DFO representative enlightened him on the plane from St John's NewFIN land to PEI.
As for the meat not being used that can be directly attributed to the ARA's protests wheneer and whereever a market was found. So this is a mute point and one which you have to take up with the ARA's.
As for the seal drowning on it's own blood. No self respecting NL'ian would ever allow an animal to suffer like this while standing by watching and filming for over an hour.
If these ARA's really wanted to see a humane hunt they wouldn't be trying to ban outright the hunt but rather would be advocating more humane killing practices. The fact is these ARA's don't want to see the hunt stop because they raise 60% of their annual funds from this one protest.
If anything they want all animal killing to stop whether it is humane or not. I guess until all animals are killed using lethal injection there will be no let up by these Eco terrorists who don't care about the balance of nature as much as they do about balancing their own check books.
http://www.furcommission.com/news/newsC7.htm
Can someone point me to some information on how this boycott is effecting sales of crab from newfoundland?
I just finished talking to my friend at the department of fiseries in newfoundland and he said that the quota of crab hasn't declined in years. Its at the point where they could increase it somewhat if they wanted but right now its at a very healthy, sustainable level, unlike some other species.
Maybe the protesters and boycotts are actually making a difference, not the one they wanted but a diffeerence none the less, in keeping demand at a environmentally balanced level. Interesting !
CR
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrkti/tdst/engdoc/tr_homep.html
Stats on Canadian Trade
WASHINGTON (November 22, 2005) – In a letter to Prime Minister Paul Martin released today, famous financial and business leader Edward A. Kangas warned that continuing the annual commercial seal hunt could bring ruin to Canada’s fisheries economy and the viability of that nation’s fisheries. Kangas, former global chairman and CEO of Deloitte & Touche and currently a member of the Board of Directors of four New York Stock Exchange companies, cited the increasing success of a boycott of Canadian seafood, instituted by The Humane Society of the United States, as a major factor in the multi-million dollar losses suffered by the commercial fishing industry.
Two thirds of Canadian seafood is exported to the United States, producing $2.8 billion annually for the Canadian economy and making the industry a viable target for a boycott.
Undeniable cruel, the annual commercial seal hunt, which results in the clubbing deaths of hundreds of thousands of baby seals, is an off-season activity conducted by commercial fishermen from Canada’s East Coast. Even in Newfoundland, where more than 90 percent of the sealers live, sealing income accounts for less than one percent of that province’s gross domestic product and under three percent of the landed value of Newfoundland’s fishery.
“I and other leaders in the business community are amazed that Canada would allow its international reputation and fishing industry to be so heavily compromised for this economically marginal activity,” Kangas stated. “It is even more surprising when one considers that as the seafood boycott gains momentum, global markets for seal products are closing. Moreover, the damage to Canada’s international reputation and economy is growing exponentially. While the boycott focuses primarily on Canadian seafood and snow crabs, more and more people are now dispensing with tourism and other Canadian products.”
Rather than continuing the seal hunt, Kangas recommended that the Canadian government institute a fair sealing license retirement program, which would provide sealers with fair compensation for any lost revenue and a cost-effective exit for the federal government. “It would seem reckless and irresponsible for the government to allow the seal hunt to continue given the damage which may result to the economic viability of Canada’s fisheries and fishing communities,” Kangas said.
To greg pruitt, baltimore md, I find you to be an ignorant and racist person. I am a Newfoundlander, and VERY proud of that fact! I am also FEMALE, and can READ, am EDUCATED and can also respect the feelings and opinions of others. You should be ashamed of yourself. You don't have to agree with Myles' opinion, but you also do not have to come on here and insult those of us who live here. We are NOT stupid or lazy!!
Ms,
You insult yourself by defending this barbaric pratice.
Myles, the only argument I was attempting to make is that you are a hypocrite.
You say you oppose trying to destroy "valid" industries, yet you do nothing but slander SS, IFAW, HSU and others in an attempt to destroy their sources of revenue.
That is the definition of hypocrisy.
To the anonymous female, not only do I believe that you are stupid and lazy, my guess from your tone is that you are probably quite obese as well.
And yes, you are ignorant if you think being anti-Newfoundlanders is racist. Newfies aren't a race.
The other anon - your own DFO has admitted to more than $139 million in lost sales. NOT lost sales to america, as Myles would have you believe, but lost sales PERIOD.
Scientists have also been urging a cut-back in the quota of snow crab, believing that overfishing (my, what a shock) is threatening the stocks.
Ask yourself this. America's fisheries are stable and profitable, have a higher median income than the auto industry and don't require anyone to engage in their most sadistic sexual fantasy reliving what they did to their daughters last night.
Perhaps it might behoove you all to learn something from us.
Oh, sorry - A Newfie LEARNING???? What was I thinking?
BNB,
The existence of one wrong does not excuse the existence of another.
There is no comparison between slaughterhouses and the seal hunt. Myles bullshit aside, nobody eats seal meat and try as the DFO has at taxpayer sense, nobody wants to. Maybe its a cultural thing for you, like Catholics and Fruit Cake, but face facts - the tons of meat left on the ice each year prove the point.
There is no comparison between the seal hunt and medical research.
BNB, you make the same crap argument you all make - "its all we know how to do."
Tough shit. learn something else. Coal Miners have. Buggy makers have. You'll be better off for it.
FACT - the hunt is inhumane, and every reputable study and common moral conscience says so.
FACT - the present quotas are not sustainable - Pierre Daoust, David Lavigne both say so.
FACT - you're not hunting for sustenance and nobody makes a living solely on the seal hunt (except maybe Myles)
FACT - you don't utilize the whole animal. In fact, you utilize damn near none of the animal.
FACT - the seal hunt makes All of Canada appear to be as barbaric, inhumane, useless, worthless and meaningless as the sick fucks who take to the ice.
Now I know that doesn't bother any of you, since you don't know any better.
But it clearly bothers the overwhelming majority of your countrymen, and you should at least have some respect for them.
I tell people not to eat fish.
When its caught by canadian fishermen.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/566342047?ltl=1141854066
See who thinks it is humane.
Bill P. Love your spirit. Don't waste so much time here, go sign some restaurants. I got two last week and will have another this week. L.A. is lining up to sign.
I am not in L.A.
www.restaurantsforseals.org
to greg pruitt: I am not obese, nor lazy, I teach at a College here in Newfoundland and am quite successful. (just to let you know, a trim 127 lbs, want me to take a picture of the weighing scale to prove it???)
I must admit, I would not be so proud to be from America, Jerry Springer ring any bells?
Greg first a correction. I have never said, nor do I belive that Seal Hunting is "all we know how to do". The traditional right to do something is one of the weaker arguments in my opinion. Whatever you think of us (and you've made that clear) the seal hunt is an aspect of our culture; it is not the definitive of our culture.
That's not an argument I have ever made.
Greg thanks for replying to me but you did not answer my question. It is quite simple. Given the hypothetical argument that all conditions of humane killing, full utilization of the animal etc. Would you then support the hunt?
Yes or No?
Let me make it simpler still. Under what conditions would you support the hunt? If never then say so.
BNB, let me clear, I don't think all Newfies are barbarians, nor all Coastal Canadians.
But sealers, and those who excuse them? yeah.
To answer your question. First, understand your hypothetical is impossible.
There is no humane way to massacre baby animals. None. The act itself, whether seals or veal, is on its face completely barbaric, immoral, and inhumane.
Unlike veal, and despite Myles' incessant lying, this is not for meat and its not a hunt.
Its a slaughter for fur.
Seals are skinned alive. Seals are left to drown on their own blood. Sealers are not professional, not compassionate and not worth anything less than the complete, abject disgust they generate from everyone outside Atlantic Canada.
Why is fur bad? because its not a by-product like leather and because its completely unnecessary. There are more than 1200 insulating fibers known to man. Fur is a vanity item - bought for one reason only - to prove you can afford it.
Are there worse evils in the world than the seal hunt? Yes. For example, Conflict Diamonds. FYI Canada does not require a COO on imported diamonds. You should change that.
But this IS evil, and what's worse, its an evil perpetrated out of arrogance. Jackasses like Myles bemoan the lack of opportunities - turn that around. Who would want to invest in the future of barbaric club wielding sadists.
Instead, you all attack anybody who dares say this is wrong. Myles wrote 2 articles on Sir Paul - not one, 2. He attacks Paul Watson and Rebecca Aldworth and the Sea Shepherd and the IFAW and Dr. David Lavigne and Rick Smith and Matthew Scully and Margaret Wente and Barbara Jaffe - you see the pattern?
Jack Troake said, "this has been putting food on our tables and roofs over our head for 500 years". And not one of you felt the need to cry over that statement. Which is sad, because THAT is sad.
Again - Look at Mexican Migrant workers - they bust their ass for peanuts so their kids won't have to, yet sealers not only pass this same life of hardship from one generation to the next, they're proud to do so.
Maybe sealers don't hunt seals because they're poor. Maybe they're poor because they hunt seals.
Myles won't understand what that means. I hope you do. And I hope I answered your question.
As for the female Anon, it is completely unsurprising that White Trash like you would latch onto Jerry Springer.
No Greg I'm afraid that does not answer my question. I appreciate that you acknowledge we are not all barbarians. I also appreciate the opinion that what I ask to consider as a hypothetic is difficult, in your words "impossible." You then went on to state some of the same reasons you disagree, the animals are babys and they are utilized for fur and vanity.
I acknowledge all of that. Now I hope you can answer for me simply. If only older seals were killed and if they were used for meat, and it wasn't left to waste on the ice. If my hypothetic were not impossible.
Would you support the seal hunt then? Under what conditions would you support the hunt, if at all?
Yes or No and Why.
I will never support a hunt for baby seals. Ever.
Your hypotheticals are not only impossible that sanctimonious. Your sealers would not engage in a massive hunt for older seals. 1) it would be too hard 2) the pelts wouldn't be worth as much and 3) older seals can swim, meaning 4) Sealers would actually have to WORK and 5) if they were actually willing to work, they wouldn't be sealers.
Myles can propagandize all he wants and you can imagine azure fields and roses til the sky turns Carolina Blue but the facts are 1) this is not a humane industry, 2) its not a profitable industry (taking out all the little gems the DFO and CG to provide to balance the ledgers, like paying for meat that isn't actually supplied) 3) its neither a cultural right (hate to tell you this, the Newfie "Race" is Caucasian) nor an economic necessity.
Its just a bunch of rednecks with rifles and clubs proving to the world they are exactly what everybody thinks they are.
Consider this, BNB. Myles has written about Paul and Heather, the Sea Shepherd, Jerry Vlasik, all matter of seal hunt opponents...
When was the last time he actually wrote about SEALERS and what they do out on the ice? For such a proud, cultural tradition and well regulated, sustainable, humane industry, Myles spends precious little time singing its praises compared to the amount of time he spends bitching about people who make more than he does.
For that matter, when was the last time any "supporter" actually wrote about sealers and what they do on the ice?
I googled. Couldn't find a single news hit.
Why is that?
Can't wait to hear those excuses.
Quick answer to your question. No excuses. There is quite a large amount of literature on the seal hunt and sealers. Not a lot of it modern. The best example of what you looked for is the film "My Ancestors were Rogues and Murderers" by Annie Troake. Not yet available from the National Film Board. The format is film so googling isn't going to get you much. Have a look for it when it gets developed for the general market. It likely will not change your mind but it is an excellent example of what you looked for.
Thanks for your answer also. That confirms my thoughts. I'll assume you put the word "baby" seals in there for effect since we were talking about adult seals at the time, and that maybe tells a lot of where you are coming from. The fact is you will never support a hunt. All of these arguments are mute in your mind. It is pointless for you to argue humane, age, utility or even the demeanor of the hunter. Nothing will change your perception of this because the image on the video is your inspiration and apparently your only incentive.
I guess that confirms what someone else said that this is an emotional vs a logical argument.
The only thing that remains unresolved in my mind then is "Why the seal hunt?" Is it because you have never seen video of a fox farm or mink trap so you can pretend it doesn't exist? Maybe that's not fair because of lot of the Animal Rights movement in general does protest these. But why not to the same degree as the Seal Hunt. The Humane Society of the US didn't fly the McCartney's over to visit a fox farm. The IFAW doesn't have a Mink as their logo. You have to agree that in the context of animal welfare the seal hunt is a huge issue. My argument is that it is unfairly a large issue because the target is easy and the money to be made is huge.
That's my argument to you. I give you some words from Paul Watson of the Sea Shepherd Society to illustrate my point "I think that of all the animals in the world or any environmental problem in the world the harp seal is the easiest issue to raise funds on... it's easier to make money and because it's easier to make a profit because there are over a thousand animals on the endangered species list, and the harp seal isn't one of them... the seal is very easy to exploit as an image. We have posters, we have buttons, we have shirts, all of which portray the head of a baby seal with the tears coming out of its eyes. Baby seals are always crying because – its - they're always - the salt tears keep their eyes from freezing. But they have this image - they're baby animals, they're beautiful, and because of that, coupled with the horror of a sealer hitting them over the head with a club, it's an image that just goes right to the heart of — of animal lovers all over North America.”
Hi folks, good debate even if it is a little childish with the name calling on occasion. I prefer sticking to the facts where possible but I guess some factions here don't have enough valid facts to support thier case so they have to resort to virtual yelling and verbal abuse.
Just to respond to a couple of points. First to the Anon who quoted "Two thirds of Canadian seafood is exported to the United States, producing $2.8 billion annually"
This person couldn't understand why such a major impact as a 100 to 140 million dollar loss in U.S. sales wouldn't stop the hunt and many are so proud the boycott is so effective. Reality check folks. 100 to 140 million represents only about 3% of the 2.8 billion in sales. Not really a crushing blow. Keep working on it folks you do have a "Long and winding road" ahead.
To those who wonder why I write articles about people like Watson and McCartney and so on rather than in favour of the hunt the reason is simple. I write about these folks because they spread mis-information. I don't spend all of my time defending any industry but when I hear out and out mis-information about my province being spread I say something about it and in doing so I do indeed defend the hunt as well.
Specifically to GP who said about a female contributor:
"As for the female Anon, it is completely unsurprising that White Trash like you would latch onto Jerry Springer."
You have proven that your opinions are nothing but the venom of a narrow minded, bigoted and poorly raised individual. Simply by attacking an individual you know nothing about and calling her "white trash" you have exhibited exactly the type of narrow minded and ignorant mental capacity you claim others exhbit. You sir (and I use that term loosely) are a jackass. If you have no more valid arguements than to verbally attack others who disagree with your stance you are winning the arguement for our side, not your own.
Bye the way, I intend to continue writing as many articles as I see fit on this subject and any other I have an interest in. If people like GP or anyone else don't like that then they have the right not to read them. Of course that is not the angle they will persue simply because their sort always prefers not to do that but rather to try to force others to their thinking.
BNB,
Actually, I protest fur farms and other abuses. One of the mistakes supporters of the seal hunt make is thinking the seal hunt is the only thing on opponents minds. If Myles ever writes about fox hunting, canned hunts, etc...believe me, you'll see an similar flood on the threads.
The other mistake you make is thinking that the existence of greater evils excuses yours. I'm sorry, but I find that thinking to be pathetic.
I used the word "baby" because they are baby seals - pups, in the biological sense. I use words like "inhumane" and "barbaric" because they are completely accurate in their depiction.
That said, I will look for the documentary you mentioned, and have written down the name. Any idea when its going to be on video?
Myles, the only one spreading disinformation is people like you. You attack the opposition and say they're spreading "lies" simply because you have no facts to back you up.
In the last day or so, Danny Williams was confronted by the IFAW with his lie that they find the hunt humane, and backtracked with another lie that both the CVMA and WWF have found the hunt humane. A simple phone call to either group will disprove both claims as well.
That's misinformation. Suggesting that 90% of seals are shot and not clubbed is misinformation, since studies have shown the majority of seals at the Front are shot AND clubbed.
Saying the FBI has an open terrorist file on Greenpeace and PETA isn't just misinformation, its a lie - one that the FBI itself confirmed.
You don't write about sealers and what they do on the ice because you know that the more the world knows, the worse its going to get, and you're too smart to contribute to your own destruction.
As for the boycott, a $140 million loss versus $16 million gain is is close to 8X the difference of the hunt. As a % of exports it may be minimal but it works out to more than $3500 in lost revenue per fisherman - close to what the median sealer makes. So while the barbarians maybe regenerating their income, moral fishermen are suffering.
Which suits me just fine.
Looks like the seal hunt might not go ahead due to the thickness of the ice. Good for the protesters, bad for the sealers, and who really cares for the rest of us. I don't like seal meat and I can buy my gortex jacket thank you very much. But I believe in the right for a hunt to happen as long as its done as humanely as possible and it doesn't risk putting them on the endangered list.
The only problem with stopping the hunt is that down the road thousands of seals will starve due to population explosion and lack of food or there will have to be a huge cull of the population which will be a wasteful and nasty mess. Of course the protesters will use this as a great photo op to put into print for the next 30 years.
Speaking of promotional material. Liable suits are everywhere in the states and someone like Tom Cruise can sue a magazine for just saying he's gay.
What about the use of whitecoats in all the protest organizations media. The killing of whitecoats hasn't happened since 1987 (??) but they still use this image.
There has got to be a slander lawsuit in there somewhere. Force all promotion material to only use pictures of the actual seals that are killed.
Oh, Greg MD, Maryland has 34.8 percent of people with some post secondary education or more. Newfoundland has about 39 percent. And that doesn't include the 10,000 or more people who have to leave every year to find work. Its also amazing the number of newfies that get job offers from the states because the good ol US of A can't find enough highly trained people at home.
God, I try not to stereotype people like you have done in your posts about newfies but man, the ignorant, arrogant, short sighted yank attitude spews outta your words a little too easy my man.
CR
Steve here,
Since I'm at work on break I only have a moment, but thought the following URL's might be of interest to the actual debate.
Regarding the backtracking by the Premier, there are of course those who will now call him a liar, but the link on the WWF site is interesting in that it chose not to actually carry the entire content of the premier's letter to the organization. Sorry I'm always suspicious of editted material.
Here's that URL..
http://www.wwf.ca/NewsAndFacts/NewsRoom/correction/Default.asp
Since we're talking about press, publicity and perception here's another posting from another environmental website which has the letter from the IWAF published earlier
http://enn.com/aff.html?id=1165
And for those who want to read what Williams wrote to the IWAF in response to the public letter here's a URL to his letter in response
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/0309n05.htm
Frankly, having read several of the documents the premier referenced, I tend to actually think his statements are relatively accurate both in the original show, and his letters.
Just my two cents worth
In response to GP in MD:
You claim to also protest fur farms and other abuses and say that if I ever wrote an article about other fur issue you would respond. I can appreciate that you would respond to my comments and you may indeed protest other fur issues.
Having said all of taht, I would appreciate it if you could backup your statement about protesting other fur industry practices. I ask you to please direct me and the rest of the people on this site to any online examples of comments you have made on other sites about things like fur farms prior to getting involved in this debate just a few days ago.
Also, I hear people saying that Premier Williams back tracked on his comments from the Larry King show due to the letter made public by the IFAW asking for an apology. I don't believe he did back track. In fact I believe he defended his position quite well.
Premier Williams is a well respected and intelligent attorney who has fought and won precedent setting cases in the past. One of those was the first use of the battered wife defence in the Country which he won. I don't believe he needs me or anyone else fighting his battles for him and I also don't believe he is nieve enough to go on international television and make statements he couldn't back up.
What follows is Premier Williams response to the IFAW and although it is not included here he also sent along the supporting documents that back up his statements.
Here is the response in its entirety and it is also available at www.gov.nl.ca
Premier Danny Williams today released the following letter, in response to a public letter from the IFAW to the Premier. The letter was sent directly to the IFAW March 8, 2006:
March 8, 2006
Mr. Fred O’Regan, President
International Fund for Animal Welfare
c/o ccutter@ifaw.org
Dear Mr. O’Regan:
Though you chose to send a letter to me publicly rather than actually sending it directly to me personally or to my office, I feel compelled to respond to some of the issues raised in your letter. There are many, many inaccuracies in the public domain on the seal harvest that I have and will continue to refute, however, for the purposes of this letter I will address the specific items raised in your public letter.
You state: "…not a single reputable "expert" or "veterinary group" that has observed the hunt and called it humane."
First of all, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association found that 98 percent of seals are killed in an acceptably humane manner (Sept. 2002 report).
Also, a report, funded by the World Wildlife Fund, by an independent veterinarians working group August 2005 made the following statement: "… the Canadian harp seal hunt is professional and highly regulated by comparison with seal hunts in Greenland and the North Atlantic. It has the potential to serve as a model to improve humane practice and reduce seal suffering within the other hunts."
I would also like to point out that this report makes the following commentary, which logically directly links to the spread of inaccurate and misleading information by organizations like the IFAW. This includes the incessant misuse of photo opportunities with white coats which are illegal to hunt. The report states that: "the perception of the seal hunt seems to be based largely on emotion and on visual images that are often difficult for even experienced observers to interpret with certainty. Campaigns and rhetoric that play to the emotion at the expense of understanding and communication of factual information will neither increase the use of humane efforts nor reduce animal suffering."
Perhaps your organization would care to explain why to this very day you have photos of white coats on your web site and you continue to promote photo opportunities involving these seals, when in fact it has been illegal to hunt these since 1987. I find it ironic that you would lecture anyone on facts, when your entire money-making campaign is based on blatantly false information. Surely with the $77 million USD raised by your organization in 2004, you can afford to update your web site.
You state: "…seal hunt is actually an intervention to save seals from starvation…I would welcome any evidence."
First of all, from a sustainability perspective let me state again that the seal herd is extremely healthy and despite increased allowable catch the population has tripled to 5.8 million since the 1970's. We have taken our annual allowable catch every year while the herd continues to grow substantially. Over-populated seal, like other animal populations, can result in the death of seals as a result of starvation. The seal population is at an all-time high therefore their food source is being stressed as well. This would likely result in many seals dying a very slow and painful death as a result of not being able to find food. In fact, we have experienced in this province seals coming into shallow water bays and rivers – where they have never been seen before – in desperate search of food. This is perhaps why the United Nations and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature have recognized that Sustainable Use of the world’s living resources is not only legal and appropriate, but that such practices contribute to conservation of biodiversity by developing protocols which guide that harvest and "constituencies of interest."
You state: "….products from this commercial slaughter are used to shelter and fuel….I would welcome any evidence you have to back up these ludicrous assertions."
Historically, seal skins have been used by people in northern regions for shelter and the oil used in the same manner as fuel today. I must reiterate that seal oil is developed for industrial use and is used for medicinal purposes in the form of omega-3 oils which are used for heart problems, arthritis problems, menstrual problems and liver problems. The purpose of my statement was to refute the very inaccurate statements made by Ms. McCartney that the seal harvest only takes place to get fur for the fashion industry. This is an absolutely false statement.
You state: "…you sought….to link IFAW to FBI terrorist watch lists…."
My statement on Larry King Live was very clear on this issue. My direct quote was: "And let me tell you the FBI right now have a file opened in their terrorism division investigating organizations like this, including the PETA organization, from a terrorism perspective." This information is public knowledge and there was, in fact, an article written on this very issue by the Washington Post on December 20, 2005. I did not reference the IFAW in this statement.
A few other points I would add. The hunt is heavily regulated, and closely monitored each and every year. The methods used in today's professional seal harvest kill seals quickly and humanely. Licensing policy requires a commercial sealer to work under an experienced sealer for two years in order to obtain a professional license. Personal use sealers must undergo training and have a license. As I have stated many times, our goal is to have a regulated and monitored harvest. This includes prosecuting offenders, which I support. What I do not support is misrepresentation of the facts for monetary gain by organizations.
Thank you for the opportunity to hear more of the facts surrounding the seal harvest in Canada.
Sincerely,
DANNY WILLIAMS, Q.C.
Premier – Province of Newfoundland & Labrador
The CVMA has made no such statement.
They published an article in their journal where a DFO shill named Daoust and his allies made such a conclusion based on faulty methodology and incorrect assumptions, pointed out at length and in detail in a peer review by, among others, David Lavigne.
A simple phone call to the CVMA would have established their official position as having no official position.
Even when caught in a lie, Danny's solution - like all Newfies - is to simply lie again.
Myles, I post on a lot of boards, on a lot of topics, and always use my own name.
You want to know what I think, search around.
Thanks for the dialogue Greg. I appreciate that you have responded to me directly. I have the confirmation I was looking for.
My appreciation ends there. I had to hold my hands away from the keyboard yesterday because I did want you to respond to my inquiry.
But now I will say what I wanted to say. You say your only issue is with sealers and supporters. Yet a lady posted that was neither a sealer, nor a supporter. She merely said she was offended by your insults. You responded with more insults. As a matter of fact your verbal vomit was spewed to her on international woman's day.
So to the College Instructor a belated happy International Woman's day. I have said to Myles that this freedom of speech I believe is a great privilage. The females of our society have fought for these sorts of rights in very recent history.
And to Greg. Clean up your language. How do you expect anyone to respect your point of view when you are apparently not capable of common respect yourself. She wasn't a sealer or supporter so that's not your excuse. You have an innate need to belittle and malign and that is particularly pityful.
To Greg Pruitt: I've taken your advice and done a search on your name. I've googled you in the standard google search, googled you in a blog search and even googled "Greg Pruitt", "Greg Pruitt Fur" and Greg Pruitt Baltimore" I won't call you a liar but I could find absolutely nothing.
If in fact you are active in other areas of fighting the fur industry I haven't found a record of it. Why don't you just save time and tell us where we can find this evidence of your caring beyond this particular issue?
By the way, I don't spend a great deal of time defending the seal hunt, once a year actually, usually between March and April when the activists have their yearly fund raising campaigns as they are now doing but if you google my name I'm sure you can find something on my take on the topic. Why can't I find anything on you if you are so into protecting animals?
Steve here,
I suggest for anyone wishing to speak for the CVMA in saying that they have never taken a position on the seal hunt, to please refer to the following URL..
http://canadianveterinarians.net/ShowText.aspx?ResourceID=378
Also available through their site,
the 2002 report referenced in the premier's letter
http://canadianveterinarians.net/Documents/Resources/Files/130_Seal%20Hunt%20Report.pdf
BTW these were not hard to find. I just went to the site and looked at the links for animal welfare and animal position papers.
So the implication from anonymous that they had contacted the DVMA by phone is at best misleading
Probably because you're published and I'm not, and to find my posts you'd actually have to hunt down the boards and read what I wrote which would involve you doing that which you seem to hate more than anything else, Myles. Checking your facts.
You, are the journalist. That is YOUR job. Its clear from your accusations regarding the number of seals you kill and the number of seals Alaskans kill that you are simply not that good at your job.
So consider this practice, which you desperately need.
As for Steve, you are not Crazy, Merely Stupid. There is nothing misleading if you simply took the initiative Myles as a newfie clearly lacks and and actually READ the damn things.
CVMA's position statement it is that they "accept" the hunt as long as it is carried out in a humane manner.
Nowhere do they say that it is carried out in a humane manner. Nowhere do they say the hunt is humane.
Words mean things, Steve. they mean even more if you read them.
As for the report you cite, that was published in their journal but is not their report - as stated by the CVMA itself in the report when they say "THIS REPORT REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHORS AND THE AUTHORS ALONE!!!
there is a difference between being wrong and lying, usually determined by a factor of laziness.
You are lazy, and therefore wrong.
Danny is simply lying.
The same way Myles does, over and over again.
Sorry, folks, that's the truth.
I googled "gregg Pruitt of Maryland' and got a lot of hits re: a football player.
Judging by the content and style I'd hazard a guess that GP of MD is the same Harry Boland , and Mt. Hood (from another board). but I could be wrong. Its entirely possible that there are more than one person with such boorish manners and attitude in the USA.
Maybe someone already posted this one but its CVMA statement re: seal hunt.
As well, the Daoust et al report states in it that these guys are 'representatives' of the CVMA. In one on-line publication of the report, CVMA takes credit for funding the report...so, go figure.
http://canadianveterinarians.net/ShowText.aspx?ResourceID=378
The CVMA does no such thing in the link you submitted.
You know what's funny? I googled me, too, and none of my posts to this board appeared.
Fancy that. A smarter man might take that as a clue.
to GP:
Once again you are incorrect. This is not my "job" it is merely a past time and if you had read my most recent article you would have realized that.
Have I made factual errors in any of my posts, absolutely but when I do I admit the error and in the case of the Alaskan hunt I have done that on several occassions. Unlike some people I could name who's initials are GP, I admit when I've made a factual error but you havn't shown me to have made one in the present circumstances.
Finally, you admit that the CVMA document states:
"they "accept" the hunt as long as it is carried out in a humane manner."
I guess that makes them much more open minded than you because you have already admitted that you accept it under no circumstances.
As for your fighting against the fur industry, if all you do is make a few comments on a message board instead of trying to reach a wider audience then it can't be that important to you.
Finally, since a number of us have tried to find your comments and couldn't you still haven't proven your point that you are involved in other areas of fur activism. You obviously know where you have posted comments so why don't you share that with the class. You seem to think you are so much smarter than those you debate (or is it debase). If you are then reading your former comments may enlighten us, or is it that none exist?
this link will show (bottom left page 687) that CVMA takes credit for 'some'funding of this report. FOr what that's worth.
http://canadianveterinarians.net/Documents/Resources/Files/130_Seal%20Hunt%20Report.pdf
Steve here,
To greg,
Actually I did read and understand the entirety of both articles.
BTW did you note that it is consistent with other forms of trapping insofar as the length of time between initial shot and point of unconsciousness. Of course, experienced as you are in the fur trapping protest movement those figures were already available and known to you. right?
What you appear to actually be saying is that you don't want anyone to have a viewpoint that is not coincidental with your own. This conclusion is reached since you immediately progress to invective, vitriol, perjoration, vituperation and contumely expressions which of course provide to you alone a most effective obfuscation of your inability to articulate a responsive statement. To others long used to dealing with those who allow emotions and attitude to provide the basis of their opinion you provide neither an intriguing nor convincing presentation of your position, and most decidedly not a new one.
Having an emotional response is appropriate, however, unlike Oscar Wilde I believe man is a rational animal who is capable of behaving logically even when emotionally jolted. You sir, give me pause to reconsider that belief.
If you actually have had the time and perspicacity to absorb the above, it might surprise you to know that I don't actually support the seal hunt.
However, what I find more troubleseome is the willingness of people to be inhumane in their treatment of other human beings outside their immediate community. If you actually took the time to look at the map you would see that for a significant percentage of the people who engage in this economic activity, the sea is the ownly practical means of livelihood.
And the sea is stressed with both the collapse of the banks and the expansion of competition for the fish who populated the banks. Yes, Man created the situation with overfishing. But precisely what has anyone really done to address this issue which bluntly put is more of a risk to the planet's ecology than the seal hunt.
I know you will flame away and accuse those who look at the situation differently than you of changing the subject. But frankly, if you want to affect the ecology intelligently you need to first understand it. You may not see that this is all part and parcel of the same issue, but from both an economic, ecological and yes even a humane standpoint the items are irrevocably intertwined.
It may surprise you to know that as I surfed the net about this entire topic, I found not a single ARA who actually suggested an alternative much less spent any of the funding they received towards finding one.
My suspicion is that there is no such person as Greg Pruitt of Baltimore MD. At least not posting here. The arsehole in question probably admires the NFL player by that name and uses it as a pseudonym. I've noticed for a while that his messages sound identical in tone and language to the beligerent "annonymous" and the former "Harry." Names come and go, but the voice remains the same. If I'm correct, then what are we to make of GP's claim that he always posts in his own name?
One person posting under several psedonames trying to sway informed public opinion. Yep that sounds like an ARActivist.
I'm an American from Arizona and wanted to let the Newfies know that I support them in their efforts to support themselves.
Don't let ignorant people like Pruitt make you lose the genuine love and kindness you have for others (including animals)
I have never had the priveledge to visit Newfoundland, but I have had the privelege to meet, befriend and become family with many Newfies.
I was very impressed with the Premiere and his representation of Newfoundland on Larry King Live... and I will always be proud to call a Newfie my friend. Thank you for opening your kind hearts and warm homes to so many Americans during the most tragic time in our history: 9/11.
I am glad that the premiere noted that in the beginning of his time on Larry King and believe it is something that outsiders need to be made aware of about the Newfoundlander people.
P.S. for all of the PETA people;
check out http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
God bless the Newfies
Wow, first george suggesting somebody's using a fake name, then lo and behold, George goes and does it himself.
Faking an American name to try and convince people that Americans support them in their efforts to support themselves? Has to be a Newfie.
Especially since Arizonans don't seem all that keen on extending that right to Mexicans.
Nice try.
Myles, when you are coming out with a new blog? I'm sick of all this Paul nonsense.
My ancestors were rogues and murderers is now available on VHS from the National Film Board. The DVD version will be available very soon. I should get my copy in 4 weeks on DVD. Here is the link.
http://www2.nfb.ca/boutique/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?a=b&formatid=51455&support=VHL
Seal-bashing Newfoundland govt. tramples human rights, too
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2005/n28jn05b.htm
UN body says Danny Williams' government must act
Flagrant violation of UN labour standards
an international embarrassment for Canada
St. John’s — The International Labour Organization's condemnation of the Newfoundland and Labrador Conservatives is so sweeping that Premier Danny Williams must take immediate corrective action, says the 340,000-member National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE).
The demand for action is also being made by NUPGE's provincial component, the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Public and Private Employees (NAPE).
"Both the provincial and federal government should be very troubled by the ILO’s ruling. It damages the human rights reputation of both the province and the Canadian government,” says Larry Brown, NUPGE's national secretary-treasurer.
“Not only is it a black mark on Canada's respected reputation in the international community, but there are economic implications as well. Corporations do not view countries with poor human rights records as places to make stable investment," Brown says.
Brown was in St. John’s to attend the NAPE's biennial convention.
'Trampling human rights'
“Although collective bargaining is considered a fundamental human right by the ILO and the United Nations, it appears that the government of Danny Williams is prepared to trample on human rights when it comes to dealing with its own employees,” says Brown.
“The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador needs to recognize that workers’ rights are human rights. All human rights must be enforced. Governments just can’t pick and choose which human rights they obey and defend,” Brown argues.
“It’s embarrassing to the citizens of our province that our government faces such strong condemnation from an internationally respected United Nations body,” adds Carol Furlong, NAPE's newly elected president.
“At the same time it’s somewhat heartening to know the ILO has upheld NAPE’s claim. We offered the government the opportunity to settle the dispute through the independent adjudication process set out in the Public Service (Collective Bargaining) Act. Premier Danny Williams and his government refused,” Furlong notes.
“It gives me some comfort to hear that the ILO shares NAPE’s view that this autocratic approach to collective bargaining is a flagrant disregard to the human rights of our members and the basic principles of freedom of association.”
Talk with premier
Furlong also says she intends to talk to the premier in the near future about his government’s plans to implement the ILO ruling. She intends to urge the provincial government to take the ILO’s advice in future and “refrain in future from adopting such back-to-work legislation and to use the adjudication process provided for in the legislation to resolve bargaining impasses . . .”
The ILO ruling also took issue with the lengthy term of the imposed contract and made the extraordinary request of the government to meet with the union to re-examine the imposed conditions.
“I will be asking for a meeting with the premier to discuss with him how and when his government plans to hold these discussions with NAPE," Furlong says.
"If he refuses to implement the recommendations of the UN body, NAPE will be asking our National Union to report back to the ILO on the flagrant disregard our government continues to show to the basic human rights of our members.” NUPGE
Well, so much for the "huge impact" the restaraunt boycott that the activist groups are thumping their chests about is having on our markets.
Today Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn released Canada's seafood export numbers for last year and there actually seems to be very little impact from the action, regardless of what some people might want to think.
Here are some excerpts from the report:
Minister Hearn Announces Fish and Seafood Export Figures for 2005
OTTAWA, ONTARIO--(CCNMatthews - March 10, 2006) - The Honourable Loyola Hearn, Canada's Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, today announced that Canada's fish and seafood exports totalled $4.3 billion in 2005..."
Although Canada's exports were down $156-million in value in 2005, the quantity of fish and seafood products exported increased...up 2.6 per cent compared to 2004."
"In 2005, the value of the Canadian dollar was 2.2 per cent higher than in 2004, which partly accounts for the lower value in exports. It was a down year for crab, which decreased in overall value by 30 per cent from 2004. There were a number of factors for the decline of crab prices, including disputes between harvesters and processors, unusually high prices in 2004...and higher landings in the Alaskan king crab fishery..."
"...The United States remains Canada's largest export destination, with 62 per cent of its seafood products, valued at $2.7 billion, sold to the U.S. market..."
Can't we just pretend Newfoundland
stayed out of Confederation?
They cost the country billions........... what do they give back?
Rex Goudie (who didn't even win by the way) and a gold medal in curling. One gold medal. One. In how many years???
And the guy who helped win the most isn't even a Newfie.
Post a Comment