Call for Boycott of Costco Stores in Canada

Image Courtesy of Our Place in Canada
The Newfoundland Experiment

As has been speculated for weeks, Costco has decided to pull seal oil capsules from its shelves across Canada. When approached for comment by media outlets yesterday and today Costco officials refused to comment, however the Barry Group of Companies, a producer of the product, has confirmed the retailer’s move.

As many people know seal oil capsules are a rich source of omega-3 fatty acids which have been proven as an effective supplement for the prevention and control of various health problems such as heart disease, arthritis and diabetes.
According to reports Costco made their decision at the urging of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. An animal rights group, which has been linked with such extremists as Dr. Vlasik, who has publicly stated that he believed that the taking of a few human lives would be worth it to save the animals. The group is lead by an extremist leader, Paul Watson, who has himself been quoted in the past as saying that terrorist tactics were a valid approach to achieving his goals.
I personally find it difficult to believe that a company like Costco would align themselves with such a group and against many of their own customers who value this product.

By removing this supplement from their shelves Costco has decided to support a questionable individual in his effort to adversely impact the sales of a legitimate Canadian product. They have also decided to jeopardize the incomes of some of the the very same local people they expect to continue frequenting their stores.

The hunting of seals is a legitimate and highly regulated activity in Canada. It is sanctioned by the Canadian government and for Costco, as a company that has prospered from Canadian dollars, to take this action is nothing more than a slap in the face to many of their patrons.
I for one intend to boycott this company until such time as they publicly agree to return this valuable and potentially life saving product to their shelves.

I urge anyone who would like to express their concerns over this action directly to Costco can do so through their customer service department at: 1-800 463-3783, or by email at: http://www.costco.ca/en-CA/CustomerService/EmailUs.aspx

Newfoundland (Celebrates?) 57 Years of Confederation

The end of March will soon be upon us. It's a time of year that means different things to different people. For some folks, primarily sealers and animal rights activists, March brings with it an annual opportunity to reap some sorely needed dollars, no matter which side of the debate you may be on. For others March marks the end of a long cold winter and the beginning of spring rebirth. For many people in Newfoundland and Labrador March 31 also marks the end of a cold, dreary period that was replaced 57 years ago by an even colder shoulder and a poor cousin’s welcome.

March 31, 2006 marks the 57 anniversary of Newfoundland and Labrador’s Confederation with Canada. To this day Confederation itself is an event that some in the Province tout as the beginning of our bright future, while others see it as simply the beginning of the end. Regardless of which side of the wharf on which you tie your boat, some facts are indisputable. One basic fact is that it hasn't been a smooth ride.

Newfoundland and Labrador entered Canada by the slimmest of margins, with the referendum vote split almost exactly down the middle. The day we walked through Canada’s proverbial back door, on March 31, 1949, Newfoundland (later to be re-named Newfoundland and Labrador) was given a few much needed crumbs that ensured its survival. It was then immediately assessed by Ottawa for what the land and resources could contribute to the good of the Country, not necessarily that of the people who lived in the Nation's newest Province.

There are those who always like to remind us that Newfoundland was basically bankrupt at the time it entered Canada. True, but I believe I also read somewhere that there was one million dollars in the bank. Not much by today’s standards of course but far better by comparison than the 12 billion dollar debt the Province has accumulated since being taken under Canada’s wing.

The truth is that Newfoundland was truly in dire financial need at the time. Much of the problem was the result of actually pay off its massive war debt from WWII. While Nation after Nation, including some of those very close to home, simply defaulted on their obligations, poor little Newfoundland didn’t and as a result was ripe for the picking when big brother Canada made its play for control.

Has it all been bad since then? It depends on your perspective I guess. What some people see as the benefits this Province has reaped as a result of Confederation others see as a hindrance. In other words, what one man views as support and safety, another may see as a crutch leading to everlasting dependence. It all depends on your perspective I suppose.

The list of potential or imagined pros and cons with regard to Confederation is far too long to recite. In fact, I doubt there is enough paper at an Abitibi-Consolidated newsprint operation to hold that list. Putting aside the “grey shades” of many of those issues, there are definitely certain long standing ones that have never been right since Joey Smallwood put his BIC to the Terms of Union that fateful day. Every day since then that list grows longer.

The list includes everything from a collapsed fishery (managed to extinction by Ottawa), the disappearance of a railway that once ran across the island (Ottawa decided that we didn’t really need that), the people of Labrador traveling hundreds of miles on a National highway that isn’t paved and a population that is ever dwindling because the best and brightest are forced to travel to places like Alberta if they want to find a job.

Would Newfoundland and Labrador have been better off if it had never joined Canada? Who knows, certainly not me. That debate has been going on since that March day in 49, but there is something I wonder somtimes. If the government of the day had simply borrowed 1.5 billion (12 billion by today's dollar value) would we be any worse off than we are now? Could we have used those funds to turn the place around, and would we still have a viable fishery? Remember, at the time you could buy a new house for less than the price of many used cars today.

I guess some folks will look back on March as the first month of spring and they'll begin looking ahead to the showers April will bring. In the mean time I’ll just sit here and contemplate the reality that is today’s Newfoundland and Labrador. I'll wonder what could have been and I’ll wonder too if we really shouldn’t have waited that one extra day before letting Joey sign us up. Maybe it would have been just a little more appropriate that way.

Ottawa Fails to Support Atlantic Canada

When will Ottawa finally stand up for Atlantic Canada and simply stop allowing activist groups to use the seal hunt as their annual fund raiser?

Yesterday Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn said that DFO intended to continue granting permits to animal rights groups, allowing them to visit the ice and film the hunt. His arguement was that we are conducting a legal hunt in a humane manner and keeping people from seeing the process would make it look like we had something to hide. In my opinion Mr. Hearn's statement is nothing more than a cop out.

When was the last time anyone can recall activist groups being given free reign to video tape the inner workings of a slaughter house? When was the last time they offered public tours of the killing floors in a meat processing plant? The beef, poultry and pork industries do not allow activists to wander around their place of business and for a good reason. What happens isn't very pretty.

Does the public take this ban on general entry as a sign that something wrong is going on inside? No, becuase the industry is monitored and the factories visited by various agencies to ensure that humane treatment and health guidelines are followed. The same should be done in the sealing industry.

Permits to view the hunt should be issued to unbiased, perhaps even international observers, who are willing to report the truth, good or bad, but not to slant it in a way that meets a predefined agenda. Yes, if this were done activist groups would no doubt shout and stamp their feet for a while. They'd probably claim Canada was trying to hide atrocities and they'd lobby to be given access. Let them.

With independent authorities monitoring the hunt and giving the public all the information it needs to make an honest appraisal these groups can yell into the wind all they want but what ammunition would they really be able to use?

When a country is accused of human rights violations the international community will often send independent observers and investigators. They don't allow activist groups who've already made up their minds to appraise the situation. When a country is thought to be dealing with nuclear weapons the international community will have independent inspectors review the situation, not uninformed movie stars or aging musicians.

We've all heard the misinformation some of these activist groups spread. An example of this is the recently published list of restaraunts that are supposedly boycotting Canadian seafood. According to one activist group the boycott is going great and gaining momentum. A consumer group recently contacted over a third of the restaraunts named and found that many were still serving Canadian seafood. Those particular restaraunts did not even know they were on the list. Others contacted were vegetarian restaruaunts that never did serve seafood and many others never served Canadian seafood in the first place. According to the report only about 13% of those listed were actually supporting the anti-seal movement in their boycott.

Can we trust organizations who spread this type of mis-information to honestly appraise the methods and standards employed at the hunt? Mr. Hearn's comment about letting them continue to monitor the hunt is just the latest in a series of sell outs by governments over the years. Can these people not see beyond the ends of their noses.

Yes, we should absolutely allow the hunt to be monitored. In that way we can all ensure that humane and safe practices are employed. Having said that, I believe it's time our government stood up for Atlantic Canada and stopped passing out permits to activist groups, like so much candy. I mean come on folks, are activist groups, who stand to make millions from protesting the hunt, really the ones who should be monitoring it?