Re: RE: Seal hunting tragedy diminishes Canada's image
quinton said:
Tracy, when I hear your comments I really worry about the future.
You say that it's no different than killing chickens or cows for meat.
These seals aren't being killed for meat, they are being killed for the pelts for high fashion in Paris, London, etc.
The meat is always wasted with few exceptions.
Furthermore, these are wild animals ! Chicken and cows are not wild animals. Don't you think 6.5 billion people who have already taken over much wild land and built roads through it are morally wrong to kill wild animals from remote pieces of wild land?
The people hunting seals are not doing this for their subsistence. That is one big lie. They are not eating the meat, they are using the money from killing wild animals for cable tv, hydroelectricity, pampers diapers, etc.
As for your argument that the hunt is sustainable, I strongly disagree. The government wants a huge quota so that it can collect income tax on the hunt. It's all about the money.
Remember the quota for Atlantic Cod that Fisheries Minister Brian Tobin managed so poorly he depleted the stocks which still have not recovered?
Remember Turbot fishing? Also that crashed.
There are too many people chasing too few resources.
Tracy you are unfortunately taking the view that the government wants you to take, which is to support the seal hunt.
All the government cares about is the economy and the money.
The media's argument that these people's livelihoods are at stake is a poor argument. If I sold drugs or hunted giant pandas for my livlelihood, don't you think I should move to another job?
The world is overpopulated and the pattern we are following is to leave each subsequent generation with a more impoverished planet consisting of more people.
Over half the people on earth are in poverty. We are beyond carrying capacity. Poverty also applies to the planet itself, as there is a continually declining level of biodiversity as species become extinct.
Hunting seals is not subsistence. Subsistence means producing your own food through hunting or agriculture. They are producing furs for the vanity clothing industry.
Quinton, I'm going to have to take you to task on some of the points you made.
First off, no, sealers do not do this for their subsistence, but this argument is nonsensical; it shows you have little experience with people in primary industries. Farmers and Fishermen do not harvest or fish for their subsistence either, to tell you the truth. Chicken ranchers do not raise thousands of chickens to fill their freezers, and crab fishermen do not haul in crab pots to keep themselves and their families in crab cakes for eternity. Oh sure, farmers often take chickens from their flocks for their own table, fishermen bring home a feed of crab legs from time to time, but they take a similar percentage of their overall stocks for personal consumption as sealers take seal meat to eat. The reason these people raise chickens or fish for crab is the same reasons sealers harvest seals. Profit. They trade these animals and animal parts for goods, sometimes even MONEY!!! The horror.... And yes, sealers are probably using this money to buy things, as you said, diapers, cable tv, electricity... things which they have absolutely
NO right to... :roll: So saying sealers hunt seal for money does not take away its legitimacy as an industry. It makes it as legitimate as any other industry that utilizes animals products.
Secondly, what about lumpfish?
Just since I'm damn sure you have no idea what I'm talking about... I have never seen environmentalist groups protest the harvesting of the Lump fish, even though all the arguments you put forward against the Seal Hunt fit the same way. The Lumpfish is harvested solely for Lumproe ( fish eggs) which are used in caviar. The fish are hauled in, clubbed, the roe is squeezed out And the fish is no longer used. They are not even eaten. The same process is used in harvesting Sturgeon caviar in Russia.
All this is done for caviar, which I would certainly argue is a luxury good. It is eaten, but I doubt anyone needs it to survive. So. The lowly lumpfish is in the same situation as the seal, yet it is never heard about, never fought for, never worn on t-shirts. Though to understand your point, the lumpfish
is horrendously ugly. Not the nicest face to distribute world-wide, nor to raise money to. Apparently animal cruelty is measured purely by attractiveness.
