Help End the Cruel Harp Seal Hunt
in [Vegetarian]
|
Prev: SpayVac� Managing wildlife without slaughter?
Next: Most early humans ate primarily plant foods...
From: 10x on 15 Mar 2007 01:02 On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:58:17 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: >"Nobody" <not(a)home.anymore> wrote in message news:Xns98F2AF550B6841v2rt(a)204.153.245.131... >> pearl wrote: >> >> > "Nobody" <not(a)home.anymore> wrote in message >> > news:Xns98F1C1FEBA9331v2rt(a)204.153.245.131... >> >> pearl wrote: >> >> >> >> > 'Most of the meat is wasted and left on the ice. Some if it is >> >> > sold to fur farms and some is ground up into animal feed. A >> >> > few thousand seal flippers are sold for human consumption in >> >> > Newfoundland. There is also a growing black market demand >> >> > for the seal penis bone in the Far East as some sort of voodoo >> >> > quack remedy for impotence. >> >> >> >> You STILL haven't come up with any valid source for that. >> > >> > You STILL haven't refuted it. >> >> Sure I have AND I gave you a link for the information. You are just >> too lazy to look for what you don't want to see. If my news server >> allowed graphics, I would post a 'print screen' of the search >> results. > >Which are? > >> > Support your claim, if you're gonna, if you can. You can't. >> >> I have, you are just too thick to see it and use the inforamtion. It >> is why you 'activists' are usually considered to be kooks. You are >> NEVER wrong. That is bullshit. Ask Greenpeace about how bad they >> screwed up on the Shell Spar. > ><yawn> > >> >> >> Harvesting wildlife is the least environmentally damaging way >> >> >> to get food. >> >> >> >> Enough said. >> > >> > It's BS. >> >> So YOU say. > >Clue: Humans number over six billion these days. Where >is all this wildlife you seem so keen on "harvesting", hmm? > >Provide evidence to support your claims... If you go out in the woods today, you're in for a big surprize. There is wildlife there, some places the highest populations of wildlife since before the fur trade. Wildlife numbers so high that the habitat can no longer provide enough food to support the populations. ANd you want to see these beautiful (tasty) animals starve and get eaten by wolves and coyotes while they are too week to flee? take the � out of 10x(a)telu�s.net to email me
From: pearl on 16 Mar 2007 08:18 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:0xXJh.83479$Du6.1257(a)edtnps82... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et9bt1$852$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > > news:q1WJh.83409$Du6.64406(a)edtnps82... > >> > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> > news:et995j$6ua$2(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> >> So you would take away a traditional lifestyle and income away from > >> >> folks who have lived of the fare of the ocean for at least tens of > >> >> centuries? What would they turn to for food and income if this is > >> >> denyied them? > >> >> So what if these folks speak French. It is their lifestyle and lively > >> >> hood you attack. They don't attack you for being vegetarian. > >> > > >> > Yeah..right. What part of "'Most of the meat is wasted and left > >> > on the ice." are you still having trouble with? If as a last resort > >> > seal meat is required, I can't object, but that isn't the case here. > >> > >> Wasted because of international ARA campaigns. > > > > That's a new one. Do explain. > > I'm sure you can figure than one out for yourself... or maybe not... you > seem to be heavily reliant on "answers.com" And yet more evasion. > >> >> Vegetarians are responsible for a great deal of loss of wildlife > >> >> habitat to the plow. They eat, wildlife starves. > >> > > >> > As if you 'omnivores' don't eat vegetables and fruits, grains, > >> > legumes, nuts and so on as well. Addressed in other posts. > >> > >> The 'ominvores' are not preaching from a holider-than-thou position > > > > That sure doesn't stop you from trying. > > You are the one wishing to foist your ideology and beliefs upon others. You are the ones forcing your ideology and beliefs upon others.
From: pearl on 16 Mar 2007 08:19 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:SPWJh.83466$Du6.53790(a)edtnps82... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et995k$6ua$3(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > > news:xrMJh.82337$Du6.31201(a)edtnps82... > >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> news:et6d6h$1ij$3(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> > >> > 'The adjective unethical has 2 meanings: > >> > > >> > Meaning #1: not conforming to approved standards of > >> > social or professional behavior > >> > >> And you're "the" judge of what constitutes these approved standards, > >> right? > >> That's the problem with the ARAs, there is only one acceptable ethic > >> (theirs), period. It amounts to a kind of religious fanaticism, or at > >> the > >> very least, it's autocratic and dictatorial. > > > > 'Meaning #2: not adhering to ethical or moral principles > > Synonyms: base, dishonorable, dishonourable, immoral > > Thank you. You've proven time and time again you're bright enough to use > online reference material. I commend you on your fantastic abilities. Evasion. > > 'A new report Public Morality and the Canadian Seal Hunt > > has just been published (2005). Written by the Reverend > > Professor Andrew Linzey it has been endorsed by more than > > 60 leading ethicists, philosophers and theologians from around > > the world. > > > > The report clinically criticises the Canadian seal hunt in detail. > > It condemns the slaughter unreservedly and calls for it to be > > made illegal. > > > > It further concludes that, 'in the absence of action by Canada, > > other governments must act. Governments have to be made > > accountable by the international community for their support > > of cruelty.' > > > > The authors urge governments to ban the import of seal > > products as a matter of urgency based on the moral > > imperative to prevent unnecessary and prolonged suffering. > > > > The report concludes that 'The commercial hunt is devoid > > of moral justification.' It says 'There is no country in the > > world that accepts a definition of humane slaughter that > > includes being skinned alive. > > ...' > > http://www.ffw.ch/content/view/88/57/lang,en_EN/ > > > >> > They show that the majority of Canadians oppose the seal "hunt". > >> > >> Depends on the poll. > > > > 'A recent opinion poll commissioned by Respect for Animals > > in the UK shows that 79% of people in Britain want the seal > > hunt to be banned. 73% want the UK to ban the import of all > > seal products. > > > > These results mirror other polls that have been published > > over recent years. A 2003 poll carried out in 4 EU countries > > for IFAW found that 77% were opposed to the seal hunt. > > > > In the USA, where the import of seal products is already > > banned, 79% of people are opposed to the killing of seals. > > > > Even in Canada, the very home of the hunt, a recent poll > > showed that 64% of the population oppose the hunt with > > 73% being opposed to the clubbing to death of seal pups. > > > > Canada's determined defence of the seal hunt shows > > contempt, not just for the international voices of opposition > > but also for the opinion of its own citizens. > > ..' > > http://www.ffw.ch/content/view/88/57/lang,en_EN/ > > > >> If an equal amount of effort went into educating > >> Canadians about the facts, opinion would swing way back in favour of the > >> hunt. Unfortunely, working people don't have a lot of free time, unlike > >> the > >> ARAs seem to have endless amounts of it to meddle in other people's > >> affairs. > > > > 'The RSPCA's chief veterinary officer, Steve Cheetham > > reviewed film of this year's slaughter (2005). His overall > > impression was that the seals were being 'assaulted and > > battered without being killed'. He says the sealers 'appear > > incompetent, their attacks are random and ineffective.' > > The video left him 'appalled' there was, in his words, > > 'undoubtedly pain and suffering being caused to these > > animals'. He added 'Some of the operatives appear callous > > and show no compassion and in my view show no evidence > > of proper training. The clubs they use are not adequate to > > ensure death without suffering when used in the hands of > > the operators seen'. > > > > The issue raised here of training is interesting. The only > > training required or available is an 'apprenticeship' from > > practicing sealers. So the cruelty and bad practice is simply > > passed on from the experienced to the inexperienced. > > > > Professor Donald Broom, Professor of Animal Welfare in > > the Department of Veterinary Medicine at the University of > > Cambridge also reviewed film from the 2005 hunt. He notes > > that a number of seals were still conscious despite having > > been clubbed by the sealers. Professor Broom says: 'A > > principle of legislation in Canada and many other countries > > is that animals which are to be killed, for food or for other > > products or reasons, should be killed instantly or rendered > > unconscious instantly so that consciousness is not resumed > > before death. If consciousness continues for more than a > > few seconds after the first severe damage to the animal, > > the method is not humane. > > > > Of the seals he saw in the videotape he said: > > > > One animal 'would have been in severe pain for several > > minutes during many blows of the stick and whilst being > > dragged with a nail through its tissues.' Others would > > have been in pain for many minutes because of inadequate > > stunning. Some were hit more than twice so there would > > have been severe pain until rendered unconscious. Three > > seals had, in Professor Broom's words 'their skin opened > > and blood vessels cut while they were conscious. They > > should have been rendered unconscious before skin and > > blood vessels were cut. They would have become > > unconscious, probably within 30 - 120 seconds after the > > blood vessels were cut.' > > > > Lastly, Mary Richardson, a Canadian expert in humane > > slaughter and past chair of both the Animal Welfare > > Committee of the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association > > and the Animal Care Review Board with the Solicitor > > General of Ontario, also review film of the 2005 hunt. > > > > Her conclusion is clear - 'the seal hunt is inherently > > inhumane'. She says 'What I witnessed was clear > > evidence of unacceptable and illegal cruelty to animals. > > In some scenes seals with terrible head injuries are left > > in stockpiles of dead and dying animals. Choking on > > their own blood and suffering tremendous pain - some > > for as long as 90 minutes. In others, sealers clearly cut > > open seals that are clearly still conscious.' > > > > So what is the reaction of the Canadian government to > > this overwhelming evidence of cruelty? In recent years > > video evidence has been submitted by licensed observers > > of more than 660 examples of cruelty and violations of > > the Marine Mammal Regulations. Video tapes, witness > > statements, dates and times have been provided in great > > detail to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Not > > one single charge has been laid against any of those > > involved. Instead, it repeatedly quotes another veterinary > > report - known as the Daoust report - for public relations > > purposes. This report claims that 'the majority of seals > > taken during this hunt (at best, 98% in the work reported > > here) are killed in an acceptably humane manner.' > > > > The Daoust survey was carried out by observers on board > > sealing vessels in the presence of DFO enforcement officers. > > Hardly surprising then if, as Daoust accepts, the sealers > > may have been incited 'to hit the seals more vigorously'. > > > > More extraordinary was the fact that Daoust only looked > > at the number of seals clubbed or shot that were brought > > on board sealing vessels while conscious. The astonishing > > omission of any and all the suffering occurring between the > > time the animals were first clubbed or shot until they reached > > the sealing ship renders the report pointless. > > > > Nevertheless the Canadian government quote it endlessly > > - on its website, in its press releases and leaflets. > > ...' > > http://www.ffw.ch/content/view/88/57/lang,en_EN/ > > > So you have an enforcement issue. Take it up with the government. Your government couldn't care less, apparently. The Canadian electorate need to take it up with the government. When their own positions are on the line they'll be sure to act accordingly. > >> >> The Golden Rule exists in all major religions, it's a very good rule > >> >> when > >> >> applied to human relationships. It falls apart when applied to > >> >> human-animal > >> >> relationships and animal ethics. > >> > > >> > For whom? Those wishing to selfishly exploit non-humans. > >> > >> Mankind has been selfishly exploiting animals since the dawn of recorded > >> history. Is there something you missed in your high school texts? You > >> won't find many instances of past peoples practicing the Golden Rule with > >> animals. The closest you will get is 'sacred' status, like certain > >> animals > >> associated with religious beliefs. > > > > 'Argumentum ad Antiquitam. > > > > Description: A fallacy of asserting that something is right > > or good simply because it is old; that is, because "that's > > the way it's always been." > > .. > > http://education.gsu.edu/spehar/FOCUS/EdPsy/misc/Fallacies.htm > > Now the repetitive, circular arguments develop. This is the predicable > outcome of those who cannot defend or argue their viewpoints. Your problem, not mine. > >> And the only reason you have the luxury to sit there and 'defend' animal > >> rights is because you sit upon the shoulders of millennia of > >> technological > >> advancement. This advancement never would have come about if mankind did > >> not exploit animals for his purposes. > > > > How on earth did you work that out? > > Common sense. Explain. > >> Of course, the alternate is you could > >> live like a gorilla or a chimpanzee or an orangutan... but you ARAs > >> aren't > >> quite that desperate to live up to your radical ideologies. > > > > Lounging about eating fruits... sounds like the good life to me. > > Then go do it. Leave your modern conveniences at home. I'm sure you'd like that. > >> >> > There could be symbiotic, that is, mutually beneficial, association. > >> >> > >> >> Sealing is mutually beneficial. They get less competition for food, > >> >> we > >> >> get > >> >> products to sell. > >> > > >> > Nonsense. > >> > >> Perfectly true. > > > > Yes, it is perfectly true that it is nonsense. > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,522410,00.html 'Cara Brydson, a marine campaigner with the International Fund for Animal Welfare, said a seal cull would be cruel and counter- productive. Ms Brydson said seals preyed on fish which ate other fish so a drop in the number of seals could also result in a drop in the number of fish. She added that a cull would devastate seal-watching trips in Britain, which generate around �36m in tourism revenue each year. A spokesman for the Scottish executive said: "We are aware of fishermen's concerns, but we have no plans to authorise a seal cull in Scottish waters." ' �36 million = $82 million CAD. > >> >> > Whatever is not required for survival is not absolute necessity. > >> >> > Logic. > >> >> > >> >> That eliminates just about 99.9% of what we know as civilization. > >> >> Humans > >> >> are not creatures of pure need, we have wants and desires and the > >> >> intelligence to achieve them. That's what separates us from the > >> >> animals. > >> >> What you're delving into are theoretical that only exist in the minds > >> >> of > >> >> naive idealists. > >> > > >> > 'hu�mane (hyu-man') > >> > adj. > >> > Characterized by kindness, mercy, or compassion: > >> > >> Absolutely. That's why seal hunters use hakapiks and .22 shells to kill > >> seals. It's humane. > > > > '.. Mary Richardson, a Canadian expert in humane > > slaughter and past chair of both the Animal Welfare > > Committee of the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association > > and the Animal Care Review Board with the Solicitor > > General of Ontario, also review film of the 2005 hunt. > > pearl, do you have ANY opinon you can call your own? All you do is parrot > ARA websites and online reference material. And yet more evasion.
From: pearl on 16 Mar 2007 08:20 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:pUWJh.83467$Du6.10748(a)edtnps82... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et9bp8$84o$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > > Find ways to do it that don't harm others. > > You should apply that to your own lifestyle first. Begin by turning off > your PC which robs wildlife of its natural habitat. Do you believe wild > animals have a right to a habitat? "The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future: deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease." - World Watch
From: pearl on 16 Mar 2007 08:21
<10x(a)telu�s.net> wrote in message news:6lfhv2pvsr0uju3hrq0qucbpvvrpk5d8e9(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:54:14 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> > wrote: > > > > >Yeah..right. What part of "'Most of the meat is wasted and left > >on the ice." are you still having trouble with? If as a last resort > >seal meat is required, I can't object, but that isn't the case here. > > THe meat isn't wasted, it feeds seagulls, other birds, and also the > fish that the seals eat... Nothing in nature is wasted. It all gets > recycled. You are so ego centric to think that it is just humans who > can utilize dead seals? Something is Rotten in the Gulf of St. Lawrence: Eco-logical reasons to abolish the Canadian harp seal hunt http://www.fisherycrisis.com/seals/hypoxia.htm http://www.fisherycrisis.com/seals/rottenhypocrisy.htm > >> Vegetarians are responsible for a great deal of loss of wildlife > >> habitat to the plow. They eat, wildlife starves. > > > >As if you 'omnivores' don't eat vegetables and fruits, grains, > >legumes, nuts and so on as well. Addressed in other posts. > > You had better believe I do. I also devote a significant protion of > my farm land to wildlife habitat at my own personal expense. Land > that I could be taking a profit from by renting it to a farmer rather > than have it sit uncultivated as wildlife habitat. Are you willing to > do the same? I am leaving that third of all land currently used for livestock as wildlife habitat. Tragically others can't get over the meat habit. > I eat grains, fruits, and vegetables, dairy products, and meat. Get > over it.... You need to get over it. > I have set aside productive land for wildlife habitat. > > Over 60% of this land is managed for wildlife alone > http://maps.google.com/?ie=utf8&z=16&ll=56.199781,-118.836644&spn=0.005575,0.014462&t=k&om=1 > > In the summer there are several thousand waterfoul there, not to > mention all of the other wildlife species that depend on water and > quality habitat year round. You don't want to hear my opinion, but the image speaks for itself. Do you shoot any of this wildlife? |