Stop Canada's Cruel And Senseless Baby Seal Hunt

Stop Canada's Cruel And Senseless Baby Seal Hunt
ThePetitionSite.com
2–25–5
Nearly 1 million baby seals will be clubbed or shot to
death in Canada in just three years. Shockingly, the hunt
is subsidized by the Canadian government!
Every winter, Northwest Atlantic harp seals migrate to
Eastern Canada to give birth and mate. Following their
birth in late winter, mothers leave in search of mates,
while the pups remain helpless and vulnerable on the ice
until they can swim and catch their own food. It's during
this time when they are most vulnerable that they are
mercilessly slaughtered for their pelts!
Hunters armed with clubs and rifles will bludgeon to
death hundreds of thousands of baby harp seals.
About 96% of the seals killed will be less than three
months old and more than 40% may be skinned alive!
Canada's seal hunt is the largest deliberate slaughter
of marine mammals in the world. But the killing of baby
seals doesn't make sense economically or ecologically,
nor is it sustainable. It's simply a tragic slaughter of
defenseless animals that benefits a small minority of
boat captains armed with big ships, snowmobiles and
even personal helicopters. This isn't about small town
survival or tradition, it's an industrial killing machine for
profit.
But Canada wants the media and public to believe that
no one cares about the innocent blood spilled each
year across the Gulf of St. Lawrence. This year's hunt
will continue until the industry reaches its quota of
319,500 seals. That's why we must raise a public outcry.
Please tell the Canadian government that you do care
and that this practice is unacceptable. We must show
the Canadian Parliament that the rest of the world will
no longer stand for this cruel and senseless hunt!
Sign petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/3105

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:10:54 –0000, "pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote:
That page isn't available.
Try here
http://n.ethz.ch/student/mkos/pinguin.swf

In article <cvnikh$ii...@reader01.news.esat.net>,
"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote:
95 million pigs are killed every year in the United States. Why
don't you try to do something about that instead of targeting
subsistence–level seal cullers? Is it because pigs aren't cute and
big–eyed?
People like you give a bad name to vegetarians everywhere.
Robert Matthews

Robert Matthews wrote:
What CRAP. It a subsdised industrial business.
You spend $135 Canadian on a bottle of MPG's Ambre Precieux, and you
"harp" on about "subsistence–level" cullers!
You give a bad name to humans.

Robert Matthews wrote:
What CRAP. It a subsdised industrial business.
You spend $135 Canadian on a bottle of MPG's Ambre Precieux, and you
"harp" on about "subsistence–level" cullers!
Is it because pigs aren't cute and
You give a bad name to humans.

I don't condone clubbing baby animals for their fur.
Now if it was Bawl out on the ice floe.......................

"Poof" <pooo...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1109359059.42736097f179caa1c56d2ac5453b9...@teranews...

No offense, but we are so much better than like half the nations of the
world.
––
purplelucrezia
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
purplelucrezia's Profile: http://thefashionspot.com/forums/member.php?userid=2491
View this thread: http://thefashionspot.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22444
This post was submitted via http://www.theFashionSpot.com

<banm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109370685.578333.87...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
He's an endangered species:–)

"Poof" <pooo...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1109357682.35962c8eaaa6d454f3663f5add049...@teranews...
There is no such thing in adult English as a "baby seal", that's baby talk.
If seal pups looked like spiders there would be no such thing as people like
you defending their harvesting. The polulation of seals in Eastern Canada
has quadrupled since the hunt was curtailed, and assholes like you say that
there is no correlation to the collapse of the cod stocks.
amazing logic on your part.
Z

"Ray" <...@syntex.com> wrote in message
news:cvo349$3l...@sparta.btinternet.com...
high percentage.
You lose your bet. You have no understanding of Canadian politics.
Margaret

In article <C6oUd.3069$Vf6.125...@news20.bellglobal.com>,
"Margaret Robinson" <margaret.robin...@utoronto.ca> wrote:
The last time I was at the hardware store, several people were buying
insect repellant, poisons and others such contraptions. Why is no one
championing the right of the cockroach or the gnat to live a life free
of cruelty and punishment. What of silverfish? What of spiders and
flying insects. What about the cute little vultures and armadillos?
There's was a mass dying off of vultures and no one seems to care.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4617

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d01jo4$sp...@reader01.news.esat.net...
================
LOL Again, like everything else, you have no idea as to the
meaning of the word.
Come on, prove that you respect all life, killer.

pearl wrote:
No, you don't. You're a misanthrope. You despise most of the human race,
as is evident from your association with violent skinheads (you even
married one!).

not another one
––
Nader
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Nader's Profile: http://thefashionspot.com/forums/member.php?userid=2412
View this thread: http://thefashionspot.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23022
This post was submitted via http://www.theFashionSpot.com

"Margaret Robinson" <margaret.robin...@utoronto.ca> wrote in message news:C6oUd.3069$Vf6.125...@news20.bellglobal.com...
'Polling shows 71% of Canadians—including 60% of Atlantic Canadians
—support banning the seal hunt outright, or limiting the hunt to seals over
one year of age. (Ipsos–Reid, 2004). '..
'..
Sealers are fishermen. Seal hunting is what they do during the
off–season in coastal Newfoundland and Quebec. Each
fisherman/sealer earns about one twentieth of his annual income
from sealing. Out of a population of more than 30 million people,
less than 5,000 Canadians participate in the commercial seal hunt
each year.
Sealing accounts for a tiny fraction of the value of the fishery.
Even in Newfoundland, where 90% of sealers live, the economic
contribution of the seal hunt is marginal at best. Ninety–eight
percent of the landed value of Newfoundland’s fishery comes
from fish, while only 2% comes from seals. It is important to
note that Newfoundland’s fishery has never been wealthier in
its history, and that the growth is due largely to shellfish.
...
Fast Facts about Canada’s Seal Hunt
It’s a cruel slaughter.
Fully 95% of the harp seals killed over the past five years have
been under three months of age. At the time of slaughter, many
of these defenseless pups had not yet eaten their first solid food
or taken their first swim—they literally had no escape from the
"hunters."
Video evidence
http://www.hsus.org/video_clips/page.jsp?itemID=27261220
clearly shows sealers routinely dragging conscious pups across
the ice with boathooks, shooting seals and leaving them to suffer
in agony, and even skinning seals alive.
In 2001, an independent team of veterinary experts studied
Canada’s commercial seal hunt. Their report concluded that
in 42% of the cases they examined, the seal did not show
enough evidence of cranial injury to even guarantee
unconsciousness at the time of skinning.
It’s a reckless cull.
In 2003, the Canadian government authorized the highest quota
for harp seals in history, allowing nearly a million to be slaughtered
over three years.
In 2004, more than 353,000 harp seals were killed for their fur—
the largest slaughter witnessed in half a century.
The last time sealers killed this many seals—in the 1950s and '60s
—close to two–thirds of the harp seal population was wiped out.
The seal hunt brings in very little money.
Even in Newfoundland, where 90% of sealers live, income from
sealing accounts for less than one–tenth of 1% of the province’s
economy.
Sealers are fishermen who engage in several fisheries throughout
the year, and sealing revenues account for only about one twentieth
of their total incomes.
Killing seals may harm fish stocks.
About 3 % of a harp seal’s diet consists of commercially fished cod.
However, harp seals also consume many significant predators of cod,
including squid. Removing harp seals may mean an increase in cod
predators.
The Canadian government clearly states there is no evidence that
killing harp seals will help fish stocks recover, and scientists have
expressed concerns that culling seals may in fact impede the
recovery of ground fish stocks.
If you oppose the seal hunt, you’re in good company.
Polling shows 71% of Canadians—including 60% of Atlantic Canadians
—support banning the seal hunt outright, or limiting the hunt to seals over
one year of age. (Ipsos–Reid, 2004).
In European Union countries where polling has been conducted—the
United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the Netherlands—close to 80%
of people who are aware of the Canadian seal hunt oppose it (MORI, 2002).
Polling shows 79% of American voters oppose the Canadian seal hunt
(Penn, Schoen & Berland, 2002).
Want to Help End the Seal Hunt? Boycott Canadian Seafood.
http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/protect_seals/why_a_boycott_of_canadian_seafood.html

"rick" <s...@stop.net> wrote in message news:mTJUd.282$L17....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
<..>
I personally respect all life. But..
PO, troll.

"Ron" <ro...@home.com> wrote in message news:ro_is–C4B958.11330528022...@news.isp.giganews.com...
––partial restore––
"People have assumed intelligence is linked to the ability to suffer,
and that because animals have smaller brains they suffer less than
humans. That is a pathetic piece of logic."
––
And the rest..
*Suggest you re–read my previous post.*
I really don't have time for your philosophical meanderings at present.
Maybe some ARA who doesn't respect ALL life will take it up with you.
<snip>

"Sparky" <...@spam.net> wrote in message news:XAOUd.4114$h06.636...@monger.newsread.com...
<..>
Fast Facts about Canada's Seal Hunt
It's a cruel slaughter.
BS. Get a clue.
<..>

In article <d01joc$sp...@reader01.news.esat.net>,
"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote:

"Ron" <ro...@home.com> wrote in message news:ro_is–6D5D79.13421827022...@news.isp.giganews.com...
I personally respect all life. But..
"People have assumed intelligence is linked to the ability to suffer,
and that because animals have smaller brains they suffer less than
humans. That is a pathetic piece of logic."
From;
Cows hold grudges, say scientists
By Jonathan Leake
February 28, 2005
ONCE they were a byword for mindless docility. But cows have a complex
mental life in which they bear grudges, nurture friendships and become
excited by intellectual challenges, researchers have found.
Cows are capable of strong emotions such as pain, fear and even anxiety
about the future. But if farmers provide the right conditions, they can also
feel great happiness.
The findings have emerged from studies of farm animals that have found
similar traits in pigs, goats and chickens. They suggest such animals may be
so emotionally similar to humans that welfare laws need to be reconsidered.
The research will be presented to a conference in London next month
sponsored by animal welfare group Compassion in World Farming.
Christine Nicol, professor of animal welfare at Britain's Bristol University,
said even chickens might have to be treated as individuals with needs and
problems.
"Remarkable cognitive abilities and cultural innovations have been
revealed," she said. "Our challenge is to teach others that every animal
we intend to eat or use is a complex individual, and to adjust our farming
culture accordingly."
Her colleague John Webster added: "People have assumed intelligence
is linked to the ability to suffer, and that because animals have smaller
brains they suffer less than humans. That is a pathetic piece of logic."
The Bristol researchers have documented how cows within a herd form
friendship groups of between two and four animals with whom they spend
most of their time, often grooming and licking each other. They will also
dislike other cows, and can bear grudges for months or years.
Donald Broom, professor of animal welfare at Cambridge University, will
tell the conference how cows can become excited by solving intellectual
challenges.
In one study, researchers challenged the animals with a task where they had
to find how to open a door to get some food. An electroencephalograph was
used to measure their brainwaves.
"The brainwaves showed their excitement; their heartbeat went up and some
even jumped into the air. We called it their Eureka moment," Professor Broom
said.
The assumption that farm animals cannot suffer from conditions that would be
intolerable for humans is partly based on the idea they have no sense of self.
Latest research suggests this is untrue.
"Sentient animals have the capacity to experience pleasure and are motivated
to seek it," Professor Webster said.
"You only have to watch how cows and lambs both seek and enjoy pleasure
when they lie with their heads raised to the sun on a perfect English summer's
day. Just like humans."
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,12390397–13762,00.html
Taking Animals Seriously Mental Life and Moral Status
by David DeGrazia
<review>
Most people who approach Taking Animals Seriously will
share an unspoken presupposition. This is that animal activists
take animals too seriously. They lack a sense of proportion.
It's not that gratuitous cruelty to members of other species is
morally defensible. Surely it isn't. If pressed, then all but the
amoral, sociopathic or philosophically bewitched are likely
to grant that wanton animal–abuse is best discouraged.
Instead, the pervasive assumption is simply that animal
suffering doesn't really matter much compared to the things
that happen to human beings – to us. They, after all, are only
animals: objects rather than our fellow subjects. Animal
consciousness, insofar as it exists at all, is minimal and
uninteresting.
Contrast one's likely reaction on learning that the infant or
toddler next door is being abused. Let's suppose that the
abuse is being inflicted for fun or profit – or, more broadly,
for purposes that can be described only as frivolous. In such
a case, then one's intuitions are equally clear. The suffering
of the victim has to be taken very seriously. One has a duty
actively to prevent it. The interests of the child take precedence
over the wishes of the abuser. In extreme cases, the adults
involved in persistent abuse may need to be legally restrained
or even locked up. Indeed, it is cases of failure on our part to
take action to prevent it – or failure to take action by the social
services or child–protection agencies – that demand justification.
To treat the suffering caused by child–abuse lightly would be
to show a sense of disproportion when confronted with the
nature of the practices involved – and our capacity to do
something about them.
Yet here lies the crux.
After Darwin, a huge and accumulating convergence of
physiological, behavioural, genetic and evolutionary evidence
suggests – but cannot prove – an appalling possibility. This is
that hundreds of millions of the non–human victims of our
actions are functionally akin – intellectually, emotionally and
in their capacity to suffer – to very young humans. In the light
of what we're doing to our victims, the consequences of their
also being ethically akin to human babies or toddlers would
be awful; in fact, almost too ghastly to think about.
When we're confronted with such an emotive parallel, all
sorts of psychological denial and defence–mechanisms are
likely to kick in. Undoubtedly, too, animal–exploitation
makes our lives so much more convenient. Not surprisingly,
in view of what we're doing to them, there is a powerful
incentive for us as humans to rationalise our actions.
Numerous pretexts and rationalisations aimed at
legitimating animal exploitation are certainly available; most
of them seek to magnify the gulf between "us" and "them".
Intellectually, however, they prove on examination to be
surprisingly thin.
....
http://www.hedweb.com/animals/degrazia.htm
As

In article <cvuuo8$2j...@reader01.news.esat.net>,
"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote:
I find it interesting though that my post was about the favouritsm in
advocacy for some animals over others whereas, your post was about cows
having emotions.
I even pointed out the mass die off of vultures that according the
article is linked to human activities and you bypassed that entirely.
The evidence would seem to support my conclusion that cute and cuddly
animals take precedence over those that are less atrractive. I made this
osbservation previously by noting the adjectives that were being used
when the topic was horses –– beaituful and majestic.
Further, your advocacy for other animals at risk has amounted to
paragraphs and several posts. When I mention anecdotal evidence from the
hardware store, you advocacy for the rights of those animals amounts to
one sentence above.
Can we assume from the article that you posted that you are not in
support of rights for all animals, but support rights for those animals
that you deem intelligent and that you consider to have emotions?
If you are advocating for the rights of ALL animals then, neither of us
will have to provide evidence of a cockroaches ability to experience
suffering. However, if you are an advocate for only "thinking" and
"feeling" animlas then I can understand your lack advocacy for the
cockroach, silverifsh and the vulture.
61% of reptile species are at threat of extinction. 73% of insect
species are at risk of extinction. And, 70% of all plants species are at
risk of extinction.
http://www.redlist.org/info/tables/table1.html
Further, I find very little on the lives of aligators, but then they
also have the same rudimentary "reptilian" brain that is responsible for
basic emotions that humans have. Again, not an attractive species.
Reptiles which includes snakes (another unattractive species) all have
the basis of the core emotions that we have. Yet, I find no evidence of
advocacy for these ugly species.
What of the frogs? I recall boycotting a science class where I was asked
to disect one. This happens all over North America where frogs with the
basic structures in their brains for emotions are raised and killed for
science.
I find your perspective is likely limited to mammals –– not animals. And
then some mammals within that category.

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:cvuuo8$2j...@reader01.news.esat.net...
=================
No, you don't. You're continued spews to usenet prove that not
all animals have your equal protection in mind. Only those that
are cute, fluufy, big eyed, and don't have anything to do with
your convenience and entertainment. Anything that gets in the
way of those gets whacked.
==================
Yes, anything you say is a pathetic bit of logic, or as should be
noted, illogic.
snip fancination for big–eyed cows so that lys can contribute to
the deaths of other less 'cute' animals for her spew...

"Ron" <h...@home.com> wrote in message news:homo–03A878.07433001032...@news.isp.giganews.com...

In article <d045o3$lu...@reader01.news.esat.net>,
"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote:

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:cvurio$1j...@reader01.news.esat.net...
news:C6oUd.3069$Vf6.125...@news20.bellglobal.com...


"Ray" <...@syntex.com> wrote in message
news:cvo349$3l...@sparta.btinternet.com...
I wonder how many Canadian's actually condone this carnage? My bet is
a high percentage.
You lose your bet. You have no understanding of Canadian politics.
Margaret
over
It is a very necesary tool to prevent the total annihilation of fish stocks
by an over population of seals. Harvesting seals is not any different than
raising pigs or cattle for meat.
Of coarse it is also amusing to watch some fanatics rant about how
animals should have even more rights than humans. And the fur is so
soft.

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:47:48 GMT, usual suspect <supp...@our.troops>
wrote:
They also have their own, convenient definition of life.
Why should seals not be slaughtered and harvested like other animals?
Because they're cute?

No cod? Blame the seals!
Thu 24 February 2005
CANADA/Newfoundland
As warnings from nature go they don't come much starker than the
collapse of the Canadian cod fishery in Newfoundland due to overfishing.
The cod, and thousands of jobs that depended on them, disappeared
virtually overnight. Now because the cod stocks have failed to recover,
seals are being blamed and hunted in record numbers.
Why did one of the world's most productive fishing grounds collapse?
Why were there seemingly plenty of cod one year and none the next?
How come more seals are being killed? The answer is a mix of history,
greed and one bad decision after another.
........
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Stop Canada's Cruel and Senseless Seal Hunt!
Target: The Canadian Parliament
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/370512755?z00m=21459&z00m=21459<l=1109104125

"zolota" <zolo...@REMOVEshaw.ca> wrote in message news:QC90e.761929$6l.473...@pd7tw2no...
No cod? Blame the seals!
Thu 24 February 2005
CANADA/Newfoundland
As warnings from nature go they don't come much starker than the
collapse of the Canadian cod fishery in Newfoundland due to overfishing.
The cod, and thousands of jobs that depended on them, disappeared
virtually overnight. Now because the cod stocks have failed to recover,
seals are being blamed and hunted in record numbers.
Why did one of the world's most productive fishing grounds collapse?
Why were there seemingly plenty of cod one year and none the next?
How come more seals are being killed? The answer is a mix of history,
greed and one bad decision after another.
........
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Stop Canada's Cruel and Senseless Seal Hunt!
Target: The Canadian Parliament
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/370512755?z00m=21459&z00m=21459<l=1109104125

By Rebecca Aldworth
MONTREAL – Right now, seals are giving birth to their pups on the
ice floes off Canada's East Coast. The seal nursery that forms is one
of the greatest wildlife spectacles on Earth. The sun gleams across icy
landscapes and open water, the only sounds are the soft cries of the
newborn seals. In this magical scene, serene mother seals lie contentedly
and peacefully with their nursing pups.
It is a sight that tourists from across the globe pay thousands of dollars
for the privilege of witnessing – one that brings substantial revenue to
coastal communities in eastern Canada.
But just days later, the peace of the ice is shattered as seal hunters
descend on the defenseless pups, and the nursery is turned into an
open–air slaughterhouse.
Beginning in the last week of March, hundreds of thousands of seal
pups will be clubbed and shot to death in Canada's annual commercial
seal hunt. It is an industrial–scale slaughter that targets the animals for
their fur, and leaves their carcasses to rot on the ice. With more than
300,000 pups allowed to be killed this year, it has become the largest
slaughter of marine mammals on earth.
Though while I was growing up in a Newfoundland fishing community,
like most Canadians, I never saw the seal hunt. The slaughter of harp
and hooded seals is something that occurs far offshore on the ice floes
– well away from the eyes of the public.
But for the past six years, I have traveled to the ice floes and observed
the seal hunt at close range.
The majority of the seals killed are less than one month old; these pups,
newly separated from their mothers, are defenseless and have no escape.
And they are treated brutally. In 2001, an independent team of
veterinarians was escorted to the ice floes by the International Fund for
Animal Welfare. They studied Canada's commercial seal hunt at close
range. Their report concluded that up to 42 percent of the seals they
studied had probably been skinned alive while conscious – a clear
violation of Canada's criminal code and marine mammal regulations that
govern the hunt.
The violent images of the hunt – gunshots, clubbings, and the sounds of
animals in pain – are vivid memories I can never erase. I carry them with
me as I work to end this slaughter. And it is my hope that goal is finally
within reach.
Sealing is an off–season activity conducted by a few thousand fishermen
from Canada's East Coast. According to media reports and government
data, they make, on average, only 5 percent of their total incomes from
sealing – the rest comes from commercial fisheries.
When the first pup is clubbed or shot to death on the ice at the end of
March, the Humane Society of the United States, with a network of
powerful organizations that includes the Massachusetts Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Born Free Foundation, will
launch a global boycott of Canadian seafood.
We are asking Americans not to buy Canadian seafood products, such
as snow crabs, until the commercial seal hunt is ended for good.
American consumers can easily identify Canadian seafood products,
which are labeled clearly in all major grocery stores.
Such a boycott – if well supported – would show the Canadian government
and fishing industry that continuing the seal hunt is not worth the potential
impact of this campaign.
As I and many others leave for the ice floes next week to again bear
witness to this slaughter, we are asking Americans to stand with the
Humane Society of the United States in our campaign to save the seals.
Together, we can put this cruel, outdated slaughter back into the history
books where it belongs.
• Rebecca Aldworth is director of Canadian wildlife issues for the
Humane Society of the United States.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0318/p09s01–coop.html
Seal Hunt Facts Canada Doesn't Want You to Know
Canada's Seal Hunt: "Unacceptably Inhumane"
"The Canadian government insists that the seal hunt is an animal
production industry like any other. They say that it might not be
pretty, but basically it is just like any abattoir except on the ice.
But we found obvious levels of suffering which would not be
tolerated in any other animal industry in the world."
Ian Robinson, British Veterinarian
Two separate veterinary reports that studied the 2001 seal hunt,
one commissioned by the Canadian government, show numerous
instances where animals were clubbed or shot and not rendered
immediately unconscious.
............
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=85064
True Confessions: Sealers Testify to the Cruelty of the Hunt
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=85070
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About the Seal Hunt
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=85075
The Dangers of The Commercial Seal Trade
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=85076

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d1nf8q$ao...@reader01.news.esat.net...
Who would otherwise grow up to deplete ocean fish stocks. Get a grip woman,
they aint cute, and they ain;'t worth your concerns. prove me wrong!
me

In <cvnikh$ii...@reader01.news.esat.net> pearl wrote:
Well Pearl. Thank you for your concern and I for one will not be
signing this petition.
––
Cheers
Dennis
Remove 'Elle–Kabong' to reply

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d1rl6e$jm...@reader01.news.esat.net...
When the hunt was banned years ago because seal pups were cute there were
1.5 million seals on Canada's Atlantic coast. Today there are 5 million.
Each one eats a tonne of fish a year. That's 5 million tonnes of fish. Your
own quote puts the peak of human fishing at 800,000 tonnes in a year way
back in 1968, 38 years ago. Seems logical to me that as the seal's
consumption rose from 1.5 million tonnes to 5,000,000 tonnes the cod stocks
collapsed. One idiot like you even went so far as to say that there are only
seals where there are fish, so the seals obviously could not cause stocks to
dissappear. Seals are smart enough to avoid places where they would starve.
Z

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d1rl6e$jm...@reader01.news.esat.net...
When the hunt was banned years ago because seal pups were cute there were
1.5 million seals on Canada's Atlantic coast. Today there are 5 million.
Each one eats a tonne of fish a year. That's 5 million tonnes of fish. Your
own quote puts the peak of human fishing at 800,000 tonnes in a year way
back in 1968, 38 years ago. Seems logical to me that as the seal's
consumption rose from 1.5 million tonnes to 5,000,000 tonnes the cod stocks
collapsed. One idiot like you even went so far as to say that there are only
seals where there are fish, so the seals obviously could not cause stocks to
dissappear. Seals are smart enough to avoid places where they would starve.
Z

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d1rl6e$jm...@reader01.news.esat.net...
When the hunt was banned years ago because seal pups were cute there were
1.5 million seals on Canada's Atlantic coast. Today there are 5 million.
Each one eats a tonne of fish a year. That's 5 million tonnes of fish. Your
own quote puts the peak of human fishing at 800,000 tonnes in a year way
back in 1968, 38 years ago. Seems logical to me that as the seal's
consumption rose from 1.5 million tonnes to 5,000,000 tonnes the cod stocks
collapsed. One idiot like you even went so far as to say that there are only
seals where there are fish, so the seals obviously could not cause stocks to
dissappear. Seals are smart enough to avoid places where they would starve.
Z

"pearl" <...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:d1rl6e$jm...@reader01.news.esat.net...
When the hunt was banned years ago because seal pups were cute there were
1.5 million seals on Canada's Atlantic coast. Today there are 5 million.
Each one eats a tonne of fish a year. That's 5 million tonnes of fish. Your
own quote puts the peak of human fishing at 800,000 tonnes in a year way
back in 1968, 38 years ago. Seems logical to me that as the seal's
consumption rose from 1.5 million tonnes to 5,000,000 tonnes the cod stocks
collapsed. One idiot like you even went so far as to say that there are only
seals where there are fish, so the seals obviously could not cause stocks to
dissappear. Seals are smart enough to avoid places where they would starve.
Z

"zolota" <zolo...@REMOVEshaw.ca> wrote in message news:TH92e.838673$6l.325...@pd7tw2no...
Seals and cod have thrived for millions of years! What happened?
'The Newfoundland Grand Banks, off the east coast of Canada, used
to be famous as amazingly productive fishing grounds. The first European
explorers described the waters as being so full of cod you just had to
lower a basket into the water to bring up it up full of cod. In the centuries
that followed, abundant fish stocks drew many people to Newfoundland.
Small inshore boats took sustainable amounts of cod for centuries up to
the 1950s. The bounty of the Grand Banks was enough for local and
small–scale fishing and a healthy population of millions of harp seals.
Invasion of the fishing factories
All this changed for the worse during the 1950 and 60's. Technological
advances in trawler design and power were modelled on the factory
whaling ships that had devastated the last remaining whale populations.
These huge factory trawlers came from distant countries attracted by
the seemingly endless bounty of the fishery. With huge nets they could
hoover up massive quantities of fish, quickly processing and
deep–freezing the catch, working around the clock in all but the worst
weather conditions. In an hour they can haul up as much as 200 tons
of fish, twice as much as a typical 16th century ship would have caught
in an entire season.
.....
The simplistic claim that seals eat too many cod is the same flawed
argument (whales are eating too much fish) that whaling nations now
use to call for the resumption of commercial whaling. Checking a few
simple facts exposes this sham. Cod make up only about 3 percent
of the average harp seal's diet. That diet also includes species that
eat young cod. There is no science to back the claim that seals are
preventing the recovery of the cod. In 1995, 97 scientists signed a
petition on the subject: "All scientific efforts to find an effect of seal
predation on Canadian groundfish stocks have failed to show any
impact. Overfishing remains the only scientifically demonstrated
conservation problem related to fish stock collapse."
The human greed that caused the collapse of the cod fishery should
not be an excuse to start pushing another species in the same
ecosystem to dangerously low levels, especially when no one knows
for sure what effects this will have.
You don't manage an ecosystem by beating it to death.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Take action:
Sign IFAW's million signature petition against sealing.
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=89072
More info:
Detailed info on the collapse of the Canadian cod fishery.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/cancod.html
Scientific quotes against the misleading seals eat cod argument.
http://www.gan.ca/en/campaigns/wildlife/sealhunt/factsheets/seals_and_cod.htm
How "Factory Fishing" Decimated Newfoundland Cod.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?507
Related stories:
Bad science: harp seals' future on thin ice
2005–03–10 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=778968
Canadian harp seal hunt: largest ever
2004–04–14 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=455020
Is there a cod?
2003–04–15 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=213525

"zolota" <zolo...@REMOVEshaw.ca> wrote in message news:TH92e.838673$6l.325...@pd7tw2no...
Seals and cod have thrived for millions of years! What happened?
'The Newfoundland Grand Banks, off the east coast of Canada, used
to be famous as amazingly productive fishing grounds. The first European
explorers described the waters as being so full of cod you just had to
lower a basket into the water to bring up it up full of cod. In the centuries
that followed, abundant fish stocks drew many people to Newfoundland.
Small inshore boats took sustainable amounts of cod for centuries up to
the 1950s. The bounty of the Grand Banks was enough for local and
small–scale fishing and a healthy population of millions of harp seals.
Invasion of the fishing factories
All this changed for the worse during the 1950 and 60's. Technological
advances in trawler design and power were modelled on the factory
whaling ships that had devastated the last remaining whale populations.
These huge factory trawlers came from distant countries attracted by
the seemingly endless bounty of the fishery. With huge nets they could
hoover up massive quantities of fish, quickly processing and
deep–freezing the catch, working around the clock in all but the worst
weather conditions. In an hour they can haul up as much as 200 tons
of fish, twice as much as a typical 16th century ship would have caught
in an entire season.
.....
The simplistic claim that seals eat too many cod is the same flawed
argument (whales are eating too much fish) that whaling nations now
use to call for the resumption of commercial whaling. Checking a few
simple facts exposes this sham. Cod make up only about 3 percent
of the average harp seal's diet. That diet also includes species that
eat young cod. There is no science to back the claim that seals are
preventing the recovery of the cod. In 1995, 97 scientists signed a
petition on the subject: "All scientific efforts to find an effect of seal
predation on Canadian groundfish stocks have failed to show any
impact. Overfishing remains the only scientifically demonstrated
conservation problem related to fish stock collapse."
The human greed that caused the collapse of the cod fishery should
not be an excuse to start pushing another species in the same
ecosystem to dangerously low levels, especially when no one knows
for sure what effects this will have.
You don't manage an ecosystem by beating it to death.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Take action:
Sign IFAW's million signature petition against sealing.
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=89072
More info:
Detailed info on the collapse of the Canadian cod fishery.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/cancod.html
Scientific quotes against the misleading seals eat cod argument.
http://www.gan.ca/en/campaigns/wildlife/sealhunt/factsheets/seals_and_cod.htm
How "Factory Fishing" Decimated Newfoundland Cod.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?507
Related stories:
Bad science: harp seals' future on thin ice
2005–03–10 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=778968
Canadian harp seal hunt: largest ever
2004–04–14 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=455020
Is there a cod?
2003–04–15 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=213525

"zolota" <zolo...@REMOVEshaw.ca> wrote in message news:TH92e.838673$6l.325...@pd7tw2no...
Seals and cod have thrived for millions of years! What happened?
'The Newfoundland Grand Banks, off the east coast of Canada, used
to be famous as amazingly productive fishing grounds. The first European
explorers described the waters as being so full of cod you just had to
lower a basket into the water to bring up it up full of cod. In the centuries
that followed, abundant fish stocks drew many people to Newfoundland.
Small inshore boats took sustainable amounts of cod for centuries up to
the 1950s. The bounty of the Grand Banks was enough for local and
small–scale fishing and a healthy population of millions of harp seals.
Invasion of the fishing factories
All this changed for the worse during the 1950 and 60's. Technological
advances in trawler design and power were modelled on the factory
whaling ships that had devastated the last remaining whale populations.
These huge factory trawlers came from distant countries attracted by
the seemingly endless bounty of the fishery. With huge nets they could
hoover up massive quantities of fish, quickly processing and
deep–freezing the catch, working around the clock in all but the worst
weather conditions. In an hour they can haul up as much as 200 tons
of fish, twice as much as a typical 16th century ship would have caught
in an entire season.
.....
The simplistic claim that seals eat too many cod is the same flawed
argument (whales are eating too much fish) that whaling nations now
use to call for the resumption of commercial whaling. Checking a few
simple facts exposes this sham. Cod make up only about 3 percent
of the average harp seal's diet. That diet also includes species that
eat young cod. There is no science to back the claim that seals are
preventing the recovery of the cod. In 1995, 97 scientists signed a
petition on the subject: "All scientific efforts to find an effect of seal
predation on Canadian groundfish stocks have failed to show any
impact. Overfishing remains the only scientifically demonstrated
conservation problem related to fish stock collapse."
The human greed that caused the collapse of the cod fishery should
not be an excuse to start pushing another species in the same
ecosystem to dangerously low levels, especially when no one knows
for sure what effects this will have.
You don't manage an ecosystem by beating it to death.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Take action:
Sign IFAW's million signature petition against sealing.
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=89072
More info:
Detailed info on the collapse of the Canadian cod fishery.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/cancod.html
Scientific quotes against the misleading seals eat cod argument.
http://www.gan.ca/en/campaigns/wildlife/sealhunt/factsheets/seals_and_cod.htm
How "Factory Fishing" Decimated Newfoundland Cod.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?507
Related stories:
Bad science: harp seals' future on thin ice
2005–03–10 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=778968
Canadian harp seal hunt: largest ever
2004–04–14 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=455020
Is there a cod?
2003–04–15 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=213525

"zolota" <zolo...@REMOVEshaw.ca> wrote in message news:TH92e.838673$6l.325...@pd7tw2no...
Seals and cod have thrived for millions of years! What happened?
'The Newfoundland Grand Banks, off the east coast of Canada, used
to be famous as amazingly productive fishing grounds. The first European
explorers described the waters as being so full of cod you just had to
lower a basket into the water to bring up it up full of cod. In the centuries
that followed, abundant fish stocks drew many people to Newfoundland.
Small inshore boats took sustainable amounts of cod for centuries up to
the 1950s. The bounty of the Grand Banks was enough for local and
small–scale fishing and a healthy population of millions of harp seals.
Invasion of the fishing factories
All this changed for the worse during the 1950 and 60's. Technological
advances in trawler design and power were modelled on the factory
whaling ships that had devastated the last remaining whale populations.
These huge factory trawlers came from distant countries attracted by
the seemingly endless bounty of the fishery. With huge nets they could
hoover up massive quantities of fish, quickly processing and
deep–freezing the catch, working around the clock in all but the worst
weather conditions. In an hour they can haul up as much as 200 tons
of fish, twice as much as a typical 16th century ship would have caught
in an entire season.
.....
The simplistic claim that seals eat too many cod is the same flawed
argument (whales are eating too much fish) that whaling nations now
use to call for the resumption of commercial whaling. Checking a few
simple facts exposes this sham. Cod make up only about 3 percent
of the average harp seal's diet. That diet also includes species that
eat young cod. There is no science to back the claim that seals are
preventing the recovery of the cod. In 1995, 97 scientists signed a
petition on the subject: "All scientific efforts to find an effect of seal
predation on Canadian groundfish stocks have failed to show any
impact. Overfishing remains the only scientifically demonstrated
conservation problem related to fish stock collapse."
The human greed that caused the collapse of the cod fishery should
not be an excuse to start pushing another species in the same
ecosystem to dangerously low levels, especially when no one knows
for sure what effects this will have.
You don't manage an ecosystem by beating it to death.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/features/details?item%5fid=754574
Take action:
Sign IFAW's million signature petition against sealing.
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=89072
More info:
Detailed info on the collapse of the Canadian cod fishery.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/cancod.html
Scientific quotes against the misleading seals eat cod argument.
http://www.gan.ca/en/campaigns/wildlife/sealhunt/factsheets/seals_and_cod.htm
How "Factory Fishing" Decimated Newfoundland Cod.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?507
Related stories:
Bad science: harp seals' future on thin ice
2005–03–10 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=778968
Canadian harp seal hunt: largest ever
2004–04–14 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=455020
Is there a cod?
2003–04–15 | News
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=213525