General Chat

Deleting a thread in which someone doesn't cheer one's every word is just so clever, isn't it?

EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 055
CONTENTS
Monday, May 11, 2009


Mr. Raynald Blais (Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, BQ):
[the original was in French; this is the official translation]

Madam Speaker, once again, the seal hunt is at the forefront of our debate here in the House of Commons. I say once again, but at the same time, I would like to say how disappointed I am that we are here today to talk about a decision that was just made in Europe. Yet everyone recognizes—and even some European parliamentarians recognize—that the decision was made based on the demagoguery and misinformation that has been circulating for some 30 years.

That is why people in my riding are extremely disappointed and frustrated by what is happening. People are perhaps even beginning to wonder if they too should not boycott Europe and cancel our planned trips, boycott French wine and Spanish wine, and so on, because what is going on right now is so appalling.

These people are parliamentarians who, like us, were elected and who will soon be heading to the polls. The elections begin on June 4. In fact, that is one of the major problems. They are going into an election, and are in pre-election mode. I do not think it is the same situation as here, or that these parliamentarians need to stand up and declare whether they agree with a certain measure or not.

I have a feeling it is just an automatic reflex—as some would say—and people are therefore becoming somewhat insensitive, but above all, oblivious to the decision that was just made in Europe. It is disappointing, it is frustrating and it is appalling that a Parliament, and one that is so young, has made such a decision.

Ultimately, it is a black eye in its history. That Parliament has made a decision based on the prevailing misinformation and demagoguery, and those who want the ban have considerable financial backing. They are highly intelligent, but they are using their intelligence for the wrong cause and they are consciously using it for destructive, and not constructive purposes. People in my riding are furious and I do not blame them one bit.

Now, how should we behave towards a parliamentarian who consciously decides to vote in favour of banning and boycotting seal products based on misinformation and demagoguery?

That is exactly what is happening, and that is why I feel it is important today to look at how all this has come about. We can use a scholarly word, anthropomorphism, which, in much simpler terms, means humanizing animals. People have succeeded in humanizing seals to the point where we talk about the “baby seal” and the “mother seal”. If this goes any further we will be talking about the father, the cousins and the extended family. It is as silly as that. It is also as dangerous as that.

People have succeeded in humanizing an animal to such a degree that they have aroused sympathy. Those who have seen whitecoats will agree that they are extremely cute. They are very cute, just as calves, lambs or even chickens could be considered cute. But we must not forget that we eat these animals. This is what is happening. We have gotten to this point because of a cute image and experts in demagoguery and disinformation who have the means to sway public opinion.

Speaking of means, the 2007 financial statements of the IFAW and the Humane Society show that these international organizations each raised $100 million U.S. in donations from individuals.

They make this money available to people who earn good salaries. Rebecca Aldworth, one of the people we have to fight, says anything and is a real liar about what is happening at present. I had the opportunity to tell her to her face what I think, and I called her a liar. We are at the point where we must no longer handle these people with kid gloves. We have to agree to say things to their face convincingly, but also respectfully.


I have no problem debating someone who feels that seal hunting makes no sense or that the hunt is not good and should be discontinued. That is an intelligent sort of debate. I am willing to respect someone who tells me that they are a vegetarian who does not eat meat and that they are against the hunt on those grounds. I respect them because I sense in their attitude and in what they say that they respect me as well and that they respect tradition.

This is a tradition, especially in the Magdalen Islands, the riding and the people I represent. I expect it is the same for people in Quebec, Labrador and Newfoundland, not to mention the Inuit of the far north. The seal hunt did not start all of a sudden just a few years ago because sealskin or fur became popular. Magdalen Islanders have been hunting seal for over 300 years. It is ancestral, traditional, perhaps even genetic. People have made that very clear to me.


-- The part that comes next is where you want to pay special attention. --

cont'd

I had a chance to participate, but I have not yet hunted seal. Perhaps I will do so one day to show my support. The end of March symbolizes a time of renewal for these people. The ice moves, and people know that spring is on its way. Spring in early April means fishing for shrimp. Then, in early May, people fish for lobster, crab and groundfish. It is traditional. Historically, seals and other animals were hunted for their meat and fur, but also for seal oil, which has various uses. Later on, I will talk more about things that can be done now that were not done historically, things that suggest the seal hunt can be viewed not only from the perspective of tradition and ancestral rights, but from another perspective too.

>>> About thirty years ago, some visitors arrived with poor intentions but with a very good sense of spectacle. The people who experienced this told me about it. The visitors asked seal hunters in the Magdalen Islands if they could photograph and film them in action. To ensure that the action was vivid enough, they asked the hunters to hit the animals several times and, even if the animal was dead, to continue hitting it with the hakapik. By the way, a hakapik is a club with a hook that is not used to kill the animal. It is used by the hunter to protect himself when on the ice and also to drag the carcass to the boat. There is another projection on the opposite side from the hook.

It is a piece of rectangular iron that is not very thick and is used to crush the seal's skull so that the animal suffers as little as possible. It is designed for that purpose. Although using a rifle may seem easier and cleaner, would you use one on a boat? The ocean causes the boat to rock, making it difficult to hit the target.

>>> The hakapik is a heritage tool still used in the Magdalen Islands. I have described how it is used. At that time, the hunter had already killed the animal. He was being filmed and they asked him to strike some additional blows. These same images were used in Brigitte Bardot's first campaign. The person who asked the hunter to appear in the film knew very well why he asked the hunter to hit the seal again. It was to make the hunt seem savage and cruel and to imply that the hunter was striking the animal again simply to vent his frustration or who knows for what other reason. It created a very bad image. That was the image used by Brigitte Bardot to launch her campaign against the hunt. That is the same image we have seen over and over again.

Recently, in 2007, the famous Rebecca Aldworth, whom I mentioned earlier, also showed up on the ice off the Magdalen Islands to take pictures. At one point, she saw a bloody seal that was not yet dead. For 20 minutes, she filmed that suffering animal, never thinking for a second to put an end to its agony by killing it.

The very same abolitionists, the very same people who condemn cruelty, used pictures, and because they needed those pictures, they acted cruelly. We need to remember that as well. That is part of the game. These people are willing to do anything.

The seal hunt is like an open-air abattoir. Do I need to say it again? I defy anyone who visits that abattoir to tell me he or she loved it, unless that person is cold-blooded and lacking common sense. That is what is happening at present. The hunt is an open-air abattoir, which makes it very difficult for us to fight these people with pictures, especially when they will use anything in any way they can just to get money from people who, when they see these pictures, say that the hunt makes no sense.

This is what we are up against, and it has been going on for 30 years, since the 1970s. That is where we are at. Today, the abolitionists are claiming victory. I feel they are claiming victory on the basis of demagoguery and disinformation. I have always said, and I will say it again, that one day the truth will prevail. That is the only way to deal with this situation. For the truth to prevail, it must be known and recognized. That is why we must engage in a huge information and promotion campaign in Europe and elsewhere. We must not forget that the United States has the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which states that the harp seal is an endangered species.

Yet, in 1970, there were 2 million harp seals, compared to about 6 million now. The species is not in danger, as the numbers show. These numbers were not made up. They are the result of a scientific analysis. In fact, those numbers may be even higher, because we are just talking about the harp seal, the one that is currently being killed and which is the subject of campaigns.

However, we do not hear as much about the grey seal, which is two to three times bigger, which eats more, and which is present in our rivers. Indeed, the grey seal is now present in our rivers, where we also find salmon and trout. ... For example, it will often eat only part of a cod, because it likes that part better than the rest.

http://www.seashepherd.org/seals/seal-hunt-facts.html

A link to a different point of view .

I didn't like the seal hunt back in the 70s , I'm glad that Europe has banned the seal products .

Amanda

Uh huh.

"There is no scientific justification for these quotas as the seal counting techniques used amount to little more than guesswork."

Uh huh. Well, if they say so.

"Scientists and environmentalists dispute the Canadian government's population claims, and believe the hunt is a threat to the survival of the species."

If only we could explain the concept of footnotes to these people ...

"After decades of this mismanagement and the resulting collapse of the East coast cod industry, the Canadian DFO has declared war on the seals in hopes that massive seal kills will bring back the cod and keep their disgruntled fishermen working."

Huh: http://wwf.ca/newsroom/?3600

The EUROPEAN UNION is the main offender in overfishing -- and that is the WWF saying so.

Pot, kettle ...

I wouldn't care if :
a) they shot them
b) they ate the meat

The way it stands it is an inhumane death, a waste of food and obviously just a 'cull' for the fur.

Its disgusting end off

Personally as regards commercial fishing cod etc etc.....I think they ought to have a total ban for several years , it's the human race in all it's arrogant greed that is going to be the ruination of the sea life : ((......... in my opinion .

It would obviously make short term economical sense to get rid of the competition...........all of it ( unfortunatly ).

Oooh, end "off".


"By the way, a hakapik is a club with a hook that is not used to kill the animal. It is used by the hunter to protect himself when on the ice and also to drag the carcass to the boat. There is another projection on the opposite side from the hook.

It is a piece of rectangular iron that is not very thick and is used to crush the seal's skull so that the animal suffers as little as possible. It is designed for that purpose."


Now, would anyone care to produce a description of how cattle are slaughtered?

Here, allow me.

http://www.funadvice.com/q/how_are_cattle_slaughtered_in_usa

"Most cattle are stunned with a captive bolt pistol where a bolt strikes the head of the animal and renders it unconscious. The unconscious animal is then hung by one leg then arteries are cut causing the animal to quickly bleed to death. Next the animal is skinned, inspected, and then processed."


Now explain the differences to me.

And keep saying that no one eats seal or uses seal carcasses for anything but fur. I'm sure that many will believe it.

Yes, Amanda. The goal of sealers, and the Canadian public, and the Government of Canada, is to hunt grey seals to extinction. Yup. We're all just like that.

The EU, they prefer to fish cod to extinction.

And hey, there's even EVIDENCE of the second statement.

You answer your query yourself:

"Most cattle are stunned with a captive bolt pistol where a bolt strikes the head of the animal and renders it unconscious. The unconscious animal is then hung by one leg then arteries are cut causing the animal to quickly bleed to death. Next the animal is skinned, inspected, and then processed."

The pertinent point in the above is the phrase:
the arteries are cut causing the animal to quickly bleed to death.
Note the word QUICKLY.

Recently, in 2007, the famous Rebecca Aldworth, whom I mentioned earlier, also showed up on the ice off the Magdalen Islands to take pictures. At one point, she saw a bloody seal that was not yet dead. For 20 minutes, she filmed that suffering animal, never thinking for a second to put an end to its agony by killing it.

Why should a reporter do the job of a hunter?
that seal had been left to suffer by the hunter - THAT was what Rebecca was filming.

So they never use the pick thingy to kill the seals then ?..........can you be certain of that ?

I remember back in the 70s getting a nasty post card from the Canadian ( what ever dept responds to petitions ) " government ? " , it depicted a bloke sitting in a warehouse with pallets of seal skins behind him with the words " we will carry on the slaughter even if the pelts sit and rot " ( I might not be word for word there as it was long ago but I'm sure you get the gist ) .

It isn't necessarily about the fur , I think that theses days it's more about the fish that are left in the sea..............and that's not many : (

I'm off to bed now , thanks for the stimulation .

Janey,
I thought the seals went on to the ice to kill the seals - therefore guns could be used.
If they are killing the seals because they eat fish stocks - wouldn't it be more practical to kill (by shooting) adult males & females of breeding age - you know kill them out of the breeding season like most hunters do?

"So they never use the pick thingy to kill the seals then ?..........can you be certain of that ?"

I give up, Amanda.

Are you saying they did? Would you like to produce some evidence of that assertion, if that is what you are saying?

Since the assertion would not even make sense, I can't imagine that it is what you are saying.


Maggie: "The pertinent point in the above is the phrase:
the arteries are cut causing the animal to quickly bleed to death.
Note the word QUICKLY."

Does no one here have google?

Does no one here have the integrity to find out what they are talking about before making insinuations that attribute despicable characteristics to people they know nothing about?

I have to go find what I want all over again, because dear Roxanne deleted the thread in which I had offered the relevant link.

... Well, can't find the source I had earlier. The petty gall of people who delete what other people have posted on the net never ceases to amaze me.


http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/seal-phoque/myth-eng.htm

"Recent changes to the Marine Mammal Regulations (MMR) will enhance the humaneness of the annual seal hunt. These changes include the three-step process (stunning, checking, and bleeding the seals); and require sealers to verify death and animals being bled for a minimum of one minute prior to skinning."

Again: what difference are we seeing between the seal hunt and commercial cattle slaughterhouses?

Please do read the above link on the issue of fish stocks and for other info.


Some quick and easy actual facts:

http://www.sealharvest.ca/html/facts_myths.html


Amanda:
"I remember back in the 70s getting a nasty post card from the Canadian ( what ever dept responds to petitions ) " government ? " , it depicted a bloke sitting in a warehouse with pallets of seal skins behind him with the words " we will carry on the slaughter even if the pelts sit and rot " ( I might not be word for word there as it was long ago but I'm sure you get the gist )."

If you actually believe that, I think I am spitting in the wind.

And of course, you do remember that in the 70s, the English were still hunting foxes in that charming, ever so humane way they had ...

...So why was one filmed dying for 20 minutes?
and - to get back to my previous point, why don't they kill the seals before the breeding season?
That'll be because they are killing the cubs for fur, not because of the fish stocks, and wasting the seal meat:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/world/Canada-defends-its--39humane39.5100890.jp

My comparison to commercial cattle slaughter was intended to raise the question of what assurance we have that no animal ever suffers in the slaughter process, and no breaches of the protocol ever occur. If *you* do the research, I know you will find these not to be true.

"why don't they kill the seals before the breeding season?"

Perhaps you would like to spend some time on the North Atlantic / Gulf of St Lawrence in February.

Yes, the cubs are desirable for their fur.

Kinda like lambs and calves are for their meat.

I'm not seeing a huge distinction.

People don't need to wear fur. And people don't need to eat meat.

Commercial cattle slaughter is carried out in controlled conditions to ensure the least suffering to the animal. True you can't be sure how much the animal suffers, but in an abbatoir the animal will be stunned and it's throat cut - a quick process. It won't be hacked about the head and left while the next ones are hacked - it certainly won't be left for 20 minutes to die.
The non-breeding season lasts a lot longer than one month - we're talking seals here, not rabbits!
I personally don't eat veal, but at least more than the skin of the lamb/calf is used.
I wear leather and I eat meat - the whole animal was utilised and it was killed in a controlled environment.
In these days of being 'environmentally friendly' I would have more sympathy with the cullers if they actually made some sort of 'show' of caring about the environment the situation of the seals and utilising the seal meat. I realise times may be harsh for them, but there are other ways of making money.

Maggie: "Commercial cattle slaughter is carried out in controlled conditions to ensure the least suffering to the animal."

Have you bothered to learn anything at all about the modern seal hunt?

"True you can't be sure how much the animal suffers, but in an abbatoir the animal will be stunned and it's throat cut - a quick process."

If you had, you would not think that this was a meaningful statement.

That is EXACTLY WHAT IS REQUIRED in the seal hunt. How many times do I have to direct you to sources that establish this?

"it certainly won't be left for 20 minutes to die."

I'll be waiting for proof that no abuses occur in slaughterhouses. I think I'll be waiting until not just the Gulf of St Lawrence has frozen over.

"I would have more sympathy with the cullers if they actually made some sort of 'show' of caring about the environment and eating the seal meat."

And I would have some respect for you if you stopped saying things that are not true, i.e. that seal hunters do not eat seal meat.


Oops, I see you edited, so I will too:

"I would have more sympathy with the cullers if they actually made some sort of 'show' of caring about the environment the situation of the seals and utilising the seal meat."

What evidence do you have that seal hunters do NOT care about the environment or the situation of the seals, whatever that means?


"I realise times may be harsh for them, but there are other ways of making money."

Perhaps you could suggest some for them. Preferably some means that doesn't involve closing down their centuries-old communities and abandoning their generations-old way of life. You may not care, but they do. How odd of them.

Found I still had the tab open for the site I couldn't find again.

This site has a POV. Take it with however much salt you want, but recall that no one else's unsubstantiated assertions trump it.

http://www.thesealfishery.com

http://www.thesealfishery.com/articleView.php?id=34&page=0⊂=1&status=2

_______________________________________________________________

Skinning Alive
This is one of the most ridiculous and nefarious of the many outrageous statements made by the animal rights movement and, sadly, one that the media “buys into’ without ever researching the myriad of reputable international and domestic studies that show that sealing is simply an outdoor abattoir. An abattoir like any licensed abattoirs throughout western society where the killing is conducted in a proper and humane fashion.

Animal rights fanatics recognize two important facts when propagating this slander. First: the majority of urban people have never seen their food or clothing killed and are repulsed by the optics of killing: all killing not just seals. Second: dead seals continue to wiggle and move in much the same way that a chicken with its head cut off continues to run about. Third: video/images can in and of itself portray things as they are NOT and when coupled with carefully chosen narration can reinforce any message the producer wishes to convey: moving or still pictures do not lie is one of the great fallacies and this has been known by propagandists since the 19th century.

The movements many animals make when dead are simply reflex actions and do not indicate that the animal is alive.

As any abattoir worker or hunter will explain to you, based upon experience, that skinning an animal is difficult enough when they are dead and near impossible to do when they are alive. Additionally, common sense tells you that when the value of the pelt depends on the quality (straight cuts improve the value) it makes no sense to ruin a pelt by trying to skin the animal alive. Unless, of course, you accept the animal rights fanatic’s contention that sealers are some kind of barbarian sub-humans and not your neighbours who live in the villages and towns strung along shores of the North Atlantic Ocean, the Bearing and Arctic Seas. And the same condemnation applies to your neighbours who work in abattoirs, hunt or slaughter animals on farms throughout Canada, the USA and Europe. Not to mention those hired by the governments of the above-mentioned societies to kill animals determined to be pests by urban dwellers.

Study after study by reputable, international veterinarians have shown time after time that skinning alive is a lie perpetrated by so called independent studies conducted, paid for and written by the staff members of animal rights groups and never peer group reviewed for methodology or accuracy.

What looks ugly is not wrong. If ugly is portrayed as wrong and pretty is portrayed as right there is a large segment of the world’s human population which needs to seek cover. Ugly and pretty have no moral value, they are simply in the eye of the beholder.

_____________________________________________________________


Anyone who has ever read the similar 'arguments' of the anti-choice brigade should appreciate that last part.

Abortions aren't pretty. Neither is heart surgery or limb amputation.

The seal cull is no less pretty than any commercial slaughterhouse.

To be honest, I haven't read the whole thread yet :-) Will do when get home.

However, I'm just waiting for some higher being to club us inhumanely to death because of our rising population. Mind you, I don't think we will be cute enough.