Europe bans Canadian seal products

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Originally Posted by FanningTheFlames

Let me ask you this. What does Canada stand for? I would hope it's not for the seal "hunt".

why not what is wrong with it

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by FanningTheFlames

Good thing, in my opinion. It is a sickening practice. And when it ends, Canada will benefit.

What is the difference between sealing and any animal sent to the slaughterhouse?

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

What is the difference between sealing and any animal sent to the slaughterhouse?

Seals are cute
There would be no KFC if all chickens looked like Tweety bird

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Yup, and no one would be up in arms about an annual Hyena hunt.

[JimmytheT]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

There is an incredible lack of understanding in this video..you might want to call it spin...

A fundamental flaw in this video is evident less than 30 seconds in. It makes a reference to herbavores, and shows illustrations of a cow, chimp, etc.

What's funny is chimpanzees are omnivores, and in the wild often hunt colobus monkeys for food. In fact chimpanzees vigoursly fight for how much meat they get, as it is their preferred food.

That video fails miserably.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Yup, and no one would be up in arms about an annual Hyena hunt.

I would!

[CaptainCrunch]

I think on a trade level, Canada should cut off trade with Europe until they force an end to veal production, and bullfighting.

If they're going to go after trade for reasons of Animal cruelty then we should respond to their hypocrisy

[4X4]

Stop all trade with Scotland until they stop humping sheep?

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Stop all trade with Scotland until they stop humping sheep?

Hey, don't mess with my single malt. Ban haggis and kilts, sure, but exempt my single malt.

[Suzles]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Stop all trade with Scotland until they stop humping sheep?

It's not the Scottish that do that - it's the Welsh! Wellington boots and a pair of velcro gloves help I have been told!

[moon]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Great idea. I would enjoy probably at least half of our athletes refusing to wear those uniforms and possibly even dropping out altogether. Leave politics out of the games.

You think half of our the Olympic Athletes are that dumb?

I would enjoy everyone of our Olympic Athletes being excited to wear the uniforms and even more proud to represent their country.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by moon

You think half of our the Olympic Athletes are that dumb?

I would enjoy everyone of our Olympic Athletes being excited to wear the uniforms and even more proud to represent their country.

No, I think the majority of our athletes are smart, thus why there is no way in hell they would participate in this. It would be a nightmare politically for Canada, especially with the new President of the United States opposed to the seal hunt as well.
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/616257

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Suzles

There are seven vegan/vegetarian restaurants in Iceland. So some people are.
http://www.happycow.net/europe/iceland/reykjavik/

Oh, so 'some' are.

Well no one would be alive IF they were vegetarians, the fact that a regular family finds fruits expensive and that we rely on fish/meat is no bother to you.

Apperantly you cannot justify Iceland or eskimos who cannot rely on a vegan diet.

[Jake]

Based on the comments in this thread, I bet most in this forum also believe the
recent estimate that 40% of our oceans need to be protected to replenish fish stocks is also way too extreme. I think there are very few here that actually realize how extreme of an impact we have on the environment, and that massive measures need to be taken before there is nothing left.

Who cares that fish stocks are at roughly 1-5% of what they were 200 years ago anyway? Or that sea otters used to call the coast of BC home? 25 more years of hunting seals at the current intensity and there won't be many left.

Congrats though, it takes an impressive level of stubbornness to say all of Europe is being stupid. It must be hard to ignore all the researchers that keep telling everyone that what we are doing is not sustainable.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Jake

Based on the comments in this thread, I bet most in this forum also believe the
recent estimate that 40% of our oceans need to be protected to replenish fish stocks is also way too extreme. I think there are very few here that actually realize how extreme of an impact we have on the environment, and that massive measures need to be taken before there is nothing left.

Who cares that fish stocks are at roughly 1-5% of what they were 200 years ago anyway? Or that sea otters used to call the coast of BC home? 25 more years of hunting seals at the current intensity and there won't be many left.

Congrats though, it takes an impressive level of stubbornness to say all of Europe is being stupid. It must be hard to ignore all the researchers that keep telling everyone that what we are doing is not sustainable.

Nope, not saying their stupid, I'm saying their hypocrites.

I'm all for ending commercial seal hunts because I see it as a waste of effort based on the market not some moral argument. But those heards will have to be continuously thinned out for their own good.

I just find it funny that not once in this thread have any of you mentioned that bullfights still happen in Spain which is excessively cruel and wastefull, that France still produces a lot of veal, that their practices to animals are every bit as cruel as what we see here.

So if the EU is going to stand up and bitch about the seal hunt, and cut off the trade of it, then they need to look in their own backyard first. Until the bullfights end we need to slap on heavy tariffs on any products coming into Canada from the EU. Until they reform their veal production we need to refuse the reception of anything coming out of Europe thats made of leather.

Damnit people sob its the right thing to do.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Jake

Based on the comments in this thread, I bet most in this forum also believe the
recent estimate that 40% of our oceans need to be protected to replenish fish stocks is also way too extreme. I think there are very few here that actually realize how extreme of an impact we have on the environment, and that massive measures need to be taken before there is nothing left.

Who cares that fish stocks are at roughly 1-5% of what they were 200 years ago anyway? Or that sea otters used to call the coast of BC home? 25 more years of hunting seals at the current intensity and there won't be many left.

Congrats though, it takes an impressive level of stubbornness to say all of Europe is being stupid. It must be hard to ignore all the researchers that keep telling everyone that what we are doing is not sustainable.

My personal stance is that sustainability should be the first priority when determining how we interact with any other species or ecosystem. Obviously this is something that we as a civilization haven't been very good at over the past 100 years, but are starting to realize right now. We completely screwed up the grand banks with overfishing, and then started very heavy restrictions on fishing in the early 90s. Unfortunately, cod stocks have been surprisingly slow to recover. The seal cull was an attempt to stop the seal population from decimating what's left of the cod stocks.

It's questionable what would happen if we stopped the cull: either the seal population stabilizes at slightly above where it's at now, or it expands to the point where it completely overruns its food source, and the entire grand banks fish population collapses, and the seal population starves and collapses as well. I'd hate to see that happen, but perhaps that would be what it takes for Ottawa to gain the clout to get some serious restrictions posed on fishing in the international portion of the grand banks.

The dilemma for me (and fortunately I'm in no position of authority so it's only a very hypothetical one) is when we've screwed up nature so completely, is it better to try to artificially keep the ecosystem in balance, or is it better to be hands off and let the ecosystem correct itself, knowing there's a danger that it collapses completely? We know from the fossil record that species go extinct all the time and ecosystems suffer catastrophic collapse, sometimes from outside influence and sometimes from reaching an internal tipping point. There's no guarantee that the things we've screwed up will ever recover if we let nature take it's course.

[CaptainCrunch]

The only question for me is if its white or dark meat and which wine goes best with it. Oh and can you cut it into strips and deep fry it.

The only thing that keeps the polar bear alive is that it truly sucks anyway you prepare it.

[moon]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, I think the majority of our athletes are smart, thus why there is no way in hell they would participate in this. It would be a nightmare politically for Canada, especially with the new President of the United States opposed to the seal hunt as well.
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/616257

You think that they are smart, yet they are going to risk throwing away their dream because of some silly stance that most likely don't care about at all?

Just because you have moronic views doesn't mean that majority are stupid enough to have them as well.

And who cares what some idiot in Washington thinks about the seal hunt.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Suzles

Animal experiments are pointless - my one word answer as always in this is Thalidomide.

Well that sure is a poor argument, I suggest more words next time.

So your argument is that Thalidomide was apparently tested on animals and caused birth defects in humans, therefore animal testing is useless because birth defects weren't detected in animals. Without touching the points about Thalidomide not being tested on pregnant animals and it probably being a poor test to begin with and it being done over 50 years ago, what is the alternative that you are purposing? Seriously. How were we suppose to test this drug? How? If animal testing was out of the picture how would you know that this drug caused birth defects? Wait for a pregnant inmate to show up on death row?

How do you propose we test drugs like this?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Well that sure is a poor argument, I suggest more words next time.

So your argument is that Thalidomide was apparently tested on animals and caused birth defects in humans, therefore animal testing is useless because birth defects weren't detected in animals. Without touching the points about Thalidomide not being tested on pregnant animals and it probably being a poor test to begin with and it being done over 50 years ago, what is the alternative that you are purposing? Seriously. How were we suppose to test this drug? How? If animal testing was out of the picture how would you know that this drug caused birth defects? Wait for a pregnant inmate to show up on death row?

How do you propose we test drugs like this?

They could start a voluntary knock up the female inmate programs. Well the inmates wouldn't be allowed to volunteer, it would be like the greeting line at a brothel.