Poll: Canadian Seal Hunt

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Dutch13, Feb 23, 2005.

  1. Dutch13 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    #1
    Hi all. I was just wondering what the general feeling is out there regarding the seal hunt that is about to get underway in Canada in a couple weeks. Positive, negative, or indifferent?

    http://www.seashepherd.org/seals/seals.html
     
  2. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #3
    Negative! The sad truth is most humans are so removed from the wilderness they miss out on the true wonder of existence.I don't want PS2's or TV or Macdonalds or Formula1 or Freedom fries I want wonder. Sorry if this is unfashionable but I like swimming with Dolphins and Seals and seeing all the rest of the extraordinary diversity in the natural world. End of diatribe! :mad:
    I loath the society of spectacle.
     
  3. apple2991 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    #4
    Abuse

    It is wrong--at least legally--to hunt down and club baby seals to death. To me, however, it seems as if the government allowing seals to be murdered just because they are not babies anymore seems like a cop-out. Dead seals are dead seals, what do we care how old they are? Does it seem like the ban on killing only baby seals is trying to appease to the morals of the people while not cutting down too much on the industry?

    From article:

    Either way, I vote negative. Let the little guys be. Besides, fur coats are generally ugly and serve no purpose for the propagation of the human species.
     
  4. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #5
    Funny I haven't heard one thing on the news about this at all. Not that I'm entirely for it; I think that if you're going to kill an animal that you should do it because you need food or clothing and be quick about it. I'm sure the vast majority of the hunters are doing just that.

    I also wonder about the motives of these protests and the 'information' they provide. To me it seems the main message is 'save them, they're cute!' :rolleyes: Here's what the Canadian government says about the hunt. It's worth a look to see why the Canadian government still allows the hunt.
     
  5. VincentVega macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    Bad. Inhumane and unnecessary. And baby seals are pretty cute...
     
  6. joetronic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Location:
    New Oxford, PA
    #7
    Against, very much so. And it has nothing to do with being cute, its just plain inhumane and wrong. What purpose does this serve besides fur coats. You know its not for popultation control, not that that would make it any better.
     
  7. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #8
    Wildlife is a renewable resource, just as are cattle, chickens or pine trees.

    That said, I'm against an amount of harvest that would be greater than some annual increase within the carrying capacity of the habitat. As for the seals, I don't know enough about the whole deal to know if the numbers for this hunt are appropriate--high, just right or whatever.

    Yeah, baby harp seals are truly cute. So are baby calves. Same for all manner of domestic and wild creatures. But they're all gonna die, same as I am.

    What's important to me is the health of the species. Worrying about "cute" just doesn't cut it.

    'Rat
     
  8. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
  9. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #10
    Hey we could cull humans for soap(now where have I heard that before)
     
  10. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #11
    Well, hello Mr. Subtle.

    I feel clubbed over the head. I'm cute.

    You're still right, of course.
     
  11. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #12
    "Hey we could cull humans for soap..."

    Peterkro, just what does that have to do with anything?

    Do you disagree with my central thesis that protecting/promoting the health of a species within the limits of habitat is a Good Thing?

    Is the fate of any individual member of a species more important than the viability of that species?

    If in a local area a species is ouitgrowing its habitat, should I forego enjoying something besides grocery store meat? Is Bambi somehow more noble than Bossy? If my killing of any animal* does no harmful impact on the species, am I supposed to refrain because of somebody else's viewpoint?

    :), 'Rat

    * I kill for the mix of the pleasure of the hunt and the pleasure of the good food. It's all part of a package. Killing just for the sake of shooting some animal is really low-rent. In the words of Ortega y Gasset, "One does not hunt in order to kill. One kills in order to have hunted."
     
  12. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #13
    What I was trying to point out was that humans are animals and if because of rapid population growth a species needs to be controlled its humans.20,000 human children die each day because of a lack of basic necessary's . Yet we go on breeding even though we can't support all those already born.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    Now, now... that's the sort of communal thinking that gets you branded a leftist - or a statist if you prefer. The supremacy of the individual is at the heart of capitalism, no?

    Between this comment and your willingness to let the government have what you're not using, I'm beginning to wonder if someone kidnapped the real DRat and is posting under his name.... :p
     
  14. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #15
    If you're down to the last couple of hundred homo saps, mac, would you still see it as advocating commuinal thinking? If you're down to the last 200 cows, are you gonna spend all your money on one sick cow, or spend that money on feed for the other 199? In the context of the thread, of course, you're playing with the apples and oranges again. :D

    I have no problem with government actions which don't involve the threat of force--rare as that is. Magsaysay's program, as I said before in that other thread, involved carrots far more than any sticks. His "stick" was along the lines of, "One of these days, you're going to want something from me..." as opposed to any, "You will sell!"

    Peterkro, I've long said we're breeding ourselves out of house and home. We're certainly out-breeding the $/capita/yr income potential, most places. SFAIK, for all practical purposes, homo sap is the only mammalian in surplus on the planet. Well, maybe armadillos in your golf course or white tail deer in your flowerbed. :) Bill Buckley and I definitely do not see eye-to-eye on this subject...

    As far as wildlife and habitat and population numbers, it bugs me when somebody fusses against hunting or the seal harvest--yet will live along the Front Range in Colorado, or buy that five-acre ranchette to have "five acres, five miles from town. They ruin habitat, which does more harm to wildlife than any controlled sort of hunting...

    I moved back to the old family farm/ranch outside of Austin, Texas, in 1968. We had way too many deer on the place. I did a herd reduction effort, and the average weight went up some 30% in just over three years. A neighbor died in 1977; his heirs sold to a developer and cars began killing more deer than I did. The escalating school-taxes ran us off in 1982, and the entire area is now covered with houses. There is a real shortage of deer, turkey, quail, coyotes and foxes, raccoons, possums, skunks, song birds. Lotsa people, though.

    'Rat
     
  15. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #16
    Not to worry 'Rat.

    By the middle of the next decade there'll be a lot less firemonkeys around. There seems to be a surplus of insane despots right now and they all (coincidentally) seem to loathe one another.

    In America this pretty much assures that a large chunk of the 48% that didn't vote for Bush (who mostly live in cities) will be thoroughly culled through terrorism and desease while inbreeding, STD's, crop failure due to global warming, not surviving their Tour of Duty, industry failure in the midwest, blights of Mad Cow and Avian Flu and of course good old American Factionalism will cull the rest.

    Not to worry, this will be a fairly global problem and we'll likely do better than most due to our geographic isolation.

    The really fun bit is that if the neocons manage to stay in office through the conflagration they'll get to call it the Rapture and the USA the new Promised Land (As Israel and most of the Sainai will be a toxic, glowing wasteland of fused glass and drifting clouds of Sarin).

    Oh! I almost forgot!

    China will have had several of the world's most horrific man-made environmental disasters in just a few year's time:

    Millions poisoned by drifting clouds of toxic effluent produced by wastes mixing in sewers and runoff, Starvation as the soil in the cino-heartland is poisoned by cloud-bourne toxins from the southern and eastern industrial centers, a localized pandemic of HIV spread initially in the late '90's by poorly managed government blood drives, the massive 3-Gorges Dam being finished as we speak will fail, killing millions and flushing millions of carcasses and metric tonnes of toxic effluent into the Sea of Japan.

    Africa will continue it's current pattern: Civil wars, Genocide, HIV will become so prevalent that immunity will become hereditary-resulting in a new kind of "royalty", eventually things will collapse politically as the nations pumping in money and guns from Europe and America are forced to deal with their own problems.

    Anybody want to take a stab at Europe, greater Eurasia, South America and the Pacific?
     
  16. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #17
    To the above (heartwarming) scenarios, I might add:

    Save your pennies. There will most likely be small corporate fortresses of affluence around the world, who are able to aquire limited resources by virtue of their power in the chaos, who will be protected from both the world and the masses by superior technology.

    I found "Code 47" to be a pretty convincing possibility of the near-future.

    Alternately, there is a possibility that a much more benign future is possible, as evinced by humanity's potential for unity under the circumstances of widespread disaster. There is a possibility that we will change our ways, although some unlucky generation will have a hell of a time during the transition.
     
  17. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #18
    That unlucky generation would include my own one-year old son.

    Personally I feel an extensive die-off of our species is a good long term contribution, particularly if the resulting social unrest wrenches control from the haves. Nothing like an angry mob of starving constituents wielding weapons provided them by a rebellious millitary to say "Gee, maybe re-electing your ass was a bad idea."

    I like the prospect of this country having to feel a little of the hell they've been ignoring and economically encouraging for our entire history. Don't however assume that I like the idea of living through it. No, I like the idea of a global reckoning from the perspective of an armchair historian and part-time eco-catastrophic pundit. I definitely do not like where this is going as it partains to experiencing it live and in person but I'm not fooling myself either.... I'll adapt better than a lot of folks and I won't need an armed compound, ten wives and an obscure religious doctrine to do it either.
     
  18. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #19
    What this thread needs now is edesignuk to come in with a "This thread has been hijacked!" Macro :rolleyes:

    I'd do it, but I don't have photoshop here, but it's kind of like copyright infringement. :)

    Basicaly from pseudobrit's post on this thread has gone WAY off course. :D
     
  19. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #20
    Don't make me whack you over the head and strip you still-twitching carcass. ;) :eek: :p
     
  20. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #21
    Off-course threads can be great fun, right? :)

    I guess someobdy oughta define "disaster", vis-a-vis grand social unrest. I tend toward the view of an ever-more-authoritarian state, trying more and more to emulate the Dutch boy with his fingers in the dike. A general "graying-down" of our world with more and more controls in an effort to stave off some sort of social collapse. Damfino.

    Too many people for the human habitat, seems to me. Not from the standpoint of food or money, so much as elbow room and the emotional comfort of "space". I'm often reminded of the Psych Dept folks and their experiments with rats and overcrowding. Pollution is "just" a symptom.

    mischief, there's been quite a bit about China and its pollution problems. And, I'm interested to see how the Three Gorges Dam turns out. Lord knows, the Aswan High Dam had multitudes of unintended consequences.

    'Rat
     
  21. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #22
    The rats-in-a-box practice only applies directly to some parts of the world IMHO. It relied on a box if fixed dimensions and infinite food. I think that applies well to China and some areas like Indonesia, etc. However most of the world is stuck on a more intricate problem: B.F. Skinner's Prison studies.

    It strikes me that most of the world is struggling with the cyclical Authoritarian/Revolutionary model in which one minority of "haves" suppresses the "have nots" until a breaking point is reached and the old despotic regime is thrown over by a fresh one, repeat ad nauseum.

    This is even the case in the USA, we just have a more polite method. The problem here is that one side has developped a sort of "final solution" that they seem to think will bring them to a final and lasting dominance. This would, of course upset the tenuous homeostasis we've been clinging to and plunge us into the previous A/R model.

    Polution.... Well... I agree with you on that one. If we had evolved from housecats instead of something more weasel like we'd have more sense. Housecats actually have the presence of mind to bury their droppings. Hell, even dogs will try to clean up after their puppies. We definitely seem very much like our cousins though: It just sort of falls out.... If we think about it at all it's all about who we want to throw it at, not how to dispose of it in some inoffensive manner.

    Human environmental/Health/Safety policy seems to be:

    Ignore a problem and poo-poo anyone who points it out until enough people die horribly that everyone has someone they know personally who has been maimed or killed by the consequences.

    This goes for chemical pollutants, DUI, single-crop farming, etc.

    Until the **** hits us in the face very few of us think about the fact that it exists at all as a byproduct of our existence.


    Though I'll say this to IJ and others who've been down 'Rat's throat in this discussion:

    There's no practical way to just switch over to some magical clean culture. Steel requires Coal, Aluminum requires vast amounts of electricity; Human society requires infrastructure for transportation, shelter and communication.

    Products have to be designed that are environmentally conscious AND outperform their heavier-polluting cousins. As much as us leftist-idealists like to espouse the virtue of more "clean" solutions we must accept the market forces that brought us to the solutions currently in use.

    Plus we have to remember that even more popular "green" technology has an impact on the environment. Hydroelectric effects the migration of Salmonids and other fish, prevents the flood-renewal of farmland downstream and submerges a tremendous amount of land. Wind farms kill birds and do poorly when winds fall above or below their design limits. Solar requires a tremendous amount of land and has significant seasonal (not to mention daily) fluctuations.

    Electric vehicles still need power from something else to generate the volts and human-power is just silly.

    Essentially: We need to get over the knee-jerk that on the one hand says:

    "**** should never exist."

    and on the other says:

    "**** only exists when thrown."

    **** exists and no matter what we choose to eat we will always excrete something. We need to get over ourselves and our ego-attatchment to our favourite solutions in order to really be able to find a synthesis of all approaches that works.
     

Share This Page