|
The millions Ottawa spends subsidizing the seal hunt
By Murray Teitel
Whether you think killing seals is a bad thing or a good thing, whether you think it barbaric or humane, you should oppose Canada’s annual seal hunt.
Photo: A sealer goes after a wounded seal. (Paul Darrow/Reuters) |
According to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) the justification for the hunt is to provide economic opportunities for Canada’s coastal communities. Last year, according to its Web site, this entire economic opportunity amounted to $12-million, the value of all seal pelts landed. They fetched on average $52 a pelt. According to evidence given to Parliament’s standing committee on fisheries and oceans on Nov. 6, 2006, half of that is eaten up by expenses, so we are talking, at most, $6-million that flowed to the sealers themselves: one-tenth of 1% of Newfoundland’s GDP. (This year it will be even less, because pelts of three to four week old “beaters” that make up 95% of the catch are selling for between $6 and $33.)
This $6-million costs Canadians at least 10 times as much and does so year after year. First of all, there is the cost of deploying the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) to the seal hunt for seven weeks each year. Last year it involved 10 vessels, many of them icebreakers, helicopters and patrol planes. Nobody in government knows, even less wants to know, what this costs. DFO claims it costs nothing because the boats and aircraft are owned and the crews are on salary. Does it cost nothing to put out fires in Toronto because it owns the trucks and firefighters aren’t on piecework? Toronto hires firefighters and buys trucks based on the anticipated number and severity of fires.
A significant part of what CCG does is rescue sealers. Some 24% of its 2003 fishing vessel rescues derived from this hunt. Without it, CCG’s annual budget could be significantly reduced. One hunt-deployed icebreaker, the Amundsen, costs $50,000 per day to operate in winter. Given DFO’s lack of transparency, one can only estimate the annual CCG cost attributable to the hunt at $5-million.
Secondly, every year some disaster occurs. Last year, it was heavy ice that trapped sealers for days on end. Some even ran out of cigarettes! DFO calculated the extra CCG costs due to heavy ice at $3.41-million. It also paid $7.9-million to owners of boats damaged by ice. This year, it is the drowning of four sealers and the near drowning of two while being rescued by CCG. This resulted in the cost of an unsuccessful week-long 2,800 nautical square mile search for one of the drowned and his boat involving patrol planes, helicopters and three icebreakers. The inevitable lawsuits and legal bills will easily cost more than $6-million.
Thirdly, millions are spent every year trying to counter bans on the importation of seal products. Our NAFTA partners and four European countries have imposed bans. Four countries have announced intentions to do so. Italy and Luxembourg have suspended imports. The European Parliament resolved to impose an EU-wide ban. The Council of Europe has called on its 46 members to do so.
Canada has taken Holland and Belgium to the World Trade Organization in Geneva. Aside form being terribly expensive, it jeopardizes a relationship with two countries with which Canada has a trade surplus. $5.2-million of raw seal products constitutes less than 1/1,000 of what we export to Europe.
The DFO, since at least 2003, has been flying high-level delegations to Europe to argue against the bans. Last year, there were at least six such junkets. For example, on March 27, 2007, a 17-person delegation was dispatched to the British Parliament for a meeting attended by only five British MPs. Last month, seven Canadians, including Loyola Sullivan, ambassador for fisheries conservation, the Premier of Nunavut and a Newfoundland Cabinet minister flew to four European capitals for a week.
Unfortunately, they seem to use a travel agent who excels at finding the most expensive fares available. When Mr. Sullivan flew on seal business to five European capitals this January, the airfare alone was $10,270.80. The DFO’s Kevin Stringer flew to Paris for $4,459.65 on Sept. 5, 2007. Of course, this is nothing compared with the $16,025.25 spent on airfare to Australia and New Zealand by the DFO’s director general of economic analysis whom I wish would do an economic analysis of his own expense accounts. With hotels, wines, meals and support staff, this adds up.
They have as much chance of stemming this tide as Germany did of stopping the Allies after D Day. The battle is lost. But because of ideological fanaticism they keep fighting, secure in the delusion that the Canadian taxpayer, like the cod, is an inexhaustible resource that will forever fund this foolishness that only benefits the high-end European tourism industry.
Fourthly, there is the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) led boycott that is largely responsible for the inflation adjusted $465-million drop in the value of Canadian exports of snow crabs — the main seafood export to the United States from Canada’s sealing provinces — since April, 2005. The value of 2007 snow crab exports is 44% lower than it was in 2004, the year prior to the boycott.
HSUS has to date persuaded almost 3,600 U.S. businesses to participate, including heavy hitters Publix (annual sales $24-billion), Whole Foods ($7-billion), WinCo Foods, Lowe’s Foods, Harris Teeter ($3-billion each) and smaller, seafood-driven ones like Legal Sea Foods ($400-million). Sealing creates less than 1% of the value of the sealing provinces’ fishery. Sacrifice 99% for the sake of 1%. Now there’s a business plan!
Finally, there is the cost of the DFO seal-hunt bureaucracy, which alone has to cost more than the sealers earn: license issuers, accountants, typists, file clerks, inspectors, quota setters, regulation drafters, “scientists,” “statisticians,” “economic analysts,” speech writers, media relations officers, anti-boycott propagandists, writers of replies to angry letters, arrangers of tours of European journalists (when the seal hunt is not taking place), all in the service of what DFO says is 5,000 to 6,000 (more like 2,000, I believe) people averaging $1,000 a year from killing 275,000 seals.
There is a conflict of interest in the DFO having jurisdiction over the Coast Guard. If it were controlled by the Minister of Defence, he’d immediately see that for what he is spending on the seal hunt, he could outfit an artillery regiment.
Enough already. This is a colossal waste of taxpayers’ money. And the sealers? Sealers should prefer these monies be used to train them for jobs in the 21st-century economy, rather than to preserve them as relics of a hunter/gatherer one.
Financial Post
Murray Teitel is a Toronto lawyer and journalist.
|
Canada's 2008 Commercial Seal Hunt Starts Today - 275,000 Harp Seal Pups Are Targeted for Slaughter
|
|
|
CHARLOTTETOWN, Canada, March 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A team of
observers with IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare -- http://www.ifaw.org)
is set to document the commercial seal hunt as it opens today in the Gulf
of St. Lawrence, Canada. Canada's commercial seal hunt is the largest hunt for marine mammals in
the world. Hunters are allowed to kill pups as soon as they begin to molt
their white coats, which occurs when the animals are about two weeks old.
"In spite of the fact that the DFO has refused to issue observation
permits for the opening day of the annual slaughter, I have no doubt that
the world will be watching closely." said Sheryl Fink, senior researcher
and veteran seal hunt observer with IFAW. "Unfortunately, I think this
year's hunt will be 'business as usual' here in Canada. I don't expect to
see any improvement in the way animals are killed, or in the way this hunt
is monitored."
Sealers compete to make their quotas in unpredictable conditions --
shifting ice, high winds, freezing temperatures and unpredictable seas --
all of which make it extremely difficult to execute a so-called 'humane'
kill.
International opposition to Canada's commercial seal hunt has grown
considerably in the last year. Belgium and the Netherlands have both banned
the import of all seal-derived products and Germany and Austria have also
taken steps to shut down markets. Currently, the European Union is on the
verge of deciding if a ban on seal products will blanket all member
nations.
"Europe is on the brink of banning this cruel and unsustainable hunt,"
said Robbie Marsland, IFAW's seal program director and UK country director.
"Canadians against the hunt are starting to stand up and be counted. IFAW
is here to turn the spotlight on the grim reality that appalls Canadians
and Europeans alike. Together we can stop the horror. Canada is better than
this."
"Even though a huge government delegation is now in Europe promoting
this indefensible seal hunt, I am confident that once again the evidence
will speak for itself. The cruelty of Canada's commercial seal hunt is
undeniable." added Fink.
Canada has allowed over one million seals to be killed in the past four
years. This year's quota for 275,000 seals makes it the fifth consecutive
year in which the government quota has exceeded the amount of seals that
can be safely removed without causing the population to decline.
To learn more about IFAW's efforts to end the Canadian commercial seal
hunt, visit http://www.stopthesealhunt.org today.
|
Extraordinary victory for harp seals: Russia moves towards banning the whitecoat hunt | | |
 |
|
|
| Wednesday, March 05, 2008 | | |
|
| (Moscow, Russia – 5 March 2008) – Today, Oleg Trutnev, Russia’s Minister of Natural Resources drafted a letter requesting the government to bring a full stop to Russia’s hunt for newborn whitecoat harp seals less than three weeks old. This first step in halting Russia’s harp seal hunt was applauded by IFAW (The International Fund for Animal Welfare – www.ifaw.org), which has been working in Canada and throughout the world to put an end to commercial seal hunts. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“We are very pleased that the Russian government is taking steps towards ending the whitecoat hunt,” remarked Masha Vorontsova, Director of IFAW Russia. “We acknowledge this step as an important achievement for animal welfare; however the government must do more -- we look forward to the full closure of the harp seal hunt in Russia.”
Russian opposition to the whitecoat harp seal hunt has grown considerably in the last year. Public outcry led to mounting pressure on the government of Russia to formally address the need to close the whitecoat hunt.
Similarly, European opposition to Canada’s commercial seal hunt resulted in national bans on all seal products in both Belgium and The Netherlands. Comparable bans are under consideration in Germany, Italy and Austria and IFAW is continuing to urge these nations and others to help shrink the global market for seal products.
“We are continuing to appeal to Russia, Canada and Norway to end their cruel hunts for harp seals once and for all,” added Vorontsova. “These hunts are unnecessary – they are merely supporting the trade in fur used for non-essential fashion items.”
Later this month, Canada’s commercial seal hunt will begin off the east coast of Canada. Last year, more than 224,000 harp seals were killed, 98.5% of which were under 3 months of age. | | | | |
Canadian seal industry faces 'crisis' because of import bans, sealers told
By The Canadian Press
Tueaday , January 8 , 2008
ST. JOHN'S, N.L. - The head of the Fur Institute of Canada says the sealing industry is in a "crisis" situation because of legislation in some European countries that bans the import of seal products.
Over the past year, a growing number of countries have passed, or are considering, such bans.
Bruce Williams, chairman of the organization, says that momentum is threatening the seal fishery and could cause its collapse if countries such as Italy and France approve bans of seal products.
Williams says that's because the global fur industry is primarily only interested in products that appear on the runways of Milan and Paris.
Belgium and Holland have passed legislation banning seal products, while Germany, Italy and Austria are drafting similar legislation.
The institute held a meeting today in St. John's with about 100 sealers to discuss the various challenges confronting their industry.
This year's hunt is expected to begin in March.
EFSA report to European Commission finds Canada’s commercial seal hunt inhumane
(Parma, Italy – 19 December 2007) – At the request of the European Commission, The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) today released its report on the Animal Welfare Aspects of Seal Hunting, finding there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the Canadian government’s claims that its commercial seal hunt is ‘humane’. Experts with IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare – www.ifaw.org) are delighted that the report sets the record straight – Canada’s commercial seal hunt is inherently inhumane.
“The Canadian government’s claim that 98% of the seals are killed humanely in the commercial seal hunt is exposed in the report as being scientifically incorrect. This report reveals the truth about Canada’s commercial seal hunt, and destroys one of the greatest myths constantly propagated by the Canadian government”, said Sheryl Fink, Senior Researcher with IFAW.
In its examination of Canada’s commercial seal hunt, the EFSA scientists found that:
- there is strong evidence that, in practice, effective killing does not always occur;
- there is evidence that, during Canada’s commercial seal hunt, animals suffer pain and distress (i.e., are inhumanely killed);
- sealers often do not comply with the Canadian regulations in relation to manually checking the skull or administering a blinking reflex test;
- in contrast to current practice, attempts to kill seals should not be made where the seal does not pose a stable target or the sealer may be unbalanced, such as on shifting ice floes;
- seal hunts should be opened up to independent inspections without undue interference.
The EFSA opinion concludes that seals should be recognized as sentient marine mammals that can experience pain, distress, fear, and other forms of suffering - not fish, as they are classified in Canada. It also recommends that seals should be protected from killing and skinning practices that cause them pain, distress, and avoidable suffering.
The report draws an important distinction between the prescribed methods for stunning and killing seals described in Canada’s Marine Mammal Regulations and the methods that are actually employed during Canada’s commercial seal hunt.
“IFAW has been documenting Canada’s commercial seal hunt for decades and has witnessed unspeakable acts of cruelty on the ice,” said Ms Fink.
IFAW submitted unedited footage to the EFSA Panel that clearly showed the hooking and dragging of live seals, wounded seals suffering for long periods of time, and few sealers administering basic tests to ensure seals are dead prior to skinning. Representative footage and photographs are available at www.stopthesealhunt.org.
“The government of Canada must now admit what the EFSA report makes clear: Canada’s commercial seal hunt is inhumane, the current regulations do not satisfy modern standards of animal welfare, and besides, they are unenforceable. Clearly, it is time for Canada to abandon this cruel and unnecessary hunt.”
The EFSA report was compiled at the request of the European Commission. EFSA assessed from an animal welfare perspective the scientific evidence about the different methods of killing and skinning seals.
For more information on what IFAW is doing to stop the commercial hunting of seals, visit www.stopthesealhunt.org.
Ends.
Background
In response to recent public concerns relating to animal welfare aspects of the killing of seals, several EU Member States are considering, or in the process of introducing, national legislative measures banning the use and importation of seal skins and seal products.
In September 2006, the European Parliament adopted a written declaration requesting the Commission immediately draft a regulation to ban the import, export and sale of all harp and hooded seal products, while ensuring this measure would not have an impact on traditional Inuit seal hunting which only accounts for 3% of the current hunt.
In January 2007, recognizing the significant level of public concern, and in line with its commitment to high animals welfare standards, the Commission undertook to make a full and objective assessment of the animal welfare aspects of the methods used for the killing and skinning of seals.
The Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to issue a scientific opinion on:
- the animal welfare aspects of the methods currently being used, particularly non-traditional methods, for killing and skinning seals in respective range states; and
- to assess, on the basis of current scientific knowledge including other available information on different killing and skinning practices, the most appropriate/suitable killing methods for seals which reduce as much as possible unnecessary pain, distress and suffering.
| |
