Pros and Cons of seal hunting in Canada?

Question

please give me the pros and cons and you are opinion.

Answer 1

Never thought this has a pro.

Pro:

  With a cold sight, seals are overcrowding Canada waters.

   There is an animal chain wich has to be followed. By being too much seals they jump that chain.

Cons:

   That is not a dignity way to die.

    Kill them perhaps is not the way to control overcrowding. Aren´t there some infertility drugs to administer them?

  Never do to others what U don´t want to do to U.

   We are a small part of this planet, as animals, water, earth, sky, and we are simply smashing all that.

Answer 2

Pros

- It's the most regulated hunt of it's kind.

-The population is large enough to sustain it

-Provides employment for First Nations and Euro-Canadian's

-The seal meat is a rich source of omega 3 and 6

- Seal pelts are water resistant and in many cases do not cause allergies.

Cons

- There is a lot of poor information being spread about the hunt. For example most people think all seals are "clubbed" Most are shot  only a small percentage of seals are killed with a hakipik.

- It takes place outside. Where as with slaughterhouses they are out of sight out of mind.

- People use " baby seal" language even though " baby seals" are not legally killed. When seals are allowed to be hunted they are after being abandoned by their mothers.

- The anti seal hunt movement make millions using images of baby white coat seals ( not hunted by the way) to pull on the emotions of people who don't know any better.

My opinion if you don't have an issue with a hamburger don't get upset over flipper pie.

Answer 3

ok there are not and never will be any pros about the seal hunt! i dont care if it makes some special pelt that "looks cool" or makes "healthy meat" or gives people jobs its all just a terrible and cruel, cruel act. and whoever would want to club those poor innocint seals are sick people. my friend and i (and ALL of our friends) are completely against it, and we sent an email to all our friends saying this: Save The Seals!

Every year, thousands of seals in Canada are killed thoughtlessly for their fur and other reasons. To this date, at least 189,900 seals have been shot or clubbed to death during this massive seal slaughter. The Humane Society of the United States estimates that at least 275,000 seals will be killed during Canada's commercial seal hunt this year! More than one million baby seals have been killed in the last four years alone as a part of Canada's cruel seal hunt. The Canadian Seal Hunt is the world's largest slaughter of marine mammals. You can pledge to boycott Canadian Seafood: "I pledge not to buy seafood products produced in Canada—such as snow crabs, cod, scallops, and shrimp—until Canada ends its commercial seal hunt for good."

Most of the seals killed are babies that don't know to run away from humans. But when they finally realize they are in danger, it's too late.

Help save the seals! Check out these websites and make your move today!

http://hsus.org/protect_seals.html

http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/prote...

http://www.hsus.org/index-seals.html

Answer 4

ABSOLUTELY NO PROS WHATSOEVER, AND IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING DOING THIS, YOU ARE A SICK PERSON AND SHOULD BE EXECUTED!!!!!!!!!

Answer 5

there are no pros to that it's cruel and pointless

Answer 6

Cruelty to animals

According to recent studies done by the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA), the hakapik, when used properly, kills the animal quickly and painlessly. Several American studies carried out from 1969-1972 in the Pribilof Islands of Alaska came to the same conclusion.[61] The Royal Commission on Seals and Sealing in Canada, also known as the Malouf Commission, claims that properly performed clubbing is at least as humane as the methods used in commercial slaughterhouses, and according to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), these studies "have consistently proven that the club or hakapik is an efficient tool designed to kill the animal quickly and humanely."

A study of the 2001 Canadian seal hunt conducted by five independent veterinarians, commissioned by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), [62] concluded that, although the hakapik is a humane means of hunting, many hunters were not using it properly. This improper use, they said, was leading to "considerable and unacceptable suffering," and in 17 percent of the cases they observed, there were no detectable lesions of the skull whatsoever. In numerous other cases, the seals had to be struck multiple times before they were considered "unconscious."[63] These findings are at odds with the CVMA report which states that Daoust, at the same time and in the same location, recorded that 86 percent of skulls had been completely crushed by strikes with hakapiks. It states further that two years previously, Bollinger and Campbell had recorded that 98.2 percent of the skulls examined were completely crushed.[64]

In 2005, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) commissioned the Independent Veterinarians Working Group Report. With reference to video evidence, the report states: "Perception of the seal hunt seems to be based largely on emotion, and on visual images that are often difficult even for experienced observers to interpret with certainty. While a hakapik strike on the skull of a seal appears brutal, it is humane if it achieves rapid, irreversible loss of consciousness leading to death."[65]

The 2001 report contained a number of recommendations on how sealing could be conducted more humanely. They did not, however, recommend the disuse of the controversial hakapik. Actually, the report recommended more training, mandatory blink-reflex tests for unconsciousness, and the cessation of open-water hunting. The report also recommended that seals be bled out immediately after clubbing, in order to ensure that the animals are unconscious when skinning begins. This is a recommendation taken in response to incidents of seals regaining consciousness after clubbing.[66] It has also been strongly recommended that seals killed by guns to be shot to a quick death, not be wounded and left to die. The 2002 CVMA report, however, indicated an average time of 45.2 seconds between the animal being shot and a sealer killing it with a hakapik. The report concluded that this time compared well with established and acceptable humane killing practices according to the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards where acceptable times range from 45-300 seconds.

[edit]Ecological feasibility

According to the DFO, the harp seal population is now stable at about five million animals, three times as many seals as in the 1970s. They say that Canada's annual quota of 325,000 harp seals, and an additional 10,000 harp seal allowance for new Aboriginal initiatives, personal use, and Arctic hunts, does not significantly impact the harp seal population. Protestors respond that this figure represents only a fraction of the total number of seals killed, because many seals' bodies fall into the water or under the ice and are not counted. The CVMA has replied that this is untrue for the Canadian seal hunt, and that the Canadian seals that have been "struck and lost" is less than five percent (16,250 animals) of the total harvest. They suggest that this is because, in Canada, the majority of seals are killed on the ice, not in the sea. [2]

Greenpeace has further stated that the quota is an unreliable estimate of the total kill, not only because of "struck and lost" statistics, but also because seals with pelt damage are discarded and not accounted for.[67]

[edit]Objections to fur

Main articles: Fur farming and Fur clothing

Animal welfare advocates object to fur, when many synthetic "faux fur" alternatives are available. On the other hand, fur advocates will claim the material's superior warmth, style, and that it is a renewable resource. It is often argued that real is superior to synthetic fur that is petroleum based product and can release highly toxic prussic acid into the environment. Real fur is completely biodegradable and lasts longer. Others counter that the chemicals used to process fur are highly toxic and therefore negate any environmental advantage of fur over synthetic products. Recently, however, great strides have been made in producing commercially tanned pelts using more environmentally friendly processes.[citation needed]

[edit]Economic impact

According to Canadian authorities, the value of the 2004 seal harvest was $16.5 million CAD, which significantly contributes to seal manufacturing companies, and for several thousand fishermen and First Nations peoples. For some sealers, they claim, proceeds from the hunt make up a third of their annual income. Critics, however, say that this represents only a tiny fraction of the $600-million Newfoundland fishing industry. Sealing opponents also say that $16.5 million is insignificant, compared to the funding required to regulate and subsidize the hunt. For 1995 and 1996 there are confirmed reports that The Department of Fisheries and Oceans encouraged maximum utilization of harvested seals through a $0.20 per pound meat subsidy.[68] The level of subsidy totalled $650,000 in 1997, $440,000 in 1998 and $250,000 in 1999. There were no meat subsidies in 2000.[69] Some critics, such as the McCartneys (see below), have suggested that promoting that area as an eco-tourism site would be far more lucrative than the annual harvest.[70]

[edit]As a culling method

In March 2005, Greenpeace asked DFO to "dispel the myth that seals are hampering the recovery of cod stocks." In doing so, they implied that the seal hunt is, at least in part, a cull designed to increase cod stocks. Cod fishing has traditionally been a key part of the Atlantic fishery, and an important part of the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans have responded that there is no connection between the annual seal harvest and the cod fishery, and that the seal hunt is "established on sound conservation principles."[71]

[edit]Protests

Many animal-protection groups encourage people to petition against the harvest. Respect for Animals and Humane Society International believe the hunt will be ended only by the financial pressure of a boycott of Canadian seafood. In 2005, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) called for such a boycott in the United States.[72]

Protesters occasionally use images of whitecoats, despite Canada's ban on the commercial hunting of suckling pups. The HSUS explains this by saying that images of the legally hunted "ragged jackets" can be nearly indistinguishable from those of whitecoats. Also, they report official DFO kill reports show 97 percent of the seals killed over the past five years have been under three months of age, and the majority has been less than one month old.[73]

On March 26, 2006, seven protesters were arrested in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for violating the terms of their observer permits. By law, observers must maintain a ten-meter distance between themselves and the sealers.[74] In the same month, as part of a counter-protest, Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams encouraged people in the province to boycott Costco after the retailer decided to stop carrying seal-oil capsules.[75] Costco stated that politics played no role in their decision to remove the capsules, and on April 4 that year, they were again being sold in Costco stores.[76]