Activists, Hunters Spar Over Seal Hunt

[Omaha Steve]

(CBS) On the ice floes of the Gulf of St Lawrence, tourists dressed in fluorescent orange life suits traveled thousands of miles to photograph and to touch the newborn seals.

But the overwhelming beauty of the baby harp seal is overshadowed by the tragedy of its fate, reports Jennifer Santiago of CBS affiliate station WFOR in Miami.

For three weeks during the months of February and March thousands of seals come to the Gulf of St. Lawrence to give birth, turning the whole area into a giant floating nursery. But unfortunately a third of the baby seals — according to some estimates — will become victims to the hunt.

The hunt — which takes place every year both on the Gulf and off the coast of Newfoundland — has brought condemnation from animal welfare groups, particularly the Humane Society of the United States and the International Fund for Animal Welfare. International celebrities have also joined the cause, such asPaul McCartney and his wife, Heather Mills McCartney, who traveled to the Gulf of St. Lawrence to pose with the newborn pups.

"Unless something is done about it, "he's going to be clubbed to death in a few weeks," said McCartney pointing to a seal pup during his trip.



A harp seal sits on a ice floe in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada, on March 25, 2006. (AP Photo)

FULL 2 page story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/08/eveningnews/main1483006.shtml

[flvegan]

1. And here I was thinking

that "hunters" (as I'm told), eat what they kill. However, in the words of Glenn Burton, longtime sealer aboard the Ocean Glider:
"I’ve said for years it’s a pity we’ve got to throw away a lot of this meat,” he said. “It would mean a lot of extra dollars to the sealers and it would look better to utilize all the seal.”

Each year the Burton’s bring back most of the seal flippers and some of the carcasses to sell, but Mr. Burton would like to see that change.

“I don’t understand why we have to dump a lot of this meat every year because it is a very high protein meat and it is a good quality meat to eat,” he said.

Additionally, considering that the sealers took 1,000 seals OVER their quota, what will the fines/charges be?

I believe the big hunt, off Labrador and Newfoundland, starts April 12th with a quota of 325,000 allotted for brutal slaughter.

Hunter? This guy? I don't think so.

[Kagemusha]

2. If it's truly only 1000 over then that's pretty damn good.

I mean, I'd like to see another hunt involving 300,000+ animals that only has 1000 over the quota in a year. I was expecting to hear of 50,000 or 100,000 off...

If individuals are caught violating some personal quota of theirs (I don't personally know the subject to that level of detail) then absolutely they'd be fined etc.

But I don't understand this.

The seal hunt was never revived because people wanted to hunt them for food. I'm amazed anyone ever thought so or would use that assumption as the basis for a moral argument. The hunt is basically pelt-financed population control. It seems the government's too genteel to call it that with terminology, but in terms of explaining why there is a hunt, that's always its top argument. If your top priority is killing x amount of seals, for population control purposes, fully utilizing their corpses is not the highest priority at all.

And um, white seal killing has been banned for years now, and when it does happen, that is most definitely strictly illegal. Even environmentalists claim in their figures that well over 95% of all seals to be killed will be "over 2 weeks old" at which time the pups have already lost the white pelts through molting.

Apologies for injecting a dose of realism into this. I know some people would rather that never happen.

[Barrett808]

3. White coats or no, they're still pups.

And the slaughter would still be abysmally cruel even if they were clubbing adult seals.

"Population control"? To what end? The cod fishery collapsed entirely due to human overexploitation. The solution, of course, is to stop overfishing, not to kill more wildlife.

The slaughter is, simply, welfare.

Sorry for injecting even more realism.

[bedpanartist]

8. You want realism?

the world is a giant pile of living beings eating each other for nourishment. Cruel is the ways of life the maker sent many of us into.

[WindRavenX]

12. And I'm pretty sure that's not what this is about

Hunting for survival? I'm down with that. Killing young pups for vanity purposes? I think that's outside the realm of "survival", and crossing into the area of "unnecessary cruelty". But that's just my opinion.

[President Kerry]

4. I have a question.

What's the point of that population control you speak of? They like to say it's dipping numbers of cod, but it's never really made clear if the cod falls prey to the seals or to thoughtless and haphazard overfishing.

Any cull (particularly a brutal one) should have some solid reasoning behind it. The nature doesn't take kindly to being abused. In the end the abuser is going to get it in some form of unintended consequences.

[Kagemusha]

5. To be honest, they're spinning their wheels

Killing a third of seal pups is the most they can kill without raising or lowering the total seal population level. At one point it reached 7 million; now it's estimated at 6 million. If people are able to say it's within 1000 of a 325,000 quota then someone's watching in order to tell. So they don't have as bad an idea as some have suggested.

However, the cod issue is remarkably simple.

- Humans vastly overfished cod during the period when seals were completely protected against hunting.
- The cod numbers are STAYING down in spite of a total ban on commercial cod fishery (bycatch is discouraged but that doesn't eliminate it in the course of fishing for other bottom dwellers).
- The cod numbers are STAYING down in part because the seal numbers are high. Therefore, the seals, while relatively innocent in the cod numbers getting this low, are full accomplices in keeping the numbers low.
- However, maintaining a stable population of 6 million seals will do nothing to help the cod recover anyway.

Therefore the effective, real-world point of the population control really is welfare for the region that has seen standards of living fall for many collapse along with the cod stocks. If they really wanted to oppress the seal because it is a natural compeditor of cod, they'd have to slaughter a lot more than this.

They aren't.

I'm just saying, biologically speaking, nature is not being *abused*. The natural compeditors (read: eaters) of seals have not recovered anywhere near as fast as the seals themselves, which is normal in nature.

In principle, keeping the seal numbers at 6 million through culling helps keep that population stable by preventing overcrowding and possible population crashes. In practice I don't know enough about seals to tell you what would cause a crash and besides, a lot of people have a moral argument - the only kind I think is really valid here, and I have a natural dislike of straw man arguments - that nature should be allowed to control the population its own way if inclined to do so. But, keeping the seals down a bit also keeps them from driving the cod stocks even lower and threatening a staple of their diet over the long term. There's not enough cod to fish for market, but there's enough to sustain 6 million seals for the forseeable future.

Because the government finds itself quite helpless to do something to help the cod that'll actually make a difference short of a much, much wider cull (let's say, of unprofitable adults instead of pups), which it has no stomach for, it's doing "the least it can do" and allowing east coast sealers to supplement their income (which is likely not high) through a regular, well-regulated seal hunt that accomplishes a mild biological good for the benefit of the seals themselves. For the humans, it's a consolation prize and nothing more.

[LeftyMom]

6. The problem is that killing the seals is bad for the cod population

Cod comprises a very small percentage of the seals' diet (I believe the number I saw was 1.5%) however they do eat other fish that prey on the juvenile cod as a much larger percentage of thier diet. As a result, it's likely that reducing the seal population increases the numbers of fish that prey on juvenile cod and actually reduces the cod population. If the idea is to stabilize the area and allow nature to restore the cod fishery, it makes more sense to stop manipulating that food chain and let the seals and cod alone until balance is restored.

Additionally, the Canadian government spends more money supporting the seal hunt than it brings in. If the main aim is to help fishermen in economicly depressed areas, it makes more sense to cut them checks and leave the seals alone.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

27. good point-the food chain is important-if IT goes we ALL go-people&animals

...since the food chain is vital to the planet.
And if it is irreparably broken, all of us will die regardless of whether or not
any government or individual believes the food chain to be important.
It would be a slow a painful process.
Haven't we learned enough to prevent it?

[Kagemusha]

28. I'd love to ask actual marine biologists that.

Like I said elsewhere on this thread, the current rate of 'hunting' isn't going to change anything anyway, so it's all basically ecological status quo ante. But there's certainly reasons to be skeptical that we do know enough to make any substantial changes. All we really do know is that no matter what change occurs, it'll have repercussions down the line.

One thing I don't understand: there some suggestion here that besides overfishing, a reason for the cod stock collapse was *not enough* seals to keep the more determined and serious eaters of cod down? Hey, it's a fascinating theory if there's any truth to it.

I mean, people are obviously going to assume that just because I don't like straw man feel good arguments about this stuff, that somehow I *want* the seals to be responsible for keeping the cod down. Not at all. It's just, when I hear people citing environmentalists saying that seals (by and large, anyway) do not eat cod, my brain goes on fire. But alas, I doubt the details are going to be anything but pure scientific curiosity. This issue is about politics, not biology, for most opponents of the seal hunt. Not that this is wrong. But I resent any side in this (Canadian government included!) not nailing down the biological facts. We should expect better. There should not be a Grand Canyon dividing the science of the seal's life cycle.

That said, the numbers of seals are not dropping near enough to BREAK the food chain in this matter. Or even, frankly, dent it much at all. I'm sorry I misunderstood the earlier post about the quota being off by 1000 being a very small quota. But as I said, I expected to hear numbers *wildly* off. Like 15%-20% over the quota. There's still a lot of seals left. The offense to the human conscience is far greater than the damage to the seal herd itself.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kagemusha]

36. Enough with the personal attacks. Please.

I don't need a lecture from the "if you don't agree with everything I say you must be an angry resentful sad pathetic person" school of debate.

Let me say this vewy slowly.

The argument that modern man has no business clubbing baby seals to death is valid because it is a moral argument.

The argument that the seal hunt is ruinous and has grave consequences in the here and now is not.

When the circumstances of the seal hunt change and grave consequences are occuring, wake me up.

I'm not angry, sir or ma'am, I'm disgusted.

The rules of cause and effect do remain constant. Facts change. Effects change due to changes in causes. But I'm no more inclined to believe that I should take seal ecology on faith one iota more than I should take war with Iraq or Iran on faith.

A point which I see will not be appreciated here. That's fine - I tried.

Good luck stopping the seal hunt. As the post at the bottom of the thread about First Nations fishing and sealing rights indicates, you'll need it. Go bang your head against the wall of native rights for all the good it'll do.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

38. there was no personal attack at all- none - just related what you had said

edited for spelling

you discredited yourself and your credibility on the other Seal kill thread-

details from that thread:
I had mentioned that everyone's seen a seal balance a ball on its nose--
You said you hadn't and you were a "poverty stricken child" from a rural area in Canada-
you think yourself said on that you resented those children who got to go to Florida on vacation
to Sea World and see seals balance balls-
I told you that those children didn't "steal your sugar" and that it sounds like you have an anger issue.
I also challenged the fact that you've never seen a trained seal--unless you've never seen T.V.

NOW..
Let's get something straight-the facts-
FACT: the earth now has 6.6 Billion people
FACT: RULES of cause and EFFECT do NOT remain Constant!!!!!
This is not something that can be agreed with or disagreed with--it is a fact

here- it's in simple terms -why the idea of Rules of cause and effect do not remain constant.
it's like this-
if five people's toilets empty into a lake at a resort it's ok.
The EFFECT of the waste is not noticeable.
Now if fifty people's toilets empty into the lake the EFFECT on the lake is more noticeable.
Now if five hundred people's toilets empty into that same lake we have EXTREME effect.

the effect of six billion people on the earth's environment follows the same.

If certain "things" have been done twenty years ago ,
that does not mean twenty years later it's still ok to do those same things.

Modern man has no business clubbing to death baby seals.
Period.

[Kagemusha]

39. Just so you understand, I don't need credibility with you.

I'm not a small enough person that I need to beg for the likes of you to find me credible.

And if you don't want to actually read my replies then that's not my concern. I did point out that I was not saying I'd never seen a trained seal on tv. I said I'd never seen one in person. Nor have I seen a seal clubbed in person. I'm not rich enough to get my own boat to go harassing hunters on large chunks of ice. Do I resent that? Hell no, I wouldn't want to go there. Too cold.

But you've got a really big problem with basic, elementary logic.

The difference between 5, 50 and 500 toilets is differences in the degree of the cause. The effect is altered by the cause. The rule is never broken.

Ever.

And that's why I'm such a hard case about mathematics and numbers. It makes a tangible difference - and saying that the number COULD be off by magnitudes of 10 or 100, so we must make decisions based on what the numbers could be, not what they actually are... that's just unrealistic.

Maybe man has no business clubbing to death baby seals (which I mentioned in my response to your deleted post, above). But man having no business doing so has nothing to do with strange and fantastic ideas about reality being squishy and intangible, and numbers and science being completely irrelevant to our judgments about the natural world.

[President Kerry]

7. That was quite informative. Thank you. n/t

[adriennui]

9. i have nothing to add

except that it makes me cry. beautiful little creatures slaughtered in such a bloodthirsty barbaric way.

[flvegan]

10. Except that it's crap.

Reguritating "facts" from Canada's Fisheries Minister is much akin to tuning into CSPAN and hearing the latest Bush rah-rah session and enjoying the KoolAid.

I'll take HSUS' word for it:

Is the Seal Hunt Economically Important?

No. Sealing is an off-season activity conducted by fishermen from Canada's East Coast. They make, on average, one twentieth of their incomes from seal hunting and the rest from commercial fisheries. Even in Newfoundland, where 90% of sealers live, revenues from the hunt account for less than 1% of the province's economy and only 2% of the landed value of the fishery. According to the Newfoundland government, out of a population of half a million people, about 4,000 fishermen participate in the seal hunt each year.

The commercial seal hunt is an activity that Canada's federal government could easily replace with economic alternatives, should it choose to do so.

Does the Government Subsidize the Hunt?

Yes. According to reports from the Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment, more than $20 million in subsidies were provided to the sealing industry between 1995 and 2001. Those subsidies came from entities such as the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Human Resources Development Council, and Canada Economic Development–Quebec. These subsidies take a variety of forms, including funding the salaries for seal processing plant workers, market research and development trips, and capital acquisitions for processing plants.

Moreover, Canada's commercial seal hunt is also indirectly subsidized by the Norwegian government. A Norwegian company purchases close to 80% of the sealskins produced in Canada in any given year through its Canadian subsidiary. These skins are shipped in an unprocessed state directly to Norway, where they are tanned and re-exported. The Norwegian government provides significant financial assistance to this company each year.

Is It True Seals Are Jeopardizing the Canadian Cod Fishery?

There is no evidence to support this contention. Some fishing industry lobby groups try to claim that seals must be culled to protect fish stocks, but nothing could be further from the truth.

The scientific community agrees that the true cause of the depletion of fish stocks off Canada's East Coast is human over-fishing. Blaming seals for disappearing fish is a convenient way for the fishing industry to divert attention from its irresponsible and environmentally destructive practices that continue today.

In truth, seals, like all marine mammals, are a vital part of the ecosystem of the Northwest Atlantic. Harp seals, which are the primary target of the hunt, are opportunistic feeders, meaning they eat many different species. So while approximately 3% of a harp seal's diet may be commercially fished cod, harp seals also eat many significant predators of cod, such as squid. That is why some scientists are concerned that culling harp seals could further inhibit recovery of commercially valuable fish stocks in the Northwest Atlantic.

Are Seals Overpopulated?

No. The Canadian government and sealing industry have, at various times, tried to claim that the harp seal population has "tripled" over the past three decades, or that the harp seal population is "exploding," or that seals are overpopulated.

This is misleading at best. The harp seal population in the Northwest Atlantic is the world's largest; it is a migratory population that spans the distance between Canada and Greenland, and is supposed to number in the many millions.

In the 1950s and '60s, over-hunting wiped out close to two-thirds of the harp seal population. By 1974, the population was considered to be in serious trouble, and senior government scientists recommended suspending the commercial hunt for at least 10 years.

In the early 1980s, the European Union banned the import of whitecoat seal skins, effectively removing the principal market for the hunt at the time. For the next decade, the numbers of seals killed in the hunt dramatically declined, and the harp seal population began to recover.

But in the 1990s, the Canadian government rejuvenated the commercial seal hunt through massive subsidies. And with nearly one million seal pups killed in the past three years alone, we can only wonder what the impact will be on the harp seal population in coming years. Scientists have already sounded the alarm regarding the poor science used by the Canadian government to set quotas for the number of seals killed.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

35. kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!kick !!

:kick:

YOU ROCK

:yourock:

[Kagemusha]

37. I'm not trying to argue or anything at this point but...

Come. on.

"
No. The Canadian government and sealing industry have, at various times, tried to claim that the harp seal population has "tripled" over the past three decades, or that the harp seal population is "exploding," or that seals are overpopulated.

This is misleading at best. The harp seal population in the Northwest Atlantic is the world's largest; it is a migratory population that spans the distance between Canada and Greenland, and is supposed to number in the many millions.

In the 1950s and '60s, over-hunting wiped out close to two-thirds of the harp seal population. By 1974, the population was considered to be in serious trouble, and senior government scientists recommended suspending the commercial hunt for at least 10 years."

Divide the seal population by 2/3rds. Then multiply it by 3. What does that math do for you?

Someone posted about "historical numbers". This post mentions "many millions". How many millions is that supposed to be?

Word is out the hunt kills up to a third of all seal pups. What happened to the other 2 million seal pups born in the last three years alone that weren't hunted and slain?

I wouldn't ask unless I was sick of hearing that the government numbers are wrong WITHOUT THE TRUE NUMBERS BEING PROVIDED, and that the seal population is not overpopulated or even high WITHOUT SAYING HOW HIGH THE POPULATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

Sorry if you're not all marine biologists and are more interested in stopping the slaughter than technical questions such as these, but I'd really like to know someday, out of resentment at having these truths hidden from me. I have no idea why no one wants to say what the "legitimate" math is, if the government math is so bad. Is it simply not important, except so as to say, "the government numbers are crap"?...

Wait, nevermind. I'm answering my own question. (sigh)

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

40. weak argument- you just think seals are inanimate objects-numbers

or statistics-

open up to the idea that these are intelligent baby animals that are being massacred with baseball bats!
The blood splatters everywhere while these baby seals scream for mercy-

this is not a harvest of wheat and they're not picking apples.
They skinning those babies alive and leaving their bodies to rot--
then selling their skins for a money -very little money.

But needless to say, no matter what people tell you here, you remain firm-
no one will ever convince you otherwise-

But it's not surprising that you're having a tough time convincing others that baby seal killing is ok-
With that in mind, I feel a duty to remind you that you are on a liberal progressive board-
where most people like the environment-
where most people like creative change and "progress"

[Kagemusha]

41. No, if people actually told me hard numbers I would LISTEN.

But I don't see a line forming for doing so.

And I don't expect to see one.

Ever.

[flvegan]

11. Psst...

I didn't mention the slaughtering of white seals, so your "and um..." kind of loses me in it's reference to "realism" and it's alleged injection. Oh, and it was 1,000 over an 18,500 quota. The slaughter of the 320,000 starts next week.

My point, thank you for backing me up on it, is that this isn't hunting. It's a barbaric, brutal, inhumane slaughter of animals, no matter how you try to support it.

[Harper_is_Bush]

13. Boo hoo.

No different than any slaughterhouse. And yes, I know you're a vegan.

[LeftyMom]

14. Wild animals well off thier historic numbers and threatened by global

warming, mere babies, shot from a distance and left to bleed to death or mauled with a spiked club. You're defending that.

Because vain people want to wear thier skins. You think that's okay?

[Harper_is_Bush]

16. "global warming". There's something Paul and the rest of the

anti-sealing crusaders should focus their energy on.

Of course, global warming won't generate the same donations for them.

[LeftyMom]

18. Don't tell other people what thier priorities should be

It's impolite.

Both are problematic and deserve attention. Both are getting attention from the conservation community.

Stop changing the subject. Either come up with a good reason why the slaughter of baby seals is justifiable (every one mentioned on this thread so far has been refuted) or stop wasting time and bandwidth.

[Harper_is_Bush]

19. Don't misrepresent my words please.

I said global warming is the issue they should go after. I'm not telling them what to do, and frankly they can all jump in the lake for all I care.

The seal hunt is not an issue at all compared to global warming. Suggesting the seal hunt is even in the same playing field as global warming is offensive, frankly.

[LeftyMom]

20. But the seal hunt is within our power to stop with little effort

There's a big nasty mess of political and economic issues involved in global warming. So the idea that we shoudn't tackle the seal hunt until global warming is addressed to your satisfaction or that it doesn't matter because it's a smaller issue (it sure matters to the seals!) is deeply offensive to me.

[flvegan]

22. Strawman.

Next?

[Kagemusha]

24. How far back in history are you going for historic numbers?

Not snark. I seriously have no idea of when seals had more than 7 mil or so in total population.

And I'll repeat this because no one wants to believe it: it's entirely consistent to say this is a totally immoral hunt without saying it's ecologically ruinous in and of itself. I just don't think impressing people on a message board is going to do anything to convince the Canadian government to change a thing.

Extra welfare for Atlantic Canada in place of the seal hunt is not going to be welcomed.

[Raine]

15. It's DISGUSTING

it all for the fucking fur! :mad: The news showed some assholes strutting around on the runway in seal fur, FUCK THAT SHIT! :grr: I don't know how anyone can defend or rationalize that kind of crap, people with excess $ strutting around with the blood of pain on their backs!:eyes:

[flvegan]

17. Is that IT?

That's the best there is?

Oh...I don't even have to BOTHER.

Some posters already have their ass in their hands. Nice to not have to hand it to them.

[flvegan]

21. Actually...I can't just let that go.

No different than any slaughterhouse, eh? You go poll a hundred folks, and they'll talk about how a slaughterhouse is for food. Poll those same hundred and ask about how okay it is to brutalize an animal, clubbing that animal and invoking misery, for his/her fur, skin them alive, leave them suffering...not for meat, but for pelts...see what you get.

Good to see those true colors...let 'em run red with the blood of innocent creatures.

It's got nothing to do with me, regardless. Don't try to make it so. You feel free to support what bullshit cruelty you see fit...

[Kagemusha]

25. One word: Mink.

If you wanna go after animals kept for pelts and not their meat, don't stop with just seals. Please.

[LeftyMom]

26. trust me

that won't be a problem. :D

[Kagemusha]

29. That's fine with me.

I'm familiar with the basics of mink farming and wouldn't touch it with a hundred-foot pole. Not least of which because dead mink apparently make a rather vile stench that they somehow get rid of when processing the pelts. Suffice to say no one will ever slaughter mink for food. That's all I know about it, and that's all I *want* to know about it.

I'll say it again: killing seals is a greater wound to the human conscience than the food chain of Planet Earth.

[Kagemusha]

23. What about the pic of the white seal being clubbed?

That was pretty damn conspicuous, and I notice it's missing from your latest post.

I find it galling you think I'm trying to support this as a good thing. It IS a barbaric, brutal, inhumane slaughter of animals - oppose it on that basis, not that the seals are going extinct. You don't NEED a straw man.

As for cod being only 1.5% of seals' diet - um, I have a genuine scientific interest in this stuff but I'm not a marine biologist. I have not even the slightest idea of how to verify that information.

[BlackHeart]

43. Wouldn't it be more important to know...

...what percent of the cod are eaten by seals rather than what portion they are of the seal's diet.

[jim3775]

30. There is one major thing these articles and the anti-hunt people don't say

Banning the seal hunt would be near impossible to do, there is 15 years of supreme court precedent that will need to be overturned. Aboriginal hunting and fishing rights have been greatly strengthened in the last few years and overturning the laws that give them those rights is essentially a laughable proposal. There is a reason why no political party with seats in the parliament is against the seal hunt, including the progressive leftist NDP.

EDIT:

Here is a copy of the marshall decision; the supreme court decision that guaranteed the rights of Aboriginal groups to trade the products of their hunting and fishing to provide sustenance for a "moderate livelihood".

[Kagemusha]

31. Well they can ban whites from doing it.

And they can attempt to ban the commercial sale of the pelts and require seals be used for personal use only.

Good luck doing all that, but they can try.

[jim3775]

32. I'm not a lawyer but...

If you read the edit I just posted on my OP, the government can't ban the sale of pelts. The marshall decision guarantees the right to trade the products of their hunts.

[Kagemusha]

33. I assumed that was the case but wasn't 100% sure before now.

The marshall settlement led to a recent scandal about the exposure of government subsidies in the form of money to buy fishing vessels and other direct support for natives to have the means to go exercise their rights to go fishing without licenses (and out of season, mind you) and sell the proceeds of their catch... which one could interpret as a bit over the top. Anyway, the government that took place under is now history...

So, basically, all the government could accomplish is to give First Nations a monopoly on the seal pelt trade, which would make the whites banned from the business very hostile indeed. And that explains a little more to American and European activists of why the government isn't listening to animal rights activists on this issue.

Edit: This way the government at least keeps some semblance of regulation on the hunt too.

[admsitio]

42. SAVE THE SEALS IN CANADA

Every Year 325.000 baby seals ( from 15 to 25 days of living ) will be killed with clubs.
It's so cruel and criminal.Baby seals are hitted with clubs on her skulls.
It´s so so sad, many activist enjoy the groups to fight against the seal hunt in Canada.
If you want to buy some anti-seal stuff go to: http://www.cafepress.com/tshirtmaster