Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ph34r wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Not to mention the fact that a Pistol Causes a huge shockwave that could very well trigger an ice breakage (the same way it can cause an avalanche). A Club Cannot.

Rifles are used in seal hunting.

I am going to stop posting at this because I do not wish to contribute further to Gwar!'s 100 posts per day.

Oh wow. Seriously, grow up. "I'm not gonna post because Gwar! posts too much Waaaa Waaa!" Really? That's the best you can come up with?

Also your claim that Pistols make it easier for "Semi Skilled Hunters" to do it is a logical Fallacy. The people who hunt the seals are not hicks who go up for a weekend to kill some stuff, these are people who's livelihood revolve around it. They know what they are doing.

ph34r wrote:I did not say that a clean shot that doesn't kill is worse than a club to the head that doesn't kill/knock out. I said the opposite.
Stabbing the seal with a hakapik reduces the value too.
I would expect a professional hunter to be capable enough with his weapon to not harm himself with it.

In fact, most seal hunting is done with rifles. According to numerous references cited on wikipedia (as in, not just pulled out of a wikipediar's ass) adult seals are more often just shot with a rifle, while baby seals are killed with a hakapik.

It seems that I was correct about using a rifle being a better way of hunting, as you both seem to disagree strongly with. Because that is what people do. If seal clubbing is used specifically on baby seals while rifle use is also an option, then there must be a specific reason for it. I do not know what this reason is, but I guess that there must be one. I would prefer if clubbing was not used in any case.

So... you were wrong?

Okay.

I knew adult seals were commonly shot with rifles, tracked down, and finished off with a hakapik if the shot failed to kill them. (In Norway at least.) When did I say they weren't used? I just said that there were reasons they aren't used exclusively.

Young seals are killed with a hakapik because of the fur value, I'm pretty sure. The hammer end is the one primarily used.

Using a gun is more dangerous than a club. Being familiar with a weapon helps, but accidents happen even to those well trained in the use of firearms.
It's better to not use them if you can help it.

Wear Fur! Stop Global Warming!

Alright, it was silly of me to say that I would not respond any more just because of one user. I will just not respond to Gwar! any more. I would not ignore a user entirely, but I am not going to keep giving a user reason to post when those posts are not constructive.

@Orkeosaurus:
Sorry for mixing what Gwar! said with what you said.
Of course using a firearm always has some danger to it, but I expect professionals to be capable enough to use them without a high risk of accident.

I don't see what you are trying to say with "So... you were wrong?"
You posted "How exactly is a shot that doesn't kill worse than a clubbing that doesn't? And by kill I should really mean knock unconscious, which is easier to do with a bludgeon. "
I posted "I did not say that a clean shot that doesn't kill is worse than a club to the head that doesn't kill/knock out."

How am I wrong at saying that something that I did not argue, I did not argue?

EDIT: I also cleared some confusion in my previous post.

The funny thing is, I am actually making the exact same points as Orkeosaurus, yet his posts are constructive and mine are not?

ph34r wrote:I don't see what you are trying to say with "So... you were wrong?"

That was snide of me, I apologize.

You posted "How exactly is a shot that doesn't kill worse than a clubbing that doesn't? And by kill I should really mean knock unconscious, which is easier to do with a bludgeon. "
I posted "I did not say that a clean shot that doesn't kill is worse than a club to the head that doesn't kill/knock out."

How am I wrong at saying that something that I did not argue, I did not argue?

You said "Failing to make a clean blow to the head is more painful than failing to make a clean shot to the head" on page 2. I was disagreeing with that.

However, my "you were wrong" comment was actually in response to "If seal clubbing is used specifically on baby seals while rifle use is also an option, then there must be a specific reason for it. I do not know what this reason is, but I guess that there must be one."

Of course, you then say you would still prefer the club isn't used even though you don't know why it is used, which seemed to get back at what gerbrith was saying about people without any experience in the trade commenting on the best way to do it...



Also, this thread has gone on too long without:

I KILL BABY SEALS WITH MY BARE HANDS! I DO WHAT I WANT!

Now, I'm not trying to be mean or single anyone out, but I just wanted to mention that just because some of those seals keep moving after the first hit to the head, doesn't mean they are actually still conscious or even still alive. I know a lot of people watch videos like the ones PETA puts out, and sees an animal moving around during the killing process and think "OMG, it's moving! It must still be alive!", when really that's not always (or even often) the case.

Having said that, I'm not condoning seal clubbing, and I think a rifle would in most cases be the preferable weapon.

I'm curious though - to the people who think seal hunting in general is barbaric and pointless, no matter the weapon used - are you okay with any kind of hunting? If so, what animals and what methods?

Excuse me here but I am going to butt in on the convo I started.

In fact, most seal hunting is done with rifles. According to numerous references cited on wikipedia (as in, not just pulled out of a wikipediar's ass) adult seals are more often just shot with a rifle, while baby seals are killed with a hakapik.

It seems that I was correct about using a rifle being a better way of hunting, as you both seem to disagree strongly with. Because that is what people do. If seal clubbing is used specifically on baby seals while rifle use is also an option, then there must be a specific reason for it. I do not know what this reason is, but I guess that there must be one. I would prefer if clubbing was not used in any case.

Oh, and checking for new posts I see

Fallicy numero uno. In Canada, using a rifle or firearm to hunt seals is highly illegal. The governement actually regulates this stuff you know, as it is a major part of the Newfoundland fisheries economy. The way they are generally killed is smacked with a hakapik, then they have their throats cut once they stop trying to get away. (which they can't as they are stunned/out cold from the blow to the noggin) Once the seal is dead the carcass is hooked by the throat and brought to the boat for skinning.

Why are we killing the babies again?

We arn't, this is the biggest lie propagated by the enemies of the seal hunt. In Canada, It Is Illegal To Kill Baby Seals. Its a practice that has been stopped for decades! (since 1987) What they tell you are lies.

PS: For clarification, a baby seal is only a baby for roughly 14 days after it is born. After which it's fur sheds and is no longer dependant on the mother and is left to fend for itself in the wild.

Fallicy number 3, Sealing is not just limited to Inuit and is actually undertaken by Newfoundlanders for the most part. A culture that has been hunting seals for hundreds of years.

Thirdly, and I really should have given this out with the original post. Here is the link to the CBC'c faq page about the Seal Hunt in Canada. And its not biased as much as it is possible to be without bias. (as I know if I said its not biased, which it basically isn't, would nail on the technicality that everything told by humans is slightly biased...)

Fourthly, that video that was shown was over 30 years old. How do I know this? Every year it is shown by Animal Groups, and every year CBC does a peice on those movements and describes what they get right and what they get wrong. That video is one of them.

Fifthly, those movements that the seal make after they ahve been clubbed? Ever heard of a chicken running around after you cut its head off? Well its the same princicpal, the strong swimming reflex in seals is still active even after death.

Lastly, and this part is slightly off topic. Factory farming isn't really that bad. My dad is a pig farmer. And is currently the Swine representative for OMAF for all of ontario. He knows what hes talking about when it comes to humane practices in farming or slaughtering. (He also worked on the University of Guelphs kill flour during University.) The proper killing of a seal is no worse or painful than the proper slaughter of a pig or cow. Factory farming produces a high meat to resources level, its cheap effective. And as long as people eat meat, most of it will come from factory farms.


PPS: Seal burgers are tasty....

People can quote facts and figures, and go on about what they believe constitutes humane killings or not until the cows come home.
Let's just reduce this to it's bare bones.

-Some people in Canada kill seals, skin them, and use the proceeds to support their families.
-The EU has banned people from buying these sealskins, as they believe that it is an unnecessary industry, that inflicts pain and death upon wild animals.

Depleting the fish is neither here nor there. If Canadian fishermen club seals to death, they're doing it unnecessarily to increase fish stocks by an infinitesimal amount. It really has little impact. Fish stocks the world over are suffering through unsustainable fishing, and it's not because of seals.

Everyone has their own moral code here. The Canadian seal hunters make a living off of it, and will be hard pressed to support themselves and their families without this source of income. Before you start moaning how barbaric it is, think of how hard it you would be if you, and everyone in your town suddenly became unemployed, but had no benefits system.

Humans exploit animals in various cruel and humane ways for meat, and industrial farming processes on a day to day basis worldwide. If you're prepared to eat meat, you must be prepared to accept that humans impose their will on how animals live and die. Which animal it is is irrelevant semantics. The real crux of the issue here, is whether you think on a global scale, or a local one.

On the global scale, the EU feels that it can ban the seal fur trade, as furs in general, are no longer considered appropriate. Killing an animal simply for the fur is seen as cruel and wasteful. There's a reason people don't wear lionskin, or mink fur coats. Taking another creatures life so that you can use it as a fashion garment is now seen as the mark of a morally corrupt person. Whilst it might be acceptable to kill another creature to prolong our own existance( so for food for example), killing for such a frivolous reason is disgusting. It's as bad as fox hunting. If seal meat was part of the industry, it was seen as an accepted delicacy outside of the local area, and you had, 'seal farms' going, there wouldn't be such an outcry, as it would be seen as a major industry that did its part to sustain humanity, and NOT using the skins for something would be wasteful

On the local scale, the seal hunters hun seals because its a source of income. They don't think on the morality of it, as far as they're concerned, they're just fulfilling the customers needs, so that they and their families can survive. The humaneness of the killing is irrelevant. Which do you value higher, the lives of your family, or the lives of animals? Killing off this industry kills off their means of survival.

The main problem here is simple if you read between the lines. The EU has banned its members from buying sealskins. That means that they were buying them beforehand. Those EU customers of the sealskin coat are the reason the industry exists. Without them, the seal hunters would not be doing it, as there would be no money in it. So for the EU to turn around and say that it is cruel is hypocritical at best. The only reason the market exists is because they were buying them in the first place.

So where to go from here?

Well, the killing of an animal unnecessarily just so you can wear its skin as an accessory is revolting morally speaking. If it's for people who live in the cold, who need those skins to help them survive on a day to day life, fair enough. But if it's for rich Europeans who want it merely because they 'like the feel' of it or whatever, it's wrong. It's as wrong as Otter skin handbags. Humaneness of killing is a recent moral concept, and one that has arisen mainly with increased public awareness of battery farming. Because I do not agree with the methods of battery farming, I only eat free range meats. At the end of the day though, that's a personal morality, as opposed to the slightly more global scale on the morality of selling sealskin.

The solution is that hunting seals for their skins should be outlawed. It's a barbaric and unnecessary practice. But the EU should not ignore the fact that IT is the reason this industry exists, and the reason why these Canadian people must now suffer hardship. Therefore they should shoulder their responsibility in the matter, and help to create new industries to replace the one that they are removing.

if you expect them to do that then you would also have to expect them to give up foods like Foie Gras. Pretty much I really don't like it cause they are simply being ignorant and extremely hypocritical. If you can make a living literally stuffing food down a ducks throat until it dies so you have a really tasty meal then turn around and say that us killing baby seals, (which isn't even allowed now) is just wrong.

Ratbarf wrote:Fallicy numero uno. In Canada, using a rifle or firearm to hunt seals is highly illegal. The governement actually regulates this stuff you know, as it is a major part of the Newfoundland fisheries economy. The way they are generally killed is smacked with a hakapik, then they have their throats cut once they stop trying to get away. (which they can't as they are stunned/out cold from the blow to the noggin) Once the seal is dead the carcass is hooked by the throat and brought to the boat for skinning.

Really? I guess it was just scandinavian seal hunting I was looking at.

Ketara wrote:Killing an animal simply for the fur is seen as cruel and wasteful. There's a reason people don't wear lionskin, or mink fur coats. Taking another creatures life so that you can use it as a fashion garment is now seen as the mark of a morally corrupt person. Whilst it might be acceptable to kill another creature to prolong our own existance( so for food for example), killing for such a frivolous reason is disgusting.

People say this, but it's not true.

Human beings can survive without eating meat, and they can certainly survive eating much less meat than they often do. For rich Europeans, meat is a luxury just like fur. People don't need to kill for food any more than they need to kill for warmth.

Plus, I notice there's not nearly as much uproar over leather, which is just as much the skin of an animal as fur.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Plus, I notice there's not nearly as much uproar over leather, which is just as much the skin of an animal as fur.

Because cows are ugly and we use "all" the cow. We Use the skin for leather, the meat for people food, the bones to make sweeties and the Brains to make Cow Food!

Aren't the seals frequently eaten though?

Making them into stew and whatnot?

Ratbarf wrote:Fallicy numero uno. In Canada, using a rifle or firearm to hunt seals is highly illegal. The governement actually regulates this stuff you know, as it is a major part of the Newfoundland fisheries economy. The way they are generally killed is smacked with a hakapik, then they have their throats cut once they stop trying to get away. (which they can't as they are stunned/out cold from the blow to the noggin) Once the seal is dead the carcass is hooked by the throat and brought to the boat for skinning.

What I was referencing was talking about these practices in countries other than Canada.

Ketara wrote:Well, the killing of an animal unnecessarily just so you can wear its skin as an accessory is revolting morally speaking. If it's for people who live in the cold, who need those skins to help them survive on a day to day life, fair enough. But if it's for rich Europeans who want it merely because they 'like the feel' of it or whatever, it's wrong. It's as wrong as Otter skin handbags. Humaneness of killing is a recent moral concept, and one that has arisen mainly with increased public awareness of battery farming. Because I do not agree with the methods of battery farming, I only eat free range meats. At the end of the day though, that's a personal morality, as opposed to the slightly more global scale on the morality of selling sealskin.

Agreed.

However, my "you were wrong" comment was actually in response to "If seal clubbing is used specifically on baby seals while rifle use is also an option, then there must be a specific reason for it. I do not know what this reason is, but I guess that there must be one."

Before I was under the impression that rifles were not used, so I thought that rifles should be used. If rifles are used, but specifically not on baby seals, there must be some reason, and I don't disagree with that. I disagree with the entire thing.

if you expect them to do that then you would also have to expect them to give up foods like Foie Gras. Pretty much I really don't like it cause they are simply being ignorant and extremely hypocritical. If you can make a living literally stuffing food down a ducks throat until it dies so you have a really tasty meal then turn around and say that us killing baby seals, (which isn't even allowed now) is just wrong.

I am against the idea of foie gras as well.

Yes but it boils down to Seals are Cute and are killed where PeTA terrorists can film it, while cows are Ugly as sin and are killed all Hush hush

Once again, why is fur morally corrupt but not meat, for a person who can live without either?

And more importantly, if the seals are being eaten, do you still oppose their deaths, and if so why? You get more meat from a seal than you do a chicken.

What I was referencing was talking about these practices in countries other than Canada.

Canada has the biggest seal hunt in the world.

I eat meat, and I wear leather, I have eaten Seal Burgers, and my family has a mink fur coat in its closet. (though admittedly it was my greatgrandmothers) Are we evil? I don't think so, to each culture its own I say. I don't really care that in Korea or China they think dogs are tasty. Just don't try to eat mine and its all cool.

GO CANADA!!!!

Jesus wept.

Does this mean that i cant have seal jerky when i go to europe?
are they going to ban dolphins meat too?

Shhhh, don't let them know we eat dolphins too!!!

And yes that means you can't take your seal jerky.

I would LOVE some seal jerky!!!! If there are any Canadians in here who can source this PM me.

And you know what, I seem to have spotted several baby seals in this thread. Too bad they haven't been clubbed already.

Ratbarf wrote:Are we evil? I don't think so, to each culture its own I say. I don't really care that in Korea or China they think dogs are tasty. Just don't try to eat mine and its all cool.

I am against eating dogs/cats. They are a species specifically bred to be pets, and they should stay as pets. One of my friends who grew up in china had 3 of his pet cats kidnapped and sold to be food. This was not an uncommon thing in his town.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Once again, why is fur morally corrupt but not meat, for a person who can live without either?

And more importantly, if the seals are being eaten, do you still oppose their deaths, and if so why? You get more meat from a seal than you do a chicken.

You yourself said it already, we have plenty of meat already. Meat from seals is a byproduct of killing them for fur.

ph34r wrote:You yourself said it already, we have plenty of meat already. Meat from seals is a byproduct of killing them for fur.

So you think the people eating seal are eating it in addition to all their other food, and if they stopped hunting seals they wouldn't eat anymore meat?

Of course not. So what if meat is a byproduct? What does that matter? If someone is eating a pound of seal they're not eating a pound of another meat. That reduces the demand for meat, which means less will be raised. Basic economics. Seal meat takes the place of other types of meat, it's not randomly added on. If more of one kind of meat is eaten less of another will be eaten.

Do you really think to kill an animal for meat and fur is worse than to kill an animal for meat and throw the skin away?

Oh wait, even that doesn't work because people make things from cow skin all the time.

Maybe someone could eat vegetables instead, but that doesn't make eating turkey any better than seal. At least with seal you get another product from its death.

Gwar! wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Not to mention the fact that a Pistol Causes a huge shockwave that could very well trigger an ice breakage (the same way it can cause an avalanche). A Club Cannot.

Rifles are used in seal hunting.

I am going to stop posting at this because I do not wish to contribute further to Gwar!'s 100 posts per day.

Oh wow. Seriously, grow up. "I'm not gonna post because Gwar! posts too much Waaaa Waaa!" Really? That's the best you can come up with?

I don't know, i think he may have a point. You've already proven you have little idea what your actually going on about when you thought we were talking about a hunting method whiich took one blow to the head.

Orkeosaurus wrote:That video was BS. Did you miss the bloody leaf? And the fact that it was a video by PETA?

Yeh the video, the video, the video. I only posted it to show gwar wht the hell seal clubbing was. Was the best I could find in the time I had.

Orkeosaurus wrote:A clean blow to the head will kill them the same a clean shot to the head.

Not an issue.

A failed clubbing will cause them pain same as a failed shot.

You seem to forget that a hakapik, the hunting tool used for this is used because it doesn't damage the pelts because thats more important to the hunters. It's not made in order to give a quick kill.

EDIT: tbh, I've had my time with this thread. It's obvious anything said will just meet with a load of counter points as some people are more about disagreeing with rather than considering the other side of the argument. End of the day this ban is going to pass, that's highly predictable now.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

ph34r wrote:You yourself said it already, we have plenty of meat already. Meat from seals is a byproduct of killing them for fur.

So you think the people eating seal are eating it in addition to all their other food, and if they stopped hunting seals they wouldn't eat anymore meat?

No.

Of course not. So what if meat is a byproduct? What does that matter? If someone is eating a pound of seal they're not eating a pound of another meat. That reduces the demand for meat, which means less will be raised. Basic economics. Seal meat takes the place of other types of meat, it's not randomly added on. If more of one kind of meat is eaten less of another will be eaten.

A cow weighs much more than a seal. It is very efficient to raise and slaughter cattle if meat is the issue.

Do you really think to kill an animal for meat and fur is worse than to kill an animal for meat and throw the skin away?

No.

Oh wait, even that doesn't work because people make things from cow skin all the time.

I don't see what you are trying to say here. Of course people use cow leather.

Maybe someone could eat vegetables instead, but that doesn't make eating turkey any better than seal. At least with seal you get another product from its death.

Using "we get some meat from it" to justify hunting an animal primarily for its fur does not fly with me. If meat was a concern at all the same amount could be gained from much fewer cattle. You get a product from them, too.

ph34r wrote:

Oh wait, even that doesn't work because people make things from cow skin all the time.

I don't see what you are trying to say here. Of course people use cow leather.

So why is it ok to use Cow leather but Not Seal Furs?

Perhaps because cattle are killed humanely in an abetour and not beaten with a hakapik. Then theres the meat, most cattle seel for over £1000 to an abetour, thats £1000 worth of meat. Then theres the fact that cattle are the biggest ferteliser provider.

Oh and then there's a barely profitable seal hunting industry which provides fur which we don't even need and meat who know one eats. Pointless. It's not the fact that they are killed inhumanely which gets me, it's the fact that they are killed inhumanely for barely any reason at all.

Gwar! wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Oh wait, even that doesn't work because people make things from cow skin all the time.

I don't see what you are trying to say here. Of course people use cow leather.

So why is it ok to use Cow leather but Not Seal Furs?

Cow leather is a biproduct of slaughtering cattle for meat.

So, your saying slaughtering animals for their fur/hides is OK, as long as they do it in a way that you don't have to see?

@ph34r: Seal Meat is a Biproduct of slaughtering Seals for furs. Or are you saying its ok to have Skins as a "Biproduct" but not ok for meat to be a Biproduct?

Gwar! wrote:So, your saying slaughtering animals for their fur/hides is OK, as long as they do it in a way that you don't have to see?

wtf? No, you could build an abetour in glass for all i care.