New
Seal Hunting Amendments:
December
27, 2008 - Amendments were released and
are active as of this date
In
an effort to thwart a complete European
ban on sealing products the Department
of Fisheries and Ocean made some
amendments to current seal hunting
regulations.
On
the surface these new regulations give
off the illusion that seal hunting will
be performed in a humane manner, but the
truth is that the regulations will
change next to nothing. We will post the
regulations, with our comments in
bold.
'REGULATIONS
AMENDING THE
MARINE MAMMAL REGULATIONS
AMENDMENTS
1.
(1) The definition “blinking reflex
test” in subsection 2(1) of the Marine
Mammal Regulations (see
footnote 1) is repealed.
(2)
Subsection 2(1) of the Regulations is
amended by adding the following in
alphabetical order:
“crushed”,
with respect to a skull, means that the
cranium has been broken so that it does
not present a solid structure on either
the right or left half when palpated; (écrasé)
“palpate”
means to examine the right and left
halves of the cranium by pressing it by
hand from the top; (palpation)
2.
Subsections 28(2) to (4) of the
Regulations are replaced by the
following:
(1.1)
No person shall use a club or hakapik to
strike a seal older than one year unless
the seal has been shot with a firearm.
(2)
Every person who strikes a seal with a
club or hakapik shall strike the seal on
the top of the skull until it has been
crushed and shall immediately palpate
the cranium to confirm that the skull
has been crushed.
The
main problem with this is that sealers
do not target seals over 1 year of age.
Sealers target baby seals that are over
3 weeks of age (old enough to shed
their white coats) In essence this new
regulation changes nothing. 99%+ of
clubbed seals are under 1 year of age.
This rule looks good on paper to people
who are unaware of how old the seals
being hunted are.
(3)
If a firearm is used to fish for a seal,
the person who shoots the seal or
retrieves it shall palpate the cranium
as soon as possible after it is shot to
confirm that the skull has been crushed.
This
looks good on paper but it would be
nearly impossible to enforce.
(4)
Every person who palpates the cranium of
a seal and determines that the skull is
not crushed shall immediately strike the
seal with a club or hakapik on the top
of its skull until the skull has been
crushed.
This
is nothing different then what
transpires now. The term immediately is
loose and can be interpreted differently
based on the sealer.
3.
Section 29 of the Regulations is
replaced by the following:
29.
No person shall skin a seal until the
skull has been crushed and at least one
minute has elapsed after the two
axillary arteries of the seal located
beneath its front flippers have been
severed to bleed the seal.
A
step in the right direction that
addresses the problem of some seals
being skinned alive which is one of the
main objections the European Union had.
This amendment was introduced to appease
the European Union. Regardless its a
positive development. But again this
would be nearly impossible to enforce.
4.
The table to paragraph 37(d) of
the Regulations is replaced by the
following:
|
Point
|
North
Latitude
|
West
Longitude
|
|
1.
|
47°27′12″
|
61°49′18″
|
|
2.
|
47°28′03″
|
61°47′42″
|
|
3.
|
47°27′36″
|
61°47′06″
|
|
4.
|
47°26′36″
|
61°48′42″
|
5.
The portion of item 6 of Schedule V
to the French version of the Regulations
in column I is replaced by the
following:
|
Article
|
Colonne
I Espèce de phoques
|
|
6.
|
Éléphant
de mer
|
COMING
INTO FORCE
6.
These Regulations come into force on the
day on which they are registered.
'Cost-benefit
statement: Implementing the proposal
would help to maintain market access for
an industry with a present export value
of $13M. The costs of implementation are
estimated to be between $1.8M to $3.6M.
These costs are associated with
increased costs to sealers (fuel, crew
wages, vessel maintenance, failure to
attain allowable catch, lost opportunity
to engage in other
fisheries/employment), to fisheries
management and enforcement (vessel time,
aircraft, observer deployment, dockside
monitoring) and to Coast Guard
(maintaining dedicated search and rescue
capability).
The
proposal makes it possible to maintain
an important economic activity for the
coastal people of Canada. It would also
align itself with the latest veterinary
advice and recommendations, requests of
the European Union (EU), and concerns
from animal welfare groups.'
At
least they are honest as to why they
passed these new 'regulations' it
has nothing to do with animal welfare.
It's all about giving the illusion of
policing the hunt as to prevent Europe
from banning seal products as to protect
an industry that is apparently worth 13
million.
Implementation
of the proposed Regulations and
associated conditions of licence would
require very specific practices to be
carried out by the sealers. This in turn
requires training for thousands of
sealers. For 2009, a training program is
being implemented beginning with
workshops, development of training
tools, and the delivery of a series of
pilot training sessions.
To
enhance enforcement, DFO plans to
implement remote camera monitoring of
the 2009 seal harvest. The system
requires reliable remote stable imaging
using a helicopter-mounted camera. The
leasing of the equipment and the
helicopter, installation, and training
is expensive but is expected to result
in a highly enhanced capability for
remote surveillance. Existing
surveillance equipment would also
require upgrading. Enforcement would be
supported by a dedicated Coast Guard
icebreaker presence.
Having
the seal hunt regulated and enforced is
a very positive development. We
can only recommend the following for
this to be taken seriously:
1.
The Seal Hunt Protection Act has to be
amended to describe fines and prison
terms for sealers who do not abide by
these regulations.
2.
The Seal Hunt Protection Act has to be
amended to allow the media and animal
rights groups to be able to openly film
the hunt without fear of
prosecution. Independent third parties
are needed to verify that these
amendments are being followed.
Lastly
the government has to address the
overall unsustainability of the hunt.
There has been no research behind the
number of seals that are allowed to be
killed each year or how these figures
are reached.
Also,
why do some of the rules only apply to
seals that are one year of age or older?
The rules need to apply to all seals
regardless of age otherwise a sealer can
claim that he was unaware of the age of
the seal. When the amendment applies to
all seals only then can it be taken
seriously.
Full
amendmends available here
|
