Tag: Canada

U.S. Senate Resolution 269 — Condemnation of Candian Seal Hunt

Whereas on November 15, 2003, the Government of Canada opened a commercial hunt on seals in the waters off the east coast of Canada; (Introduced in Senate)

SRES 269 IS

108th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. RES. 269

Urging the Government of Canada to end the commercial seal hunt that opened on November 15, 2003.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

November 20, 2003

Mr. LEVIN (for himself and Ms. COLLINS, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. REED, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. DODD, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. JEFFORDS, and Mr. KENNEDY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Urging the Government of Canada to end the commercial seal hunt that opened on November 15, 2003.

Whereas on November 15, 2003, the Government of Canada opened a commercial hunt on seals in the waters off the east coast of Canada;

Whereas an international outcry regarding the plight of the seals hunted in Canada resulted in the 1983 ban by the European Union of whitecoat and blueback seal skins, and the subsequent collapse of the commercial seal hunt in Canada;

Whereas the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) bars the import into the United States of any seal products;

Whereas in February 2003, the Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans in Canada authorized the highest quota for harp seals in Canadian history, allowing nearly 1,000,000 seals to be killed over a 3-year period;

Whereas harp seal pups can be legally hunted in Canada as soon as they have begun to molt their white coats at approximately 12 days of age;

Whereas 97 percent of the seals culled in the 2003 slaughter were pups between just 12 days and 12 weeks of age, most of which had not yet eaten their first solid meal or learned to swim;

Whereas a 2001 report by an independent team of veterinarians invited to observe the hunt by the International Fund for Animal Welfare concluded that the seal hunt failed to comply with basic animal welfare regulations in Canada and that governmental regulations regarding humane killing were not being respected or enforced;

Whereas the 2001 veterinary report concluded that as many as 42 percent of the seals studied were likely skinned while alive and conscious;

Whereas the commercial slaughter of seals in the Northwest Atlantic is inherently cruel, whether the killing is conducted by clubbing or by shooting;

Whereas many seals are shot in the course of the hunt, but escape beneath the ice where they die slowly and are never recovered, and these seals are not counted in official kill statistics, making the actual kill level far higher than the level that is reported;

Whereas the commercial hunt for harp and hooded seals is not conducted by indigenous peoples of Canada, but is a commercial slaughter carried out by nonnative people from the East Coast of Canada for seal fur, oil, and penises (used as aphrodisiacs in some Asian markets);

Whereas the fishing and sealing industries in Canada continue to justify the expanded seal hunt on the grounds that the seals in the Northwest Atlantic are preventing the recovery of cod stocks, despite the lack of any credible scientific evidence to support this claim;

Whereas 2 Canadian Government marine scientists reported in 1994 that the true cause of cod depletion in the North Atlantic was over-fishing, and the consensus among the international scientific community is that seals are not responsible for the collapse of cod stocks;

Whereas harp and hooded seals are a vital part of the complex ecosystem of the Northwest Atlantic, and because the seals consume predators of commercial cod stocks, removing the seals might actually inhibit recovery of cod stocks;

Whereas certain ministries of the Government of Canada have stated clearly that there is no evidence that killing seals will help groundfish stocks to recover; and

Whereas the persistence of this cruel and needless commercial hunt is inconsistent with the well-earned international reputation of Canada: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate urges the Government of Canada to end the commercial hunt on seals that opened in the waters off the east coast of Canada on November 15, 2003.

Senate Resolution Condemning Canadian Seal Hunt Recommended by Senate Foreign Relations Committee

According to a press release by the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has recommended that the full Senate consider a resolution condemning the resumption of the commercial seal hunt in Canada. According to the Senate web site on the bill, however, no action has been taken on the bill other than the addition of several co-sponsors.

Regardless, the resolution was introduced in November 2003 by Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), and read, in part,

Whereas the persistence of this cruel and needless commercial hunt is inconsistent with the well-earned international reputation of Canada: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Senate urges the Government of Canada to end the commercial hunt on seals that opened in the waters off the east coast of Canada on November 15, 2003.

In its press release, IFAW president Fred O’Regan said of the proposed resolution,

This move illustrates that the international opposition to the Canadian seal hunt is not a fringe opinion, but a worldwide consensus that ranges from the halls of government to the man on the street. The issues are the same as they were when IFAW began, 35 years ago, to stop the hunt. Killing baby seals doesn’t make sense economically, ecologically or in regard to the humane treatment of animals.

It is unclear how O’Regan makes the leap that a Senate committee recommending that a proposed resolution go to the full Senate for a vote represents proof of “a worldwide consensus” on the Canadian seal hunt.

The full text of the resolution can be read here.

Source:

U.S. Senate Moves Closer to Condemning Canadian Seal Hunt. Press Release, International Fund for Animal Welfare, May 3, 2004.

Keep Your Hands Off My Canadian Bacon

The Bush administration kicked off its term in office by imposing Draconian tariffs on imported wood from Canada and now it seems to likely to bookend its first term with equally stupid tariffs on Canadian pork products.

The U.S. International Trade Commission claims that Canada unfairly subsidizes hog farmers. Canadian hog farmers say that’s simply not true. Frankly, I couldn’t give a damn. Look, if the Canadian government is subsidizing hogs for export to the United States, it is basically transferring wealth from Canada to the United States — who in their right minds would want to stand up and say “stop giving us your money! We want to pay higher prices for pork products!”

Well, the Bush administration might. Pork producers are big businesses in swing states like Ohio where Dick Isler, executive vice president of the Ohio Pork Producers Council tells the Gannett News Service, “In general we have seen large numbers of producers, especially in the last two or three years, who have not been able to make a profit and as a result are not able to raise hogs any longer.”

But is this due to “unfair” subsidies? In fact, the decline in U.S. hog farms — and rise in imports from Canada — began in 1998 which, not surprisingly, also happens to be when the Canadian dollar crashed and burned compared to the U.S. dollar (I worked for a company at the time that moved all of a number of lucrative telecommunications contracts to Canadian firms strictly to take advantage of the currency savings).

The current comparative advantage that Canada has in producing some goods, such as wood or hogs, benefits both countries, but especially the United States where cheap imports can help deter inflationary pressures. This state of affairs won’t last forever, and the Bush administration would be crazy to arbitrarily tell Americans, “no, you must pay more for pork products because our farmers just can’t compete with Canadian farmers.”

Source:

U.S. panel mulls trade sanctions to stem hog imports. Greg Wright, Gannett News Service, May 8, 2004.

Television Bureau of Canada Rejects PETA Ad as "Too Graphic"

In February, the Television Bureau of Canada rejected as “too graphic” an ad that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wanted to run on Canadian broadcast television stations.

According to The Canadian Press,

In one scene, a North Carolina pig farmer gloats as he smashes what appears to be a concrete block on the head of a downed pig.

The ad was run by some TV stations in the United States. Of course the PETA’s point is not necessarily to run the ads, but to get groups like the Television Bureau or stations to reject the ads so that the “controversy” about the ads then generates stories.

PETA’s Teri Arnold told The Canadian Press,

Getting it [the ad] rejected does tend to get us more play off of it, which is helpful. We just don’t have the advertising dollars, to spend millions and millions of dollars to put it all over the airwaves.

Source:

PETA anti-meat commercial runs afoul of Canadian TV ‘censors’. Colin Perkel, The Canadian Press, February 10, 2004.

Man Acquitted on Charges of Performing Oral Sex without Girlfriend’s Consent

The Nova Scotia Chronicle Herald reports that a jury in Sydney deliberated only 10 minutes to find a man not guilty of performing oral sex on his girlfriend without her consent. Apparently prosecutors in Canada don’t have much real crime to prosecute if they can devote resources to such ludicrous cases.

After having what the Chronicle Herald characterized as a “bitter fight” with her boyfriend, the woman went to police and reported that five days earlier she had awoken to find her boyfriend performing oral sex on her. The boyfriend testified that the woman was, in fact, awake throughout the sex act and, in fact, “moving around . . . [and] moaning.”

Apparently the jury found the case groan-inducing as well.

Source:

Cape Breton man found not guilty in oral sex case. The Chronicle Herald (Nova Scotia), January 29, 2004.

Saskatchewan Government Says It’s Not Sorry for Malicious Prosecution

A judge recently ruled that a family accused of ritual abuse had been the victim of “malicious prosecution” but that hasn’t stopped representatives of the Saskatchewan government from saying it did nothing wrong and has nothing to apologize for.

The case against 12 members of the Klassen family began in 1987 when three foster children — a boy and his twin sisters — made accusations of incredibly bizarre ritual sexual abuse against their foster parents which soon led to allegations against twelve family members.

The children’s accusations were filled with bizarre ritual abuse, including claims that they were forced to eat eye balls, drink blood, participate in orgies, and watch while infants were skinned alive.

Police in Saskatoon called it the “scandal of the century” but few charges were actually lodged against anyone and by 1993 all charges in the cases were stayed. The children later came forward to repudiate the stories. The boy had been removed shortly before making the allegations after he had been found abusing his sisters. He maintained he made up the stories in order to be reunited with his sisters whom he then convinced to go along with the fiction.

On December 30 a judge ruled that Crown Prosecutor Matthew Miazga, Saskatoon Police Superintendent Brian Dueck, and child therapist Carol Bunko-Ruys were guilty of malicious prosecution. Shortly afterward, Saskatoon police chief Russell Sabo publicly apologized to the Klassen’s and promised an investigation into what went wrong in the investigation of the case.

Sabo said,

The judgment in this case vindicates the plaintiffs for the criminal charges they faced. Based on the information contained in the judgment, as the chief of police of the Saskatoon police service, my sympathy goes to each and every person that was wrongfully charged and I extend my apologies to them for any part that the Saskatoon police service played in this case.

But Saskatchewan Justice Minister Frank Quennell was having none of it, telling Canoe.Com,

It is our position that Crown prosecutors did not commit a wrong and there is no reason they would be required to apologize in that circumstance.

Quennell is probably afraid of the millions of dollars that Saskatchewan is going to have to pay out to the Klassen’s and perhaps even the twin sisters. They are also suing Saskatchewan, arguing that police social workers and others did nothing to protect them from the abuse they were subjected to by their brother.

Sources:

Twins hail malicious prosecution victory. CBC News, December 31, 2003.

NDP Must Take Responsibility for Klassen Family Tragedy and Negotiate Payment Immediately. Press Release, SKCaucus.Com, January 8, 2004.

Sask. government won’t apologize in abuse case. Canoe.CaTim Cook, January 8, 2004

Saskatchewan offers Klassen no apology. Darren Yourk, Globe and Mail, January 8, 2004.