|
The IFAW Update
In 1983, the European Community introduced a ban on the trade in the skins of newborn harp seals (‘whitecoats’ about 0 -12 days old) and young hooded seals (‘bluebacks’ about 0 -14 months old). This ban substantially reduced the market for seal skins and thus the Canadian seal hunt reduced in size. |
|
However, following subsidies from the Canadian Government to reinvigorate the hunt and create new commercial markets, the annual hunt has increased with a vengeance. The sealers now simply wait a few extra days until the harp seals begin to shed their ‘whitecoats’ before killing them. Their skins are then legally traded in Europe.
Most European governments (including the UK) have been clear in their opposition to the hunt and have expressed this view to the Canadian Government on numerous occasions. However, IFAW would like to see this opposition demonstrated in the form of action by banning the trade in seal products in the UK and throughout the EU. This would send a clear message to Canadian Government and show that the citizens of the UK and Europe want nothing whatsoever to do with this barbaric hunt. |
|
THE CANADIAN COMMERCIAL SEAL HUNT TODAY
Canada’s commercial seal hunt is the largest marine mammal hunt in the world.
In the last 5 years over 1.5 million seals have been killed in Canada. The Canadian government has set a quota for a further 275,000 seals in 2008.
Current kill levels are unsustainable. The Canadian government is ignoring its own scientific advice by setting quotas for harp seals above what the population can sustain. A recent scientific report concluded that the Canadian Government’s management approach risks depleting the harp seal population by as much as 70% within the next 15 years. Recent years, including 2007, have seen poor ice conditions, which normally lead to higher natural pup mortality rates. In spite of this, quotas have remained exceptionally high.
Veterinary reports have consistently identified unacceptable levels of cruelty. Due to concerns about cruelty, the European Commission asked the animal health and welfare panel of EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) to produce a scientific opinion on seal killing and skinning methods. The study, published in December 2007, recognised many of the concerns raised by previous veterinary reports, stating there is strong evidence that, in practice, effective killing does not always occur; that animals suffer pain and distress during Canada’s commercial seal hunt; and that sealers often do not comply with regulations.
Canada’s commercial seal hunt targets seal pups. In 2007, 98.5% of the seals killed were less than three months of age.
The pups are killed primarily for their fur. Practically all of the seal carcasses are abandoned and left to rot on the ice because there are few markets for the meat.
Over-fishing, not seals, has led to the decline in fish stocks. Even the Canadian Government no longer tries to maintain the spurious argument that the hunt is to protect fish stocks.
The commercial hunt is separate from the Inuit hunt. IFAW is not opposed to subsistence hunting by the Inuit and other First Nation peoples of Canada, who take less than 2,000 (adult) harp seals a year. Canada’s commercial seal hunt and Inuit seal hunting are two very different operations; they take place at different times of the year, in different places, involve different people, and different seals. The Canadian government is cynically trying to blur the distinction between Canada’s commercial seal hunt and Inuit sealing to deflect opposition to the commercial hunt. Virtually all existing bans on seal products contain exemptions for products derived from Inuit hunts.
- THE ECONOMICS OF THE HUNT
- Europe remains a key transitory market for Canadian sealskins. Each year hundreds of thousands of Canadian sealskins are shipped to Europe for processing and resale.
- The seal hunt contributes very little to Canada’s economy. Even in Newfoundland, where 90% of sealers live, sealing income accounts for less than 0.5% of Newfoundland’s GDP.
- No-one makes a living solely from the seal hunt. It contributes very little to individual incomes, with about 5,000 fishermen participating each year, for a few days during the off-season for fishing.
The Canadian government still indirectly subsidises the hunt, for example, through the provision of ice-breaking vessels to allow sealers access to the pups, and through funding an expensive PR effort in the face of massive and ever-increasing international opposition.
SEAL PRODUCT BANS WORLDWIDE
The USA has had a ban in place since the introduction of the Marine Mammal Protection Act in 1972. Mexico introduced its own Marine Mammal Protection Act in 2006 and Croatia also banned the trade in seal products in 2006.
In the EU, Belgium permanently banned the trade in seal products in February 2007. The Netherlands followed suit in July. Slovenia also has a ban. Germany, Italy, and Austria are also introducing or considering national bans. In February 2007, the UK government announced its intention to pursue an EU-wide ban on the import of seal products.
In September 2006, a Written Declaration was adopted by the European Parliament calling for an EU-wide ban on seal products.
In response, the European Commission pledged to undertake two studies - one regarding the humaneness of seal hunting (the EFSA study mentioned above) and an impact assessment looking at socio-economic aspects of the hunt (expected April 2008). On the basis of these two reports the Commission is due to announce a decision shortly about what action the EU will take. The Commission has also explicitly stated that Member States have the legal power to introduce national bans and that more national bans would help justify action by the Commission on this issue.
Recent media reports have suggested that the Commission may put forward some kind of partial ban, where products from hunts that cannot be proved to be humane will be banned. Such an approach would be impractical and incredibly difficult to enforce. IFAW remains convinced that Canada’s commercial seal hunt is inherently inhumane, and any decision that tries to enforce higher standards is unrealistic. The only sensible response is a total ban on products derived from commercial hunts.
In September 2007, the Canadian government requested WTO consultations on the Belgian and Dutch national bans. WTO consultations are a precursor to a full WTO challenge but do not necessarily lead to one. The timing of this consultation was very clearly meant to influence proceedings of the Commission’s study. This is a cynical attempt to derail further bans by Member States or the EU itself. The fact that Canada has chosen to target only Belgium and the Netherlands and not Mexico or the USA (Canada’s two trading partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)), who also have bans in place, clearly demonstrates this. Exports of seal products from Canada to Belgium and the Netherlands are negligible so it is certainly not because of perceived economic effects that Canada is reacting in the WTO. It is instead based on domestic political reasons and on concerns about the possible future significance of EU legislation.
