Hi Jennifer,
In the spirit of Steve Irwin, we have learned that no wild animals should be killed for food as we have an abundance of farm animals. Also, many people believe that activities such as whaling belong in the past.
However, a report from LEAD, which also has been refereed to by FAO, stated
“The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. The findings of this report suggest that it should be a major policy focus when dealing with problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.
“Livestock’s contribution to environmental problems is on a massive scale and its potential contribution to their solution is equally large. The impact is so significant that it needs to be addressed with urgency. Major reductions in impact could be achieved at reasonable cost.” [end of quote]
The report also stated that cattle fed on artificial fodder in factory farms constantly suffered from stomach ache. (Maybe not a problem for Australian cattle, as I understand they are kept in big paddocks.)
From a strict animal welfare aspect we also know of the cruelty associated with pig farms. Here’s an example:
“Gestation crates are 2-foot by 7-foot metal cages used to confine breeding pigs for months on end. Pigs confined suffer leg and joint problems and psychosis resulting from extreme boredom and frustration. Confinement in gestation crates is so abusive that the entire European Union is phasing out the practice, with a total ban taking effect in 2013.”
In light of these issues, I wonder if it is time to re-evaluate our opinion of factory farming relative to the harvest of natural resources, such as eating organic kangaroo meat or a minke whale steak?
In whaling discussions at the blog, there have been slight cultural differences.
Also, most Norwegian NGOs (except Greenpeace and WWF) are not opposed to whaling. Their main argument being that it’s more eco-friendly to consume minke whales than factory farmed meat. Note these NGOs have in other cases a similar agenda to most large, international NGOs.
Regarding factory farming, the animal welfare organisation WSPA stated : “In terms of numbers, intensive farming is the biggest cause of animal suffering in the world.”
Travis provided evidence in a previous post on kangaroo culling, and as I have understood, it is done in a humane way.
Whaling is perhaps more controversial in this aspect, as we know, for example, from the Norwegian hunt that 20 percent of the whales don’t die instantly (statistics submitted by Norwegian researchers to the IWC). The time to death , TTD, varies between some minutes to one hour, but is seems like a majority of the whales die within some minutes.
So the final question to you is:
“Would you prefer to be kept in captivity, without sunlight for the rest of your life, or is whaling a better alternative?”
Note, in this globalized world, it would be very difficult to Valtrex completely abandon factory farming.
Cheers,
Ann Novek
Sweden
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
As this thread is meant to be on the cruelty issue and not so much about conservation, I would also like to point out that ” happy pigs” etc. taste much better than sad ones(the ones confined to small, dirty cages etc).
It has also been proven in Norway that ” happy salmons” taste better.
In another study , carried out by an agricultural institution , it was proved that milk from cows , who were kept on the pastures were more nutrisious and contained much more healthy fatty acids than the ones kept on artificial fodder.
you’d better be carefull Ann, it almosts sounds like you are advocating proto-organic farming over agri-industrial GM monocrops so popular on this forum.
as an aside, things in the sea arent so great either:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/04/03/feeding-frenzy/
snippet:
Why is it still acceptable to eat the endangered large predators of the sea?
“If these animals lived on land there would be a global outcry. But the great beasts roaming the savannahs of the open seas summon no such support. Big sharks, giant tuna, marlin and swordfish should have the conservation status of the giant panda or the snow leopard. Yet still we believe it is acceptable for fishmongers to sell them and celebrity chefs to teach us how to cook them.
A study in this week’s edition of Science reveals the disastrous collapse of the ocean’s megafauna. The great sharks are now wobbling on the edge of extinction. Since 1972 the number of blacktip sharks has fallen by 93%, tiger sharks by 97% and bull sharks, dusky sharks and smooth hammerheads by 99%(1). Just about every population of major predators is now in freefall. Another paper, published in Nature four years ago, shows that over 90% of large predatory fishes throughout the global oceans have gone(2).
You respond with horror when you hear of Chinese feasts of bear paws and tiger meat. But these are no different, as far as conservation is concerned, from eating shark’s fin soup or swordfish or steaks from rare species of tuna. One practice is considered barbaric in Europe and North America. The other is promoted in restaurant reviews and recipes in the colour supplements of respectable newspapers.
In terms of its impact on both ecology and animal welfare, shark fishing could be the planet’s most brutal industry. While some sharks are taken whole, around 70 million are caught every year for their fins(3). In many cases the fins are cut off and the shark is dumped, alive, back into the sea. It can take several weeks to die. The longlines and gillnets used to catch them snare whales, dolphins, turtles and albatrosses. The new paper shows that shark catching also causes a cascade of disasters through the foodchain. Since the large sharks were removed from coastal waters in the western Atlantic, the rays they preyed on have multiplied tenfold and have wiped out all the main commercial species of shellfish(4).
Much of this trade originates in East Asia, where shark’s fin soup – which sells for up to £100 a bowl – is a sign of great wealth and rank, like caviar in Europe. The global demand for shark fins is rising by about 5% a year(5). But if you believe that this is yet another problem for which the Chinese can be blamed and the Europeans absolved, consider this: the world’s major importer (and presumably re-exporter) of sharks is Spain(6). Its catches have increased nine-fold since the 1990s(7) and it has resisted – in most cases successfully – every European and global effort to conserve its prey….”
Hi Julian,
Yes, I read that article in the Guardian yesterday, methinks it was a great one…
Re the fate of the angel shark in British waters, I think this is one example of European politicians.
Very, very much focus is on whaling ( and of course this is good) , but they have a tendency to forget other species, such as the sad fate of the angel shark.
And what’s under the water , you don’t see, so it doesn’t matter much to most people….
Hey Julian,
Such papers that evidently make for great alarmist and armaggedonist headlines have frequently had their scientific merits (as well as the entire peer review process) brought into question by other scientists from across the spectrum.
An example on the 2003 paper (the (2) quoted in the snippet) from Tom Polacheck (currently with CSIRO):
http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/PFRP/large_pelagics/polacheck_marine_policy06.pdf
A more general article from Ray Hilborn (“Faith-based fisheries”):
http://www.pacificfishing.com/art/Hilborn_2006_FaithBased.pdf
Back again on the issue whales vs farming.
In the article that Julian provided us it was mentioned that Spain was indulged in the shark fin trade, which is a cruel one.
Meanwhile they are an anti whaling country, you could believe as well, that they were interested in animals and the environment.
But no, their fishing fleet is really a pirate one …
And re the cruelty and bull fighting. No , bull fighting will not end because the bull farmers are subsidised by EU money.
It is generally true that animals slaughtered on farm have better flavour than those sent to the processor, for a variety of reasons.
PETA once suggested that whales be eaten rather than pork.
Sadly it seems that they weren’t taken seriously.
1. Kanga
2. Beef
3. IT geek
4. Whale
Hey Ann, you planning to eat that whale after you go out & watch it get harpooned?
Whale meat remains a speciality product of the Tosa bay region, while at the same time there are whale watching operators in Tosa bay.
The supposed incompatibility between whaling and whale watching that Pinxi appears to be alluding to is a myth. There is no incompatibility – some people simply don’t like whaling, full stop.
Aaah, Pixie that was a tricky one….
OK, an honest and straightforward reply. If I ever get the chance to witness a killing ( not funny) and the TTD is long and it is all messy….no chance of trying it.
However, if the whale is lucky, I might give it another chance. Note, I have tried it twice when I was 13 years old, and I still remember that it was not in my taste ( and I didn’t know it was whale stew). It had a livery taste….
However, if I find kanga in my store, gonna try it…
On another note, it seems like there are bison burgers for sale in the States , and after going commercial the population has increased….
I have zero knowledge how the bisons are killed etc, so can’t take a standpoint on this….it was just interesting to hear that the population had recovered.
No one goes out of their way to torment an animal in the slaughter process.
The whole TTD conundrum is a red herring as is the wild/domesticated split.
In reality there is no meaningful divide between wild or domesticated.
Different animals, different situations. Even trained slaughterhouse workers sometimes make a hash of it and I’m sure a kangaroo harvester occasionally manages a clean head-shot.
Concentrating on animals down plays the very serious consequences becoming apparent in industrialized crop production.
The UNFAO remarked sometime back that the industrialization of food production now means that almost all foods are now derived from less than 4 species of animal and something like a mere dozen crops.
I also recall some reports recently mentioning that 1/8 of the world’s poor survive from wild produce and meats.
I feel the wild/domestic distinction is like terms such as “wilderness”; they’re more social/cultural constructs than anything else.
For the record, I’d eat the whale no matter how grisly I found it’s slaughter to be.
To not eat it would be wasteful and ignores all the indirect suffering involved in all aspects of the food production system.
There really ain’t no free lunch.
Surely, the most significant contribution to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global, is not the agricultural sector per se, but rather human population and economic growth and its prerequisite dependence upon food.
The sheer enormity of the task of feeding the multitudes has extended beyond the vast tracts of agricultural land and in its own right keeps humankind in a veritable captivity, without sunlight for (much) of its life, where conceptual ramblings might question whether whaling is a better alternative.
>The supposed incompatibility between whaling and whale watching that Pinxi appears to be alluding to is a myth.
Of course this would all depend on the culture you are talking about. To use your example David – this particular culture views everything as if it is to be consumed in some form or another. They are not reknowned for being sympathetic to the environment or empathetic to animal welfare concerns. But it suits your argument of course.
Neil,
A voice of reason in a sea of madness.
Travis,
When did you become an expert on the “culture” of Tosa bay?
David, did not say I was an expert on Tosa Bay. Your nit-picking is a good diversion though.
To all,
This thread is not meant to be on conservation or how to feed a growing population.
It was a question to you all,” if you don’t have any moral objections, could you think it’s more animal-friendly/ eco-friendly to consume a kangaroo/ minke whale steak than a factory farmed beef?”
Thanks Neil and all for your inputs.
My favorite choice of food in regards to animal and eco-friendliness is the half domesticated reindeer’s meat.
One problem with all this ” eco food” is that the price is more expensive than for factory farmed choices.
Travis,
I suppose I can then take it that the “culture” of Tosa bay “… views everything as if it is to be consumed in some form or another. They are not reknowned for being sympathetic to the environment or empathetic to animal welfare concerns …” is not the comment of an expert…
I wonder what the point of posting such a comment was, and whether there is a reason it shouldn’t simply be ignored as ignorant bigotry.
It was a comment directed at Japanese in general David, as it was told to me by someone who is actually Japanese and living in Japan. (He actually said they would eat Gucci handbags too, but I don’t think they feel much pain). Are you disagreeing, and if so, perhaps you could provide some evidence.
Talk about diversions! I wonder if it is Travis’ lack of interest in the situation in Tosa bay, where whale meat is a regional specialty product, and where whale watching operations also co-exist with this, that saw him try to change the topic to his generalizations of the “culture” of “the Japanese” (apparently based on what he was told by a Japanese person who also “said [“the Japanese”, presumably] would eat Gucci handbags too”).
Ironic it is that Travis’ view is that “the Japanese” are “not reknowned for being sympathetic to the environment”, while Japan’s ecological footprint is significantly lower than all of the enlightened “whale-watching only” nations of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Perhaps Travis’ generalization about “the Japanese” informs us more about the ignorant bigots of the world than anything 🙂
Thanks for your contribution Travis.
Always a pleasure David. As usual you have managed to accuse of topic changing (which it isn’t) and twisted it around into something it is not. A ‘significantly lower footprint’, hmmm… I wonder why that would be! You are a clever fellow.
Travis you big sillybilly, it was *you* who first start accusing others of diversions…
🙂
🙂
🙂
The topic was ‘the supposed incompatibility between whaling and whale watching that Pinxi appears to be alluding to is a myth’.
It seems to me there is a cultural element to this. I doubt that whale watching and whaling would be compatible off Sydney. Although not all visitors would be Australian, the majority of them would likely be westerners. If you can convince me that they would find watching and killing compatible, I’d like to hear it.
In Taiji they have dolphin drives and dolphinariums. It is hardly surprising they would have whale watching and whale killing in Tosa Bay and it seems to be compatible. How aware the visitors to the dolphinariums or whale watch boats are of the killing and more importantly the methods employed is another issue.
It is a view held by myself and echoed by others on this blog and elsewhere that culturally, the Japanese do not have the same empathetic tendencies towards nature and are more interested in consumerism. I have not indicated if this is a good or bad thing. If you want to take it as a negative, that is your interpretation. Can you follow this sequence now from 08:12 David without swerving it elsewhere?
Travis,
Actually , both in Japan and Norway some whale watching operations are run by former whalers or I know in one case by a current whaler. They are the ones with knowledge about whales and their behaviour. So there is hope…..
On the other hand , there was a strange comment from one representative from the whale industry last summer in Norway, when a whale was killed in front of the eyes of tourists. He said that whale watching only was for hardcore anti whaling persons. This is certainly not the truth.
As I see it some whalers are doing the good work participating in whale surveys etc. And there are also the nutcases that think the whales are to be blamed for the decline in fish supplies….
Putting all the intellectualism aside for a second: Whale meat tastes disgusting. As does crocodile. But I don’t mind roo. Snake tastes like chicken. Beef is orrite, but lamb is best.
And if you don’t believe whale tastes disgusting, ask the Japanese people – they only ate it in large quantities during WW2 because it was cheap protein.
With increased prosperity they sought out better tasting meat. Now the whaling companies are having the hardest time preventing the market from shrinking further that they are trying to confect cultural/historical reasons to get people to eat it, and trying to force the government to feed it to schoolchildren.
It is a view held by myself and echoed by others on this blog and elsewhere that culturally, the Japanese do not have the same empathetic tendencies towards nature and are more interested in consumerism.
===
I guess you have never spent any time in a riokan, then? Or a zen garden? Or know anything about the Shinto ‘naturalist’ religion where they believe nature was possessed with spirits? Or the aesthetic philosophy of wabi sabu and it’s adherence to bio-mimicry. Your ignorance of Japanese culture is clearly on display.
If your comment was coming out of the – ‘cruelty to whales’ angle, please understanding that Japanese people as a whole are not clamouring for whalemeat. Whaling is being pushed by a small (but powerful) lobby-group.
+++
http://www.greenpeace.org/new-zealand/campaigns/oceans/whales/japan/japanese-opinion-poll
In June 2006 Greenpeace Japan commissioned a survey by the Nippon Research Centre where more than 1,000 Japanese people across all ages and both genders were randomly selected to answer a series of questions concerning whaling.
Respondents were asked:
“What do you think Japan should do concerning its whaling practices?”
The majority (44.2 per cent) of the total respondents answered: “Japan should conduct whaling along the Japanese coast but not in the high seas.” In addition:
* 24.8 per cent of respondents said Japan should stop whaling in either
* 22.5 per cent of respondents said Japan should whale in both seas (both coastal and offshore whaling)
* 8.4 per cent of respondents voted other.
Adding together the 24.8 per cent respondents who said that Japan should stop whaling altogether and the 44.2 per cent who say Japan should only whale in its own coastal waters, it can be inferred from the poll that: a total of 69 per cent of Japanese people surveyed are opposed to whaling in the high seas.
“It seems to me there is a cultural element to this.”
To you, I’m sure it might seem that way Travis.
“I doubt that whale watching and whaling would be compatible off Sydney.”
Perhaps you might like to consider whether it’s because some people in Australia don’t like whale killing. But it’s certainly not true that all (or even necessarily a majority) of Australians feel that way however.
So where is the cultural argument?
You rabbit on and on about Japan – no mention of other nations where whale watching and whaling also co-exist.
“It is a view held by myself and echoed by others on this blog and elsewhere that culturally, the Japanese do not have the same empathetic tendencies towards nature and are more interested in consumerism.”
Of course, everyone is entitled to their views, no matter how poorly informed they may be.
Ann,
It’s certainly true that many fisher people think that increasing whale numbers have the potential to negatively impact fisheries yields (and it’s a double whammy with whaling being banned in the first instance).
My impression is that the fisher people who think whales are solely responsible for the decline in fisheries yields are significantly in the minority.
Wadard,
I’ve had some very good whale meat actually. Where did you try yours?
“And if you don’t believe whale tastes disgusting, ask the Japanese people – they only ate it in large quantities during WW2 because it was cheap protein.”
Lots of Japanese people evidently also think it tastes pretty good. Me? I’ve never liked cauliflower. As always, generalizations are not particularly informative.
“they are trying to confect cultural/historical reasons to get people to eat it”
Funnily enough, most of the articles I read in the Japanese media about whale meat in school lunches are coming out of traditional whale consuming areas.
“and trying to force the government to feed it to schoolchildren”
It appears to be local municipalities behind the push for whale meat in school lunches, rather than central government.
This is consistent with the continuation of Japan’s regional whale meat consumption tradations.
In Tokyo you can also eat whale meat, but it’s worth noting that you can also eat French, Italian, and various other cuisines in Tokyo as well.
“Whaling is being pushed by a small (but powerful) lobby-group.”
It’s also being backed by the national government, as banning it would set a dangerous precedent for the principle of sustainable use of natural resources, which is something that resource-poor Japan regards as critical to it’s national well-being. Telling the Japanese government that she can not even use any resources at all, not even on a sustainable basis, is obviously going to be upsetting.
Wadard,
Many religions and cultures have some degree of connection to the natural world in them. Can you tell me that today people (especially the young) in 1st world countries are as in touch with their religion and spiritualism as they were 200 years ago? Honestly?
In another academic thread, apologies Ann we hardly taste the obvious and that’s the remoteness of diners from their sources. IceClass hits a valid point though in the increasing narrowness of choice. This should lead to a discussion about nutrition versus mono culture etc not only as applied to agriculture but also fish farming and so on.
When Maggi Beer’s former chef Steve was interviewed on ABC radio recently I could not help but notice his enthusiasm for his chosen culinary corner in the world today, a little bit of “channel” country down in Tasmania where a considerable no of my grand children live well outside the city fringe. Maggi & Simon Bryant are noted hands on gourmets with natural products.
The wildness or otherwise of live stock seems hardly an issue on our ABC TV
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/cookandchef/
The key in sources around Peppermint Bay like Maggie’s beloved Barossa Valley is variety. Apparently this “marginal” agricultural country now includes buffalo farming amongst the salmon smoke houses and many other small enterprises.
The point is our award winning local produce specalist Steve can see his “happy” cows watching the sea while he cooks, its all very hand to mouth again. Kids on the farm see it all and accept what’s happening right under their nose.
http://www.discovertasmania.com/home/index.cfm?siteid=199&display=product&productid=9001221
Hi Gavin,
The whole idea with my thread is to promote ” happy cow”, ” happy pigs” and ” happy animal” consumption.
I wanted to be provocative and included whales as well.
My idea was that it is more animal -friendly and sometimes even more eco- friendly to consume wildlife. I’m well aware that this is not always an option.
Re the debate on harvesting whales as food in a whaling country I want to give you all an example what those people think about whaling as a ” cruelty issue).
A short summary, they think it is not worse than factory farming.
Read this debate in a Norwegian paper on the discussion of cruelty in whaling . The debate is is English as they interview an NGO spokeswoman as well. Unforunately her only respons is going vegetarian, which I find is too simplistic.
Heres’ the debate ( scroll down and find the English debate). There are both anti and pro whaling replies.
http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2005/06/17/434981.html
Examples of replies that I think are good:
“Stupid Reaction
Let all the people who reacts negatively to the whale fishing go into a normal slaughtehouse! The would propably not like what they see there either, but still they want hamburgers and beef. Talking about double morality!”
Innsendt av: Thor Loenning
Dear Ann may be interested in another Tasmanian/QLD development.
By contrast to Japanese whaling and other fishing fleets operating in the region, Tasmanian fish farming culling methods where our salmon die with a smile right back to their gills, are now exported in a modern technology for all such farms.
According to one of the developers interviewed on ABC all design is done with natural flow in mind.
“Huon Aquaculture at Dover in the far south-east of Tasmania is successfully using a new harvesting technique that’s been developed right here in Australia. Queenslander Bruce Goodrick has spent several years developing the system which literally tricks the salmon into harvesting themselves, removing the need for manual culling and gilling. Reporter Cameron Wilson heads down to the salmon farm with David Moorehead from Huon Aquaculture to see how it works”. ABC Rural Reporter 31/03/07
http://www.seafoodinnovations.com.au/products/Training.htm
Thanks Gavin,
Glad that people think about the fish as well. The common feeling used to be ” that they are just stupid fish”.
R e fish farming, I have heard it is different from a welfare aspect with different species .
It’s more difficult to breed cod than salmon for example.
It is difficult to imagine any economic justification that outweighs the barbarity of whaling.
Whale meat fetches high prices in Japan, generally much higher than those of Australian and American beef imports.
That’s evidently enough justification for people to hunt whales, just as the lower prices of beef are still enough to convince Australian and American beef farmers to breed more stock than they require to feed their own populations.
I guess I don’t see the logical similarity between livestock animals that are farmed, hence only exist to feed the higher rung of the food chain, and the unnecessary killing beautiful and scarce wild creatures.
A better, although still very flawed, analog would be like claiming some form of wild and scarce ungulate sells well and livestock.
TRS – why it is that animals that happen to be born into human captivity (through no choice of their own) have less value than animals that were lucky enough to be born wild and free?
That excess cattle stock that are often “converted” into exports for overseas markets exist is (in my view) a reality due to the way humans in those places see fit to associate with animals and animal life – not an attribute of those animal species which are degraded by such treatment.
On the contrary, we need to ensure that we maximize our dependance on the exploitation of wild / natural resources to the extent that it is sustainable, and reduce our dependance on livestock farming, so that we need subject fewer animals to substandard lives in human captivity. This is a direction which the international community should start working towards today. In a bizarre twist, we have the opposite occuring – “animal welfare/rights” groups complaining about hunts of seals and whales, and suggesting not improvements to the hunts, but banning them altogether. They have their own distinct goals from the rest of us, although they often try to frame their positions in appealing “conservationist” arguments.
You refer to “beautiful and scarce wild creatures”.
– Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
– The fact that they are wild is a good thing.
– The relative scarcity of the creature’s species is to a large extent besides the point, as hunts should only occur to the extent that they are sustainable (some species can not currently be hunted sustainably because they are so few in number – I’m not talking about such species).
David writes:
>so that we need subject fewer animals to substandard lives in human captivity.In a bizarre twist, we have the opposite occuring – “animal welfare/rights” groups complaining about hunts of seals and whales, and suggesting not improvements to the hunts, but banning them altogether. They have their own distinct goals from the rest of us, although they often try to frame their positions in appealing “conservationist” arguments.
So the substandard killing techniques for seals and whales doesn’t matter but captivity does? Don’t you think these animal welfare groups are actually against the inhumane kiling methods employed, which so far have not been improved to a satisfactory standard? Done that experiment yet David regarding pain and suffering? Oh, wait a minute, you don’t actually believe non humans can feel pain and sufering, and even if they do, so what, they are just dumb animals here to be utilized by us superior chimps. You will write anything to try and get your point across David, and you are looking more and more like the ‘sick’ ‘cretin’ you have been labelled as.
Travis,
In discussion forums with other people (particularly where people with different world views are involved) you should avoid using the word “substandard” when you mean “my standard”.
Killing techniques do of course matter, but in the context of what are generally long lived mammals, the emphasis of animal welfare should be predominantly on the way in which animals live their lives, rather than placing a lopsided emphasis on the final momments when their lives are taken from them. I agree with Joanne Massiah’s perspective from 2006, that the term “humane killing” is bit of an oxymoron.
With whaling, whales are of course already free in the wild, so basically the only things that humans can continue to work on from an animal welfare perspective is trying to reduce the occurence of shipstrike, entanglement in fishing gear etc., keeping human observers a reasonable distance away, and of course improve the killing methods. Particuarly in this last area fairly significant improvements have been made in recent years – certainly methods are orders of magnitude better than when Australians were hunting humpbacks (according to you, because they needed to, to get oil for their lamps and other … essentials?).
Meanwhile with livestock, the animals are still in captivity.
In my view, there is simply no comparison.
The Australian governments’ complains about modern whale killing methods, but given that they are complaining about how other humans interact with these animals in their final moments of life, and whereas these animals lead far better lives than many of the animals which Australians eventually slaughter, I have the impression that the complaint is merely a personally cheap means of seeking redemption.
The “animal welfare”, “animal rights” groups that complain about whaling and sealing don’t care about conservation OR the killing methods as such – they care about killing per se. They think humans should never ever kill animals regardless (apparently we are a different class of animal, so where as it’s acceptable for arguably intelligent orcas to kill whales etc., apparently in their view the same does not apply for humans).
Anyway, given that the standards are better now than when Australia’s whalers were operating, they clearly must be satisfactory by “Australian standards”, despite what the government representatives say (political expediency).
> Oh, wait a minute, you don’t actually believe non humans can feel pain and sufering, and even if they do, so what, they are just dumb animals here to be utilized by us superior chimps.
As I’ve told you before, if you wish to have an argument with yourself you needn’t try to get me involved.
> You will write anything to try and get your point across David, and you are looking more and more like the ‘sick’ ‘cretin’ you have been labelled as.
The feedback is valuable and informative. Thank you.
I live in Iowa (USA). We raise the best beef cattle in the world. Most of those cattle species, let alone the individual animals, only exist because man created them.
Their conditions are not “substandard” they are the standard by which such animals exist.
I’m obviously not talking about factory farms, etc…but very few such facilities exist in the US.
On the other hand, wild animals do have some purpose other than to serve man’s needs.
David are you suggesting that just because one country does not improve cattle husbandry techniques another does not need to improve whale killing techniques? That certainly seems to be the crux of your typically pathetic argument. It is reminiscent of a school boy’s logic.
>Particuarly in this last area fairly significant improvements have been made in recent years – certainly methods are orders of magnitude better than when Australians were hunting humpbacks (according to you, because they needed to, to get oil for their lamps and other … essentials?).
It would appear, judging by what some veterinarians on the IWC whale killing methods workshops say and many others around the world say, that the improvements have not been enough. Bringing up how we used to kill whales, and singling out Australia, is of no use to your argument David, only in your mind. The issue is now and those that currently kill whales. Why are you bringing up Australia’s past and questioning why whales were killed? Is this another kind of bratish joke?
>The “animal welfare”, “animal rights” groups that complain about whaling and sealing don’t care about conservation OR the killing methods as such – they care about killing per se.
Tha is a generalisation and you know it.
>They think humans should never ever kill animals regardless (apparently we are a different class of animal, so where as it’s acceptable for arguably intelligent orcas to kill whales etc., apparently in their view the same does not apply for humans).
Again, a generalisation to fit your stupid argument. Anyone (and it has been done before) who brings the ‘intelligent orcas’ which ‘kill whales’ into it is simply delusional and expecting others to be. Are humans the same as orcas David? Again it is drawing in something else to detract from the issue, only this time it is particularly meaningless.
>Anyway, given that the standards are better now than when Australia’s whalers were operating, they clearly must be satisfactory by “Australian standards”, despite what the government representatives say (political expediency).
Sorry David, got lost with this weird justification.
>The feedback is valuable and informative. Thank you.
If you’d like your ego stroked with more, I can easily accomodate. In fact, it would be my pleasure.
> David are you suggesting that just because one country does not improve cattle husbandry techniques another does not need to improve whale killing techniques?
No, my comment may be found a couple above yours. Again, you need not address your comments to me when you are trying to have an argument with yourself.
> That certainly seems to be the crux of your typically pathetic argument. It is reminiscent of a school boy’s logic.
Thank you for the feedback. It is valuable and informative.
> Why are you bringing up Australia’s past
Feel free to substitute “New Zealand”, “UK”, “USA”, “Netherlands” in there as well.
> and questioning why whales were killed?
You told me why you think Australia’s whaling of the recent past was justified, where as whaling of today is not. I thought that was indicative of what it is that belies your complaints, and I think it deserves further exposure.
> Is this another kind of bratish joke?
Thanks again for the feedback.
> Tha is a generalisation and you know it.
I don’t know of any “animal welfare” or “animal rights” group that campaign against whaling and sealing whose true desire, irrespective of how much more whale killing methods are improved, does not involve all whaling and sealing being ended.
> Again, a generalisation to
Yes, it was part of the same paragraph.
> fit your stupid argument.
Thanks for the feedback. Veeeeeery valuable.
> Anyone (and it has been done before) who brings the ‘intelligent orcas’ which ‘kill whales’ into it is simply delusional
Very very very valuable feedback. I hope lots of people are reading this.
> Are humans the same as orcas David?
No Travis, they aren’t. Humans are a different species.
> Sorry David, got lost with this weird justification.
I.e., what’s good enough for Australians is by extension good enough for others, at least in Australian eyes (as Australian’s don’t apply double standards, like the anti-whaling whaling nation of the USA). Australia’s Ministers of Anti-whaling try to give a different impression, which is thus clearly political expediency.
Yes David. Whatever.
I wonder if you got the pleasure out of your three word response that you suggested you would.
>” You will write anything to try and get your point across David, and you are looking more and more like the ‘sick’ ‘cretin’ you have been labelled as.”
Is this kind of crap really necessary to you Travis?
No Iceclass, you and David’s crap is not necessary to me.
🙂
Re this argument of David, ” that orcas can kill whales but not humans”.
David, according to yourself you are looking at conservation in long terms.
It’s not the same thing when a human kills a whale or an orca does the same thing.
An orca leaves a lot of left-overs from the whale to other animals in the eco-system . Sometimes they only eat the tongue of the whale , the rest of the whale will be fodder to sharks, fish and sea-birds etc.
Apart from that, orcas have never been responsible for the collapse of whale populations. Do orcas know greed? I guess if lions can indulge in infanticide, and dolphins can indulge in rape, then humans can too, according to this thinking.
Whale carcasses are also very important to abyssal communities, with some highly specific creatures being found on whale falls.
Ann,
My comment with respect to the orcas eating whales is more in relation to animal rightists’ demand that humans not kill whales (attempting to separating every member of our species from the animal kingdom to which we belong).
The fact is even with a limited harvest (say under the RMP) of a robust abundant stock of whales, most whales of that stock that die each year will die of causes other than directed hunting by humans.
The only way to have no impact at all on the environment is to simply not exist at all. This isn’t an option.
>My comment with respect to the orcas eating whales is more in relation to animal rightists’ demand that humans not kill whales (attempting to separating every member of our species from the animal kingdom to which we belong).
Some clarification please. Your original comment read that you are suggesting that because orcas kill and eat whales, humans are justified in doing the same. If so, then do you support gang rape and incest too, which are carried out in cetacean societies? Are animal rightists actually attempting to ‘separate every member of our species from the animal kingdom to which we belong’ (a pretty sweeping claim), or is this your opinion David?
>The only way to have no impact at all on the environment is to simply not exist at all. This isn’t an option.
Sheer politeness prevents me from writing something here David.
Travis,
A consideration of the words “intra” and “inter” should put you on the right track.
Doubtful, your tracks are seriously derailed David!
Travis,
You evidently don’t understand even the word “derail”.
“An orca leaves a lot of left-overs from the whale to other animals in the eco-system . Sometimes they only eat the tongue of the whale , the rest of the whale will be fodder to sharks, fish and sea-birds etc.”
Yet somehow you were all atwtitter because Canadian Sealers don’t use enough of the meat for your tastes and prejudices.
So, in your mind Orcas leaving lots of leftovers for other critters is beneficial but leftovers from Canadian sealers are a problem??
I might also add that it’s a wee bit disingenious to bash Canadian Sealers for failing to develop better markets for meat when there is a multi-million dollar industry premised on demonising them and their products.
When they do make such efforts like developing seal oil capsules the animal protest industry goes out of their way to demonise the capsules and campaign to get people to avoid their use.
“No Iceclass, you and David’s crap is not necessary to me.”
Your continued dishonesty and inclination to insult over substance is noted.
Let me know when you’re mature enough to exit the sand box.
Thanks.
>Your continued dishonesty and inclination to insult over substance is noted.
Let me know when you’re mature enough to exit the sand box.
Now now Iceman. What dishonesty are you referring to? I am quite sure your little play pal David is able to fend for himself. In fact, if you had actually read what had been written, you would have found that he finds the feed back valuable and informative. As for the sand box, it is necessary when playing with obnoxious little boys who like to play dress ups and live in never never land.
🙂
Find “derail” yet Travy?
“…little play pal David”
“…obnoxious little boys who like to play dress ups and live in never never land.”
Like I said, your inclination to insult over substance is noted.
Let us know when you have something to contribute instead of puerile insults.
Of course Iceman is above insults. Referring to European stay-at-home mothers and insinuating that they are ill-informed, emotional and don’t actually get out and do any work is something I am sure many females would be happy to read. Did the Inuits not let the foreigner play so he had to take a swipe at women? Nice and suitably Neanderthal.
Davey,
I have no idea what you are babbling about. I used to get paid to deal with people who suffered from psychological illness. Doing it for free here is not even charitable! Actually, I am convinced you don’t even know what you are babbling about, but it is interesting watching the self-justification. If you are nit-picking again, de-louse yourself first.
> I have no idea what you are babbling about.
Of that I’m quite sure.
> I used to get paid to deal with people who suffered from psychological illness.
> Doing it for free here is not even charitable!
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear…
> I am convinced you don’t even know what you are babbling about,
Of that I’m quite sure as well.
IceClass,
I think we needn’t say anymore. Travis has already said more than enough for the both of us.
Iceman,
I have had friendly discussions here with the whale-eaters for quite a long time , and I will give credit to them because there has not been much abuse….
However, this is the third time you want me to comment your posts , but what do ya think?
You ask me to comment your post meanwhile you state in an abusive way that opinions from idiots like me doesn’t matter!
And this EU housewife stuff was too much for me…
Obviously you are a misogynist, so more comments from me are not needed, even if I could have debunked a lot of your arguments.
Hope that you in your next life will experience the nice hakapika …
Bye, bye,
Ann! You come across like a little white coat with big, cute black eyes, but underneath those whiskers there are a mean set of teeth! I’m laughing so much I’m crying, but hey, what would us women know about seals and stuff?? Thanks Ann.
>Hope that you in your next life will experience the nice hakapika …
Well, you have more balls than me Ann. I had originally wrote re Iceman’s comment that I hoped a female of any species caused him a painful death, but then deleted it. Good on you for expressing yourself so eloquently.
Actually, the comments about EU housewives refer to the fact that the likes of the IFAW make most of their money and support from nice middle class housewives in the EU and hence that is the primary audiuence for their campaigns. From personal experience I’ve always found EU opponents of sealing to be almost totally ignorant on the question.
It stands to reason that many of the anti-use arguments will be crafted to suit the background of the bulk of their funders.
Which might explain why thirty years on we are still discussing this mythical live seal skinning conundrum among other canards.
“You ask me to comment your post meanwhile you state in an abusive way that opinions from idiots like me doesn’t matter!”
Not at all. Nowhere are you referred to as an idiot or that your opinions don’t matter.
“Obviously you are a misogynist, so more comments from me are not needed, even if I could have debunked a lot of your arguments.
Hope that you in your next life will experience the nice hakapika”
Great!
So now you add to the insult quota and top it off with wishes of violence.
Your lack or response to any questions let alone the “debunking” is equally noted.
Don’t you guys have any better way of using your time?
David wrote:
“I think we needn’t say anymore. Travis has already said more than enough for the both of us.”
Yes, his reliance on ad-homs is boring and devoid of relevant content. I think I can safely ignore him from here on in with no loss.
Let me know if he ever contributes anything worth a read. I won’t hold my breath though.
>Yes, his reliance on ad-homs is boring and devoid of relevant content. I think I can safely ignore him from here on in with no loss.
Let me know if he ever contributes anything worth a read. I won’t hold my breath though.
I have contributed here, but usually get sidelined by your little buddy David, who insists on nit-picking everything anyone with an opposing view has to say and driving them off. Take a look at his contributions and ask yourself if he has ‘any better way of using’ his time.
If you somehow think that your comments consist of ‘relevant content’ and you contribute ‘anything worth a read’ which is not insulting, you are more delusional than David.
bon appétit!
So much irony dished up…
After failing (for the umpteenth time) to haul me into another of his dog chases tail arguments, he gets confused about the difference between trains and tracks, and still can’t even manage a laugh at his own expense. Is it that hard to admit even a “slip of the tongue”? I’m more than happy to give Travy the benefit of the doubt that that is what it was, even despite his subsequent comparisons of me with those of “psychological illness”.
IceClass,
The only interesting thing that I personally recall Travis ever posting here was some information about Australia’s kangaroo slaughter. If you can find that post, you’ve found “Travis’ Greatest Hit” (sic!)
Other than that, nothing of note other than a few good laughs. His recent number one chart-topper was a justification of historical Australian whale hunting (which only ended completely in 1978):
“[whaling] was an activity that was necessary. We needed oil for lights, machinery and so on”.
( http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/001892.html )
Lights, machinery and so on…
Tell us that one again Travy! Or is it time to admit your superior enlightened culture isn’t quite all you cracked it out to be?
Gosh Davey, our ‘superior enlightened culture’ isn’t much different from yours. Oh, that’s right you ditched it to turn Japanese. You have a habit of picking out something and chewing on it like a little terrier on a trouser leg. This is the post- JARPA-terrier-tug is it? It is not a good sign of a mature mind Davey.
I overlooked the ‘slip of the tongue’ and ‘difference between train and tracks’ bits because I’ve become accustomed to skipping over your little quips. It just astounds me how you manage to make claims about things such as orcas eating whales and then resort to pointless quips because you have been shown to make a dumb comment.
Your judgment on my contributions here are meaningless to me Davey, much like the person himself.
“Your judgment on my contributions here are meaningless to me Davey, much like the person himself.”
*Sigh*
If only that were true then he wouldn’t need to continue the pointless stream of insults.
Thanks for the heads up David. I got a good laugh from Travis’ tragic misunderstandings.
Funny that you have nothing better to do than reply here and contribute your own insults.
IceClass and David,
You both seem to be accussing Trvais of something you are guilty of yourselves. I find Travis’s input interesting and worthwhile, and there may be others who do too. You seem to be suggesting that somehow you have both posted far more worthy contributions, but I think you may be sadly mistaken.
Libby: I went cruising on the issue of deteriorating debate here and came to this conclusion; it has much to do with the smugness of certain island exports.
Recall? I have said in the past that Sydney, particularly the cross was overrun with them, bludgers, both m & f! However I was greatly entertained thinking about the fate of a petite foreign lass who may also need to migrate here in the long term.
I study the rise and of the silicon doll then the robotic role and wonder about a culture that perhaps respects their environment more than we do our own yet exploits the rest of the world with explicit precision.
With my Celtic heritage I can easily see another link with the sea; note how I hammer the coastline watch. Glass fronted towers by the waterside can be so easily covered with prawn food.
The whale thing in the Great Southern Ocean will be nothing but a side show as we go on.
Considering the tone of this discussion, I hesitate to enter it, but anyway: here is an interesting article from a Danish newspaper about WSPA’s support for Greenland whaling: “Support for Greenland whaling is hypocrisy”:
http://politiken.dk/indland/article279721.ece
A relatively well machine translated version can be found at:
http://visl.dk/tr/url/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpolitiken.dk%2Findland%2Farticle279721.ece&pair=da-en
(Dyreværn = animal welfare/protection, Verdensnaturfonden = WWF, vågehval = minke whale, nærings = nutritional)
I especially find this anti commercial whaling argument by WSPA interesting: “If quotas near Greenland are to be fixed after rules for commercial whaling, the quotas will be considerably smaller than presently. Furthermore the Greenlandic finances will be strained by the required expensive investigations of the whale populations”
Libby,
I wondered whether Travis’ comparing me with people of “psychological illness” wasn’t an attempt to attract your affection.
There is much I could say about what your comments over time have revealed about yourself, and indeed there is a certain commonality between yourself and Travis.
hm,
Productive discussion on whaling here is not feasible.
Some people, such as Libby, have stated on this site that (amongst other objections to whaling) “there is no scientific … evidence to show me it is sustainable”.
Greenpeace, who Libby has worked with in the past, also makes similar claims.
This is despite clear scientific advice from the IWC’s Scientific Committee that “if commercial whaling were resumed under the revised management procedure, it could be managed safely” (former IWC Scientific Committee Chair, Judy Zeh).
I’ve never seen any honest attempt to reconcile such facts with such contradictory views, and I stopped holding my breath long ago.
For Greenpeace, the fundraising organization, the lack of desire to reconcile with such facts is understandable. For participants here, on the other hand, one can only presume that there is some other subconscious factor at play.
Hi HM,
I have been told by many Aussies here at the blog that this discussion form is the usual in the Oz, and nothing to be afraid of;) We actually don’t mean to harm anyone here! LOL! Just a hot discussion as it always is on the whales issue…
The article is very interesting and shows that there is no political courage to deal with aboriginal hunting methods today at the IWC or elsewhere. It is today politically incorrect…
The Greenland aboriginal whaling is indeed a commercial operation and their Fin whale quota is 19. Still no protests, but when Iceland hunts 9 Fins there is an outcry! Yes, hypocracy.
Later on today I will post an article from the Russian aboriginal whale hunt…there have been time to deaths of 9 hours….
David and Hm,
According to the tone of the paper, I read the Danish version, it seems likely that Denmark will vote in support of the moratorium.
I have also read the Danish Embassy’s reply re commercial whaling.
It seems like they are compromise willing in this issue and supports an RMS proposal.
It was an interesting reply, including a comment that stated ” if the RMS had been adopted in 2005, less whales had been killed today”.
Ann,
I imagine under current circumstances that’s probably true (assuming no objections were lodged to any adopted RMS).
But the problem for the anti-whaling politicians is that, if implemented, over time the RMS would see the potential for increased levels of whaling.
The IWC/SC is currently only in a position to advise on safe levels of removals for common minke whales in the North Atlantic and the ‘O’ stock of the Western North Pacific, plus if things have gone well over the last few months which I imagine they have, Western North Pacific Bryde’s whales as well. By 2009, an RMP implementation for (“critically endangered”) North Atlantic fin whales is planned to be completed, and beyond that I imagine the Japanese govt. will request an implementation for sei whales in the North Pacific too.
However, my money is on the IWC simply collapsing by the end of the decade, or at least Japan quiting (Iceland and Norway have played their cards well). Japan’s coastal whaling proposal this year, if rejected, will provide more than enough justification (at least from a layman’s perspective) for the view that the IWC can no longer reasonably be considered an “appropriate international organization” for the conservation, management and study of cetaceans, as in UNCLOS Article 65.
OK, as this thread was meant to be a controversial one, i.e comparing whaling and sealing to farming .
I read another Norwegian article this morning.
The Coastal Party, a political party consisting mostly of coastal people, fishermen, whalers , sealers , you name it, and has also been lead by a notorious whaler , who tried to smuggel whale blubber to Japan etc…..
Anyway, the party line is ” No to the EU” , and one of the reasons is animal abuse of farm animals in the EU.
” We can get cheaper meat if we are EU members, but the animals suffer during calving and during transports 20% of the animals die” continues the party.
So it is ineresting that a party that involve whalers and sealers are so keen on animal welfare issues IMO….
http://www.idag.no/debatt-oppslag.php3?ID=12429
I’m looking for the Rieber thread ( haven’t found it yet) but saw that a guy had added a new comment recently to one of our old whaling threads.
I’m posting it here to keep up the balance:
“I think you’re all a dying breed. I have been living and working in Southern Norway for nearly a year and no-one (O.K. maybe one but he is a not exactly the picture of physical or mental health)I have met is pro whaling and they find the matter both embarrasing and a moot point in general.
Keep eating the Minke steaks, keep absorbing the toxins they contain and have as many sickly deformed infants as you think you can sustain on it.
I have dived with Minke’s and the experience was profound. They are gentle, intelligent, sensitive creatures and they actually care about each other and make frequent bodily contact with each other. I learnt more about the animal in one hour of diving than any of you can ever dream of in a lifetime of senseless and barbaric predation.
Whale watching and Tourism alone would net the communities or (komunes)of the Northern Norway far more revenue than hunting and it is truly sustainable.”
Posted by: Schmal at March 30, 2007 07:07 AM
Actually, didn’t know that there existed an opportunity to dive with the minkes….
Minkes “actually care about each other”?
They are therefore at least as intelligent as cows.
Ann: David seems to have missed my jab re kiwis and “caring”
IMHO all kiwis are blatant opportunists and notorious in the loyalty stakes
So Gavin, kiwis are opportunistic….haha, I can make some more generalizations…
Aussies are the most anti whaling people in the world, the Japanese dare not oppose their elders, the Norwegians are extremely nationalistic and flag tooting and Swedes, well, we are often very neutral and compromise willing , this means that we are often labelled as cowards LOL!!!
Re anti whaling activists in prowhaling countries, I can mention the difficulties that met Norwegian activists in the beginning of ” the whales war”. They were labelled ” whores or quislings”! Hard times indeed….
hm,
It is hard for anyone with an opinion to contribute to the debate here and not get attacked. Please don’t let that stop you from putting forward ideas and pieces of information like you have. It is refreshing to have someone else to respond to.
“Some people, such as Libby, have stated on this site that (amongst other objections to whaling) “there is no scientific … evidence to show me it is sustainable”.
Where did I say this David? Not doubting you here, but just checking as I know you like to cherry pick and form comments to suit your own agenda. So what if I did say it anyway? I gather you are looking at ways of undermining me.
“I wondered whether Travis’ comparing me with people of “psychological illness” wasn’t an attempt to attract your affection.”
Golly David, still smarting over my comment that you are “sick”. You do hold on to things for a long time don’t you?
“Greenpeace, who Libby has worked with in the past, also makes similar claims.”
I question whether I was actually working for Greenpeace David. I was doing surveys as an independent observer. There were things I did not do for Greenpeace as I was an independent observer. But I guess it suits you to lump us together.
“There is much I could say about what your comments over time have revealed about yourself, and indeed there is a certain commonality between yourself and Travis.”
Go ahead David. I am in need of a good hearty laugh. If you think that comments on this blog have revealed much about me, you are very shallow indeed! If there is a certain commonality between Travis and myself, it is probably that we both wish you would go to a parellel universe and not come back, but I don’t mean to speak for Travis, as he may actually have a soft spot for you. I was once accussed of being Pinxi, but I guess there are actually a few people out there David that don’t like you.
“Minkes “actually care about each other”?
They are therefore at least as intelligent as cows.”
I guess the intelligence of cows has been established in the scientific literature.
Hi Gavin,
I have tried not to lower myself to smugness or even the slimy personal jibes of David, but I have unfortunately failed. It is hard when you are dealing with people of a certain mentality who insist on personal and professional attacks on anyone who does not agree with their pov.
Here on the Sydney coast those glass fronted seaside towers are usually frosted over with salt spray, causing more feshwater to go down the plug hole as they wash down their glass expanses. But hey, at least they can watch the whale migration whilst it lasts.
Libby: Seems you too can vouch for my interpretations of Bondi type kiwis. Pests! As one tries to suck you dry in the pub another closer to home borrows you shoes and tyres.
Best of the lot was the man on roam with his young family, he wanted to have a lend of my tent and wife. I drew a line in the sand then on the question of greater needs. I reckon isolated farmers and their families loose essential social graces over time and it affects both sexes.
Back to topic: Brutal practice everyday also lowers sensitivity. I mentioned the rough living in Bass Strait that led to abuse and slavery. In those regions I had direct access to family accounts of personal hardship and tough regimes when unlimited exploitation was the driving force. We were quite complacent when huge Japanese fishing fleets wiped out both the scale fish and squid. I watched with binoculars their day and night operations also chatted with the pilot of the spotter plane.
Later on it was woodchip. I doubt your David was around then Libby
Seems Ann has cottoned on about “industry loyalty” at the grass roots. We could go on with protests v stampedes hey
You are a very interesting chap Gavin. I always enjoy reading your insights and feel I come away learning something from someone far wiser than I.
Brutal practice can be either the pen or the sword, and in both cases, yes, it can lower sensitivity.
Libby,
> So what if I did say it anyway?
You tell me.
> I gather you are looking at ways of undermining me.
If you have changed your views on that matter, you needn’t be afraid to show it. It’d do your image wonders.
On the other hand, if you haven’t changed your views on that matter, you undermine yourself.
> Golly David, still smarting over my comment that you are “sick”.
… and ditto to this.
> I question whether I was actually working for Greenpeace David.
I didn’t say you were working for them, and sheez, it’s no big deal even if you were, don’t you think?
> I guess it suits you to lump us together.
Hullo, there’s Travis’ dog chases tail trick…
> Go ahead David.
That sort of thing is very much best left as an exercise for the reader, and especially so in your case.
RAOTFL!!!!! Thanks so much again David!!!
>If there is a certain commonality between Travis and myself, it is probably that we both wish you would go to a parellel universe and not come back, but I don’t mean to speak for Travis, as he may actually have a soft spot for you.
Libby, please do not misrepresent me. That is Schiller’s job. I do not wish David ‘go to a parallel universe and not come back’ I wish him dead.
It is funny how David: assumes he has far better things to say than anyone else; accuses others of immaturity; gets upset when anyone questions, him and more so if they match his nastiness; writes things he can’t back up with evidence; excessively repeats himself to try and get his points across; launches a far more personal assault on a female (even compared to me and none on Gavin); and always has to have the last word! Over to you Davey…(LOL!)
Plenty of commonality for the both of you to mull over 🙂 Only if the spirit is willing of course.
Travis wrote :
“I do not wish David ‘go to a parallel universe and not come back’ I wish him dead ”
Am I the only one who finds that statement extremely offensive?
I thinks he may have been tongue in cheek? Kind of fits in with the rest of the verbal abuse going on here I reckon. You give it and expect to get it back heh?
Thanks Libby for your recent complements; if I seem wise then it’s only because I learnt early to consider the extensive experience of my forebears. If that comes over on the web then I have done my job. Sadly google finds very few of them regardless of the web power today.
“Am I the only one who finds that statement extremely offensive?”
George,
Could be construed as being a little overstated, but there wont be any sympathy from me. Those that make their bed have to lie in it, people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, if you sleep with the dog you’ll get fleas (insert any appropriate cliche that aptly says if you say/do nasty things, nasty things will someday bite you on the bottom).
That’s enough from me. I am tired of lowering my intelligence and decency to that of David’s. Hope you are well.
Gavin,
“Thanks Libby for your recent complements”
Pleasure Gavin. Unfortunately my grandparents were all dead by the time I was a few years old, but I would have loved to have learnt about Life from them, especially one of my grandfathers. It may be an unthankful task at times, but you have done your forebears proud.
> there wont be any sympathy from me.
I’d be surprised if many readers expected such from you, Libby.
> if you say/do nasty things, nasty things will someday bite you on the bottom
This sort of response is also not surprising from you, Libby.
> That’s enough from me. I am tired of lowering my intelligence and decency to that of David’s.
Like Travis, feel free to reassure yourself as much as you please. You needn’t feel the need to tell all the readers here about it though, surely? Doesn’t it go without saying?
Hey George,
Travis’ wishing me “dead” is at the same level as his comparing me with “people who suffered from psychological illness” (and Libby’s calling me “sick”), and even now suggesting that my comments to Libby had something to do with her being female?!
Ann and I seem to be able to treat each other with reasonable amounts of respect. Yet if we take Ann out of the equation – substitute her with Libby, or Travis – observe what happens…
Not pretty, but the results are nonetheless interesting.
Hellooo all,
Schoolteacher talking here;).
Now, now , we want to talk about cruelty to animals and not cruelty to each other. LOL!
So questions are such as :
1) Have marine mammals greater value than farm animals from a strict philosophical viewpoint?
2) Unfortunately, some people who really care about sea mammals have a tendency to forget farm animals, is this a correct observation? Or are such people as well aware of the plight of farm animals, transports etc.
I have some personal observations on this….
Deary me. George finds my comment about David offensive, but not Ann’s comment about Iceman. David finds he and Ann can ‘treat each other with reasonable amounts of respect’, but not Libby or I. More to do with allegiances and differing view points than anything else (not forgetting Gavin, who was conveniently ignored by some, for some unknown reason!) As I mentioned to Iceman, David seems capable of looking after himself, including digging his own grave!
Libby Said:
>That’s enough from me. I am tired of lowering my intelligence and decency to that of David’s.
David said:
>You needn’t feel the need to tell all the readers here about it though, surely? Doesn’t it go without saying?
No, I think the readers can make up their own minds from your response David, but you had to say it!!!
In answer to to your questions Ann:
1) No
2) No
Not much point in saying anything else as David and Iceman have made it perfectly clear that they will disrespect it. So it then becomes a discussion involving all those who think along a similar line, because anyone else has been taunted by the sandbox kids using school yard tactics to get rid of the opposition rather than meaningful debate. Have fun kids.
Ann,
I considered that you know what I think already, but given that the whole thread was derailed after my taking issue with Travis’ comments on his perceptions of the “culture” of “the Japanese” (which in hindsight were better left simlpy ignored), I should probably give you my answers now.
1) I guess a definition of “value” could give a narrower range of answers, but if “value” means something like “deserving to be spared death at the hands of humans”, no, not from my philosophical viewpoint – however others seem to disagree. Some chap on another thread the other day seemed to suggest that animals which only exist because of us breeding them are of lower value (i.e., more OK for killing) than wild animals. I can’t agree with such a view myself, although I probably would have once upon a time.
2) For people who are just casually against exploitation of marine mammals (i.e., those who would start by arguing “but [marine mammal] are endangered”), I imagine most would generally be less likely to have given a great deal of thought to the issue. On the other hand, for people who spend wads of time thinking about marine mammals, I imagine that the observation you suggest wouldn’t be fair. At the end of the day I think the politicians are driven more by the casual majority than the thinking people who are fewer in number. This, I think, is why Sea Shepherd is popular in Australia, yet Australians happily export hundreds and thousands of tonnes of their excess animal protein to overseas markets.
A bit off topic, but about 30 whaling boats will participate in this years Norwegian whale hunt.
Some new boats are added, some have quit and it also seems to be some difficulties to recruit whalers.
David and Travis,
I’m really glad that you both answerd “no” to my first question.
Well, picking at one of my former activists in Greenpeace.
We were looking at an add about organic farming, and the pic showed a pretty young female farmer together with the free range ” happy cows”. I really thought this was a nice add promoting organic farming with happy cows on the pasture…. the activists said the add was ” disgusting”….well, she meant that cows were pesky little critters that probably destroyed the Amazonas and our planet.
I must also say that I have met many, many people that show little respect for farm animals and ignore the plights just because they are meant for consumption….
Hi Ann,
Just seen a report in Japanese media about bull-fighting under discussion in the EU. Apparently the movement to ban it has become more active lately, but Spanish people familiar with bull-fighting have responded saying that bull-fighting is a “cultural asset” of Europe.
Some reports out of Madrid apparently suggested some link between bullfighting and benefits for the environment (I couldn’t understand that bit of the article well though). Members of some EU thing have been asked to reject whatever proposal for banning bullfighting are suggested.
The article also notes that there are bull-fighting traditions in southern France and Portugal, and support for Spain is supposedly expected from those areas.
However, the article says that the number of young people heading to bull-fighting is on the decrease year after year, and the direction of the situation is uncertain.
—
I think it’s pretty crazy that any people who’s nation joins the EU is then subjected to the cultural intolerance in that way. Same problem with globalization in general. I hope this disturbing trend is reversed.
David,
Personally no aficinado of such things as bullfighting….( I have heard that the matadors are snorting coke )
What I have heard is that the bull breeders get lots of EU subsidies and that is why bull fighting will not end…
Re the environmental benefits it might be that it is some kind of landscape management…we have that in Sweden….farmers get subsidies keeping cattle to keep the ” landscape open”. Could be good for some kinds of plants, insects and birds.
Ann: From personal experience familiarity with brutality works about the same onshore and offshore. As I grew up with farmers, slaughtermen, butchers, fishermen, hunters and divers, I can say their emphases was on “process” with “kill and catch” major measurements.
However our culture changed in recent decades. “Quality” is most industry jargon now.
With this knowledge I returned pet mince to my local supermarket today in anticipation of a call from their supplier where I can have another go at their product QA. It’s normally roo meat in the main.
David raises Oz meat exports. Hey what about NZ lamb? Who catches my frozen Hoki fillets?
David: Who is your advisor on Jap culture as applied to exports and imports also their various operations in southern seas. Has any evolution occurred since ww2 ???
As a teenager I got to know a mild man who spent considerable time in Changi and on the notorious Burma Railway. He never spoke about that but as the decades rolled by I noticed a rather curious habit of his. We worked in mines at different times. I eventually got the knack of leaving the job at high speed through the bush.
But jack flash remained legend. When he was alone on the way out to the family beach house young bucks never saw his wheels again on that trip. Deep underground he showed off fabulous crystal caverns. Above he dug disused dumps for their history. How he saw his own life remains a mystery.
Ask any vet from that era David before you lecture us on adopting another culture.
Bull fighting is extremely cruel. Why hold on to a disgusting activity just bcause some old folk find it cultural. What do people learn from bull fighting that can’t be learnt from art or something else that doesnt subject animals to suffering. If globalisation can end human suffering, then I hope it can end animal suffering too. I hope the EU ban it.
Ann: there was a fab internet pic of a man running on water while looking over his shoulder.
The caption said he was the first to “walk on water” since JC.
Guess what, the motivating force was a loose Spanish bull chasing street crowds.
Good post Gavin, you are indeed a wise man…
David,
Not going into any lenghts with bull fighting right now.
I read an article about it.
A summary about this ” macho cult” :
1) Many of the matadors are former convicts snorting coke before the bull fight
2) Bull’s horns are filed down
3) Bull’s are on tranquilizers
4) Bull’s eyes are smeared in vaseline so they have not much visibilty
So much for the cultural aspect of bull fighting
Travis said :
“Deary me. George finds my comment about David offensive, but not Ann’s comment about Iceman”
Anne did not wish death on another contributor to this blog Travis – your compassion is showing sweety
Gavin,
I wasn’t intending to lecture anyone here on “adopting another culture”. Was there something I said that gave you an impression otherwise?
Wadard Said :
“Putting all the intellectualism aside for a second: Whale meat tastes disgusting. As does crocodile. But I don’t mind roo. Snake tastes like chicken. Beef is orrite, but lamb is best.”
Different strokes for different folks – I find lamb not especially appetising, Roo quite tasty and minke whale meat delicious ( with the right cut and cook ) Fin whale tastes better IMO and I´m told that humpback is the creme de la creme meat wise from a colleague 😉
..Ostrich is particularly yummy and I´m particularly glad to find that there is an ostrich farm not a kilometer from my new abode :O)
“And if you don’t believe whale tastes disgusting, ask the Japanese people – they only ate it in large quantities during WW2 because it was cheap protein.”
I believe that some folk don´t like the taste and some do – why not ask the norwegians as well who pay good money for minke whale meat?
Or Greenlanders, American inuit, russians, etc etc etc …
>Anne did not wish death on another contributor to this blog Travis – your compassion is showing sweety
Please don’t generalise and misrespresent me George. I have shown compassion on this blog towards many, including those incarcerated in Indonesian gaols, Muslims, Australian Aboriginals, Japanese sailors and animals. My comment was regarding David and no one else. If it demonstrates my compassion, it is a lack of it towards him and him only. I can understand he is your friend, but you have shown a lack of interest in his behaviour towards others here, and that can equally indicate a lack of compassion. At least I am being honest, something you have previously implied I am not.
Ann, you write
>“Would you prefer to be kept in captivity, without sunlight for the rest of your life, or is whaling a better alternative?”
I realise you are talking primarily about ‘food’ animals (although the obscene practice of bull fighting has been brought up recently), but how does this comment about captvity relate to zoo, circus and research animals, and what of ‘food’ species such as dogs?
George,
I have heard that the Russians used the whale blubber for their nuclear and missile arsenal….
And the Russians fed their fur farm animals with whale meat….
Travis,
I think you have already posted your share of sanctimonious BS on this thread, and probably the remainder of Libby’s share as well. But go ahead an get into a fight with George about it too if you are so sure of yourself 🙂
George,
Isn’t it fascinating that comments on a thread at Jen’s blog can result in some participants wishing death upon others?
Travis Wrote ( amongst other things ) :
“My comment was regarding David and no one else. If it demonstrates my compassion, it is a lack of it towards him and him only. I can understand he is your friend”
Travis, I know David through the internet and forums / blogs like this – hardly a friend, tho I suppose ” internet friend ” may apply.. there are anumber of sometime posters on this blog that I .. lets say, mildly dislike, for a number of reasons, intellectual dishonesty being one of them.
I would not wish death on my worst enemy however, and this is where I differ from you, you are quite happy to wish death on someone you have never met, merely because of disagreement of opinions … ummm wow ..
Indeed, it speaks volumes about your compassion Travis
What exactly are you so vigorously defending here David?
It seems to me your whole line of arguments have little or no practical background let alone cultural from one place or another and this I feel is in contrast to others regularly on the slaughter theme.
Travis:”Ann, you write
>“Would you prefer to be kept in captivity, without sunlight for the rest of your life, or is whaling a better alternative?”
I realise you are talking primarily about ‘food’ animals (although the obscene practice of bull fighting has been brought up recently), but how does this comment about captvity relate to zoo, circus and research animals, and what of ‘food’ species such as dogs?
Travis, a good question! A short summary of my very own opinion.
Well, not a big supporter of none of the objects you mentioned, but hey can’t make any generalization.
How many acceptable zoos do exist in this world ,with enough space for the animals? Well, there have been good zoo projects with some endangered species.
Circuses, nope, IMO, no elephants etc. Dogs and horses might be OK,as well as some other species such as parrots??
Research animals, this is the VERY question, the really hard one. Probably no animal has suffered as much as the research schimps???
Hopefully research on animals will be phased out in the future and replaced with cell and tissue research etc.
A very sensitive issue that is maybe even more hot than whaling.
The very problem with dog meat is how the dog is treated before the slaughter. Asian dogs are very cruelly treated and to increase the leaness of the meat , the dogs are hit and tortured.
Gavin,
See my questions below to Ann.
(By the way, still interested to know if you really had the impression that I might try to lecture people about “adopting another culture”).
Ann,
I heard that of Asian dog meat as well.
In such situations,
1) I wonder what’s an appropriate way of trying to effect change?
2) Where do we end up if our efforts to effect change are not successful?
David,
I think there really is some hope for the Asian dogs. More and more people are concerned about the dogs fate and some organisations are working hard on this issue…
As people get more and more companion animals I think as well they will get another view.
For example, in China during Mao’s regime , it was viewed as something very dirty and capitalistic to own a dog….this is changing a bit now….
Ann,
I guess the way in which Asian dogs are treated may improve as more people come to keep companion animals etc., but I imagine dogs will still remain on the menu. Back home in the Manawatu, the next door neighbour of my family’s dairy farm ran a sheep farm. The kids of that family were keeping two cute fluffy little lambs as pets.
But more generally, is simply getting some large number of people concerned about a given issue in question an appropriate route? Does it matter who the people are? Does it matter how they are led to become concerned about the issue? Same with the organizations – work hard they may – but what is the most appropriate way of working to effect change?
Are there any principles that those trying to effect change should look to abide by? Or is it not required?
>I think you have already posted your share of sanctimonious BS on this thread, and probably the remainder of Libby’s share as well.
Here we go again David, assuming your contributions are somehow better than those of other people, even those that have some practical knowledge.
>Indeed, it speaks volumes about your compassion Travis
Your judging me from this comment makes you no better than I when it comes to ‘someone you have never met, merely because of disagreement of opinions … ummm wow ..’ To be truthful, it is my compassion that makes me dislike David so much, and if you choose to think about that, you may understand how that has come about.
>Travis, a good question!
I will take that as a positive contribution made to your discussion Ann.
I have seen a few programs lately on China and Korea and their attitudes to dogs. It seems that dogs as pets are becoming very popular, but in China families are limited to one dog for a companion animal. There are now doggie dressup clothes and so on, but in Korea, there is still a desire for dog meat and little knowledge by the general public about how the dogs are kept.
With regard to circuses and zoos, if we aim to ‘educate’ the public by keeping animals in questionable conditions and making them do tricks, then how can people understand wild animals, let alone optimal conditions for farmed ones?
Travis Said ( amongst other things ) :
“Your judging me from this comment makes you no better than I when it comes to ‘someone you have never met, merely because of disagreement of opinions … ummm wow ..’ ”
Once again Travis, I´m not the one wishing death on a fellow human being that I have never met – you are …
and I am not judging you as a person – merely your compassion or lack of it ..
A difference of opinions about environment and culture, or even personal dislike is one thing Travis,.. wishing Death to another human based on such dislike or differing opinions is a whole other kettle of whales when it comes to compassion
Who´s next on your death wish list Travis? .. or does your list consist of one entry?
David, facinating indeed ….. and disturbing … :O(
Yes David; I think you are into some kind of personal subversion in regard to rights of Japanese whaling and I reckon you are still “beating round the bush” on that issue. Some of these side issues like this thread are traps in a wider campaign.
Perhaps you can tell the blog if I’m right or wrong on both scores then tell me why.
BTW Did anyone see the little vid on salmon killing on that link I gave Ann up this thread?
Ah! David did have roots on the farm. Pet lamb story reminds me of a local stall holder hugging a huge white rabbit. This young lady was selling her NZ meat type bunnies to any passers by.
I used to like “underground mutton” from the stew pot and folks in times like the last depression lived on them. Ive trapped, shot, hypnotized n grabbed wild bunnies A few mini breeds as pets loose in the backyard changed all that.
Travis,
> Here we go again David, assuming your contributions are somehow better than those of other people
My comment in relation to your sanctimonious BS was not intended to be interpreted as a comparison of my contributions versus anyone else’s. In fact, I wonder how you could have honestly taken it that way. I don’t recall alluding to the value of my contributions at all. If you have an impression to the contrary I can assure you that it’s only in your head.
> David, facinating indeed ….. and disturbing … :O(
Quite. He could simply say “I got carried away”, and all could be forgotten. Certainly no one would think any less of him were he to do so.
For my part, I shouldn’t have described Travis’ diversionary generalization about the “culture” of the “Japanese” (in response to my reference to the Tosa bay region) as “ignorant bigotry”. There’s simply no nice way of putting it, so I shouldn’t have said it.
gavin,
If you read through the archives you’ll see that I have previously conceded to being a shill for the ever expanding Japanese commercial whaling industry (yes, it does exist!).
Every time a discussion related to whaling breaks 100 comments here at Jen’s blog, I’m paid, a 1 TRILLION YEN (if I recall correctly) bonus!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$ $$$
$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$
$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$ $$$ $$$$$ $$$$
$$$ $$ $$$ $$ $$$$$ $ $$$$ $$$$ $$ $$$
$$$$ $ $$$ $ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
俺は売春！
(satisfied?)
“…share of sanctimonious BS on this thread, and probably the remainder of Libby’s share as well”
David is still bad-mouthing me and I haven’t written anything since this morning!
David: you make more sense that way but I dont need another sermon on meat eating
Libby,
Astute! It was indeed this morning that saw your quota of sanctimonious BS partially reduced with your “if you say/do nasty things, nasty things will someday bite you on the bottom”, in combination with your talk of being “tired of lowering my intelligence and decency to that of David’s”.
It didn’t take you long to recover from your purported exhaustion, did it 🙂 Good to know you are in such fine health, and won’t be dying anytime soon (as has been wished of me).
Finally if you think I was bad-mouthing you – as with Travis, that’s just in your head as well. You say more than enough for yourself, after all. In this instance I was merely commenting on the large volume of sanctimonious BS from Travis.
gavin,
ではこれから貴様に限って、特別スペシャルの日本語コメントを差し上げることにしますね！代わりに魚についての説教でもいかがでしょうか？！
Childish
“It was indeed this morning that saw your quota of sanctimonious BS partially reduced…”
This statement suggests that this morning you thought I posted “sanctimonious BS”, is that correct David?
“…share of sanctimonious BS on this thread, and probably the remainder of Libby’s share as well”
This is the original statement mentioning Travis’s share of “sanctimonious BS” and “probably” mine as well, is this correct David?
“In this instance I was merely commenting on the large volume of sanctimonious BS from Travis.”
So why mention my name in the original comment David? What was the means to that end?
“Good to know you are in such fine health, and won’t be dying anytime soon…”
“You say more than enough for yourself, after all”.
You have no idea of the state of my health David, although at the moment all I am doing is dying from laughter from your comments!!!
Gavin,
Adult?
Libby,
Your name was mentioned as a test.
Results were as expected 🙂
Gavin,
In NSW they are proposing to outlaw smacking of children, claiming that reasoning with a child gets far better results. I am not sure if you have some thoughts on methods dealing with child disobedience?
Not much in the affirmative to the original question regarding taking offence, although it seems there are some regarding maturity!
Ann,
Regarding appropriate ways of attempting to bring about change, I found this article an useful read:
http://www.un.int/kamal/publications/cultural_intolerance
It concludes:
“With dialogue and understanding, and empathy and humility, all problems can be resolved. With cultural arrogance and superiority, none of them will.”
> With dialogue and understanding, and empathy and humility, all problems can be resolved. With cultural arrogance and superiority, none of them will.”
Well David, say that at an IWC meeting! People speak at each other at such meetings as if they were from different planets…
We have posted much negative stuff here on Greenpeace, but one of the ever , best statements I have heard came from one their campaigners. He said that only through rational and logic discussions can we win the case….
However, we would miss much fun here with our whale discussion’s little circle….
Ann,
Can you point me in the direction of some examples of Greenpeace campaigns where they eventually turned around and said “hey you know what, it was us who was out of line”?
I found one example…
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0921-03.htm
… of campaigns being dropped, that is.
David,
I think I have mentioned some ” failures” here previously.
Well, they have actually confessewd that many mistakes have been made.
The most famous one was the campaign opposed to Greenland sealing.
Another campaign that failured was the Norwegian anti whaling campaign.
There are certainly many more, can’t only recall them right now….
Maybe they will look at the recent ” Esperanza” tour in Japan as a failure as well and reorganize the whaling campaign????
And they dropped the Aussie kangaroo campaign as well…
I’ve not seen the Patrick Hof paper, but it seems pertinent to the discussion.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10661-whales-boast-the-brain-cells-that-make-us-human.html
Hi Pragmatic,
Thanks for the interesting link…
This article could be refereed to Paul Watsons claim that ” whaling is cannibalism”.
I think it is also interesting that the humpbacks, fins, and orcas have the spider cells and not dolphins and minkes.
So the question arise, are they less worth???
Personally, I’m not especially comfortable with this ” intelligence issue”. So is killing an animal based on its intelligence? A very difficult criteria, since I believe all this neuro science is not developed at all etc. and I think that animals that don’t have all those areas in the brain that are connected with intelligence, emotions etc. could have the same properties to suffer etc. as their cousins with ” higher intelligence”.
Libby: Since you raised the question of smacking and it has been a big topic in local media including this week – for what its worth I have a firm view that comes with a paddle and a threat. That’s more about developing personal safety than anything else.
One family of school kids I knew got a whipping for being late at the dairy at milking time. Their dad was a little guy and he had to catch them first. Apparently he killed a sleeping hawker in a prank with the cart during his wild days.
I copped a few hidings at home and at school from both adults and kids. How do you protect the next gen then? Not by silly softness. My lot early on saw a section of the “Age” newspaper over their shoulder before it landed with a wallop low down.
We tend to pass on what we ourselves got once upon a time. The world at large is a tough place. The sooner kids learn their limits the sooner they can deal with it themselves. One of mine had a near shave with a predator who was later convicted for the worst possible offence elsewhere.
Ann; there was an interesting item re marine predators on ABC TV last night..
Catalyst: “Fish Schools – teaching the little tackers how to survive”
‘Over the last decade, an undercurrent of research reveals that fish are intelligent social animals that learn from direct experience and by watching how other fish behave’
See the transcript – http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1895106.htm
Thanks for the feedback Gavin. I learnt by watching what my siblings recieved from my father, so avoided his wrath as best as could. Most animals keep their youngsters in line by something akin to a nip or a smack. It is a way of learning about the world, their place in it and about respect. Trouble nowadays is that many don’t have the slightest clue what respect is, and reasoning with childish adults can be more impossible than with actual children. Some never learn.
On the issue of intelligence, there was a great program on last night regarding the heart and its ‘memories’ and intelligence. Perhaps we should not be ‘judging’ by the brain’s intelligence alone (although a creature’s continued existence in the human world should not be based entirely on what we consider ‘intelligent’).
The following ABC program “Thanks For The Memories” on the changed lives of patients with heart transplants raises the fascinating possibility of distributed memory through the body and nervous system.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200704/programs/ZY8704A001D12042007T203000.htm.
Considering all the aspects of cruelty regarding memory and learning, it seems the body and organs could face a separate death to that of the brain
Thanks Gavin,
Yeah I really enjoyed the fish link…
Libby: We could go on about distributed learning, collective knowledge, sympathy, premonition and many other things. I witnessed the excitement in a group of researchers when scattered juvenile brain cells in growth medium joined in a web.
Maturity of the individual is another theme. That process we know gets stunted by various factors. What constitutes adulthood? Many retire without knowing.
I chatted often with IT “masters”, their soulmates, other bright sparks in general on the internet about the missing rites of passage for in-betweens, those who reckoned on having the wrong childhood. A common symbol for CD TV TS was a wedding dress.
Sometimes it’s about submission. This is another background for cruelty as apposed to creativity.
I refer pollies to my cats and my garden. Two “tame” tabbies have more attitude than sense. On the other hand the master sprayer is as bold as brass till a dog comes in, that’s when he rolls. After thousands of dollars to the vet in repairs I can say he never learns.
Rivalry across species is difficult to measure in intelligence terms. That’s why we must not assume superiority. When we have to train fish, the question should be; why? Not how good are we.
Gavin- The rough translation for what was written in Japanese is:
“Well I’ll give you a special comment in Japanese just for you! In return, how about giving us a peaching on fish?!”
Why this had to be written in Japanese, by a kiwi, to a likely non-Japanese speaker beggars the question why it had to be written at all. Some don’t seem to realise how stupid they look.
Thanks Louis:
Well David I must be psychic as I felt a strong urge to drift back to fish while I waited for someone to translate. If I am psychic, then it happens most when I can stand squarely on the shoulders of others in the know. Then it’s no accident.
Other creatures share this way. It’s a “hell” of an advantage at times though.
George wrote that according to a colleague of his, Fin whales tasted better than minkes but the very tasties whales were humpbacks.
So it seems like the whale eaters are ranking whale meat differently among themselves…
Icelanders don’t like Fins …
Hmmm, now I read that the Japanese want to hunt the humpbacks because they are competing with the Antarctic minkes about the food…
And the minkes are competing with the blue whales for food…
I really wonder if scientists really are aware of the very complex marine food web???
According to one of the world’s leading fisheries experts this whales and seals competing with fisheries is a myth…
On the contrary ,they will only benefit the eco-sytem.
Read the very interesting article here:
http://article.wn.com/link/WNAT1F396C2A33D4D52DAD49876D739C575E?source=templategenerator&template=whaling/onephoto.txt
Louis Wu, your translation was a bit off the mark, and you missed the bit of Japanese at the end of my previous post as well…
> Some don’t seem to realise how stupid they look.
It seems I need to point out that I was being *incredibly stupid* in response to a couple of *incredibly stupid* comments…
…and with that, I wonder where it leaves you.
Ann,
Essential to a sound criticism is first an accurate representation of the argument that one is criticising.
Just as we have seen around here, for example, Travis frequently starts chasing his tail, and ultimately never gets any where because of it.
With regard to the Daniel Pauly article, if the representations of the arguments being attacked are indeed as described in the article, unfortunately for the credibility of this function in the US, it’s going to be of little (if any) benefit to the problems at the IWC.
So you prostitute yourself David. I don’t think we needed that translated.
You have rightly assumed it was you I was referring to as looking incredibly stupid. You and your few friends seem to be the only ones who think there have been incredibly stupid comments aside from your own. Stop judging other’s comments for everyone else. I think we can make up our own minds here about what is stupid and what isn’t.Your behaviour of constantly being critical, baiting people so they will comment some more to your dumb-ass dribble and using Japanese on an English-speaking weblog just demonstrates you are an absolute idiot, and an immature one at that.
Louis Wu
David,
In the link it was mentioned there could be some competition between whales and the herring fisheries in Iceland….
However, the herring fisheries in the North Atlantic are really reporting record catches of herring currently…herring is a fish that is really sustainable to eat….I really believe we can share the herring with the whales as well…
Travis and David have been briefly discussing dog meat consumption , that is a cruel practise in Asia.
Well, not only pointing out Asia, as we treat as well especially farm animals poorly in more developed countries….
Here is a report from a market from China:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=445004&in_page_id=1811
Hong Kong based organisation Animals Asia is currently doing some great work on pet animals and bear bile farming….
Translate TextOriginal text: Automatically translated text:
ではこれから貴様に限って、特別スペシャルの日本語コメントを差し上げることにしますね！代わりに魚についての説教でもいかがでしょうか？！ So from now on your way in giving the Japanese comment of special special only, the stripe shank! Instead how probably will be even in preaching concerning the fish?!
Ah, google to the rescue.
Two very interesting links on whaling:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=31&art_id=nw20070415124412250C494522&set_id=
Iceland unsure to continue commercial whaling. Decision not made yet. Seems like their is vey little local demand for whale meat and their are 100 tons of minke meat in storage.
Iceland is as well listening to international criticism as they are a big tourist nation.
This according to Prime Minister ,Haare.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/radical-proposal-to-save-the-whales/2007/04/15/1176575681130.html
Radical proposal to save the IWC and whales , from former US Commissioner.
No whaling in the Sanctuaries
Phase out lethal reseach whaling
A management regime etc
will mean that less whales will be killed than today
Ann,
Hopefully we’ll hear about the Iceland whale meat soon, huh. I personally have little doubt that they’d be able to find buyers in Japan, the problem is jumping through all the hoops. I wonder how co-operative trade officials on the Japanese side have been. At the moment the US are having trouble getting their excess beef in to the country.
Just read about the “radical proposal” from the former US commissioner. I guess the idea of lifting the commercial whaling moratorium is radical for people of an anti-whaling persuasion, but with all those other strings attached, the proposal seems just like another big waste of time from my perspective – I don’t see any reason why the pro-whalers might be expected to agree with it, as there is no gain out of it for them.
I believe Japan’s coastal whaling proposal is likely to offer benefits in terms of making the IWC relevant as a management organization again, but if the true desire of the anti-whaling nations is just to see fewer whales killed (which I believe it is, no matter how they each individual extreme anti-whaling nations wishes to dress it up), then there is no hope for general compromise. Some of the “neutral” nations like Switzerland (who a Greenpeace official recently described as lacking common sense for participating in the Tokyo normalization meeting) may support the coastal whaling proposal, but there isn’t enough support to counter the recent EU recruitment drive. Some rough talk this year, and the IWC (or what’s left) could be completely irrelevant by June 2008.
Louis Wu,
Real nice pair of blinkers you have there…
David,
I must personally say that I’m surprised that you contradict the High North Allince’s own statements on the Japanese market.
According to Norwegian sources it is impossible to sell whale meat to the Japanese market due to protests from the Japanese whalers that are afraid of competion and price dumping. ( Note this is not from Greenpeace but info from a prowhaling site).
The ” radical ” proposal seems in line with some of the statements made of Denmarks compromise on the whaling issue. They proposed the RMS as well as ” whaling will be less than today”. This has also been some of Swedens support for the RMS.
Guess though that such proposals are not in the least popular in Japan, and according to NGOs it is Japan that is not interested in the least of RMS negotiations as they would like to run the IWC as they please ( read that somewhere).
David,
I guess the proposal was radical if you compare what the Independent states today:
http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article2452380.ece
And 6 new anti whaling countries have joined the IWC.
The article states that the anti whaling nations have learned this from the Japanese!
Funny, last year the Norwegians said that the Japanese had learned the vote buying from Greenpeace!!!
Time will tell with respect to entry into the Japanese market, I doubt Mr. Loftsson would have gone to all this effort if he knew that it would be in vain.
Ann,
Some Japanese literature I saw dated October 2006 (when Iceland announced their commercial whaling resumption) suggests that in Japan the development of a framework for Norwegian whale meat imports was ongoing, and the fisheries agency commented that Iceland’s product would be handled under the same framework as for Norway.
How to regulate the prices of the imports was apparently one sticking point, as you mentioned, but the issue doesn’t seem to completely preclude the possibility of the imports taking place.
If anything, my view is that in the short term the additional supply represents an opportunity to expand the market further, rather than create competition that could force prices down. Iceland’s volume of meat is only about 1/3’s of the amount of stock that apparently left stockpiles in February 2007 (and February was a quieter month).
David,
As I see it there is really something very fishy(whaly) or stinky about this Fin whale analysis and this whole affair with Loftsson.
A guy with his experience should really know how long time it takes to make a whale meat analysis.
Now it has gone about 6 months since they caught the whale…
And personally I don’t support any trade with Japan, I support only a very small local consumption…
This seems also be politics on a very high level including local elections etc.
And if you ask me , what I mean with a very small hunt, I can inform you that means about 20 to 24 minke whales…there is no demand or consumption for more as I see it…
Last comment from me on this thread…
It seems as well likely that Iceland will seek for an EU membership in the ( near?) future…and the concensus in the EU, is the ” no whaling line”.
And it seems as support for whaling has decreased in Iceland since the resumption of commercial whaling,
About 40% of the people participating in a poll conducted by the Icelandic Nature Conservation were dissatified with whaling and 44% supported whaling…
A major change in opinion…. maybe whaling will be phased out very soon???
“The article states that the anti whaling nations have learned this from the Japanese!
Funny, last year the Norwegians said that the Japanese had learned the vote buying from Greenpeace!!!”
But Anne, anyone who cares to look into the history of the whaling moratorium (and not a “ban” as the Independent reports erroneously)should know that the anti-whalers were the first to bring in small and sometimes landlocked nations to the IWC to swing the voting.
I believe Sydney Holt among others has even boasted of this in writing in the past.
The UK Independent is very biased in their reporting on whaling, sealing and fur stories.
Their editorial position is one of anti-use and their reporting is highly biased as we see from their erroneous terminology such as “ban” instead of moratorium and their historical amnesia over who started recruiting non whaling nations into the IWC.
“And personally I don’t support any trade with Japan, I support only a very small local consumption…
Why not?
Why only support a “small” local consumption (whatever your definition of “small” is based on).
Are there any other foods you think should be restricted to “small” and “local” consumption (both highly subjective terms) or is this distinction only reserved for whales?
In some cases, trade can be beneficial.
My understanding is that the Nordics eat the meat but not the blubber which could have a market in Japan.
Here in Canada mostly the skin and some blubber is eaten in the form of maqtaq whereas in Greenland they are much more fond of the meat than us.
In such cases, it would seem that an ability to trade would be beneficial and ensure maximal utilization.
Russia Tries to Save Polar Bears With Legal Hunt
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/world/europe/16polar.html?ex=1177387200&en=0cd638a96c74770e&ei=5070&emc=eta1
I have missed one comment from Travis.
>With regard to circuses and zoos, if we aim to ‘educate’ the public by keeping animals in questionable conditions and making them do tricks, then how can people understand wild animals, let alone optimal conditions for farmed ones?
I have an observation re animal cruelty issues and the public/consumers.
Some people are educated by gruesome video footage, however some people find such footage SOOO disgusting that they now never look at such evidence.
For example, I know people that are very interested in the issue , but can’t stand witnessing such evidence….
An other example, there is an organisation in Europe, Animal Angels, and they showed gruesome pics from animal transports, people complained, it was too terrible, so now on their website their is a note ” we don’t have no more gruesome pictures”!
Something to think about maybe, how is the best way to inform/educate people !
I see that IceClass has posted a comment on polar bears.
Want to end my comments here with a more happy pic!( promise last post)
Polar bear research carried out:
http://www.svalbardposten.no/nyhet.cfm?nyhetid=709
Thanks to all for an interesting discussion!!
>how is the best way to inform/educate people !
Someone I know is involved in marine mammal conservation but does not want to see videos such as the latest dolphin slaughter one as it will upset him too much. For the people who are aware of the types of cruelty that goes on it is not such a big deal, but for people who are blissfully unaware of how animals are treated in various parts of the world, I certainly don’t think pandering to their sensitivies is a good idea. When the ostrich pulls its head up from the sand, the lion is still sitting at its heels. Footage and photos do not have to show the full extent of the cruelty, but some hint of the end product needs to be made clear. This would be similar to reporting of war on mainstream TV stations. On the one hand kids play the latest playstation killing game and yet their parents feel they may be too upset to see what real killing is about. Life is not a fantasy, or a game.