Animal Rights and Such
Posted on February 28, 2008 - Filed Under Animals, Environment/Conservation |
This is one of the worst things I’ve ever seen. I can’t understand how someone could act like this. It’s really fucked up. Why is it that the West screams bloody murder when the Japanese launch whaling expeditions and then gives Canada a pass to kill 300,000 seals every year? What disgusting hypocrisy. Don’t eat fish. Or buy Canadian.
A much nicer video.
Comments
7 Responses to “Animal Rights and Such”
Leave a Reply
Not cool.
I’m never eating seal fur ever again.
It’s for their own good.
300,000 seals are killed to allow the overall population (over 6,000,000 in Canada according to the BBC) to prosper with abundant resources, food, etc.
In WW1, the cruel and barbaric fishing industry was grounded to a halt in the Atlantic.
There were less fish after the war than there were before.
After 80 years of research in population dynamics since them, people can control the populations to keep them at optimal levels with fair success. A lot of money goes into deciding the quotas, and very smart people make the decisions. It’s not just some thugs beating seals for the laugh.
Arf!
“There were less fish after the war than there were before.”
huh? right, thanks.
killing off seals doesn’t control a population. If the population grows too big, seals migrate or die. Food sources will control it perfectly well, as it always does.
I’m just saying that in that historic case, fishing was actually increasing the population of fish in the long term, which was counter-intuitive.
“If the population grows too big, seals migrate or die. Food sources will control it perfectly well, as it always does.”
Seals always migrate. And yes, food sources do control populations, but not perfectly well, as my fish example illustrates.
To try to shed some light on the problem, consider the birth rate of seals, which is some specific constant ‘a’ times x, or ax, where x is the population. This makes sense because the number of births (in a given year, say) depends on the number of seals (or seal couples making babies).
There is a negating factor which accounts for the competition between seals for food, mates, land, or whatever else seals market in. This depends on some specific rate constant ‘b’ times the number of seal interactions, which is (x)*(x) = x^2
In the long term, as seal populations boom, and x gets relatively large, which is larger, x or x^2?
This is why quotas are practical.
Why would you trust in a model of population dynamics rather than letting nature sort itself out? If the seal population grows too large and starts to starve, then let them starve. This’ll lead to a rise in seal numbers again, and so on.
The numbers of seals should be allowed to rise and fall naturally, rather than going out and clubbing some of them to death and saying you’re doing it to keep the population static at some arbitrary value.
Lets be fair with our application of logic here. Try clubbing a few thousand unwanted Chinese kids to death (the girls I presume) and see if the rest of the population is better off maybe?
*THWACK!*
We’re all missing the point here which is this: clubbing seals is fun.