Seal hunt begins; IFAW bears witness

"pearl" wrote:
"I R Canuck" wrote:
"pearl" wrote:
"Invective" wrote:
More than five million seals. Thirty pounds of fish per seal per day. Do the
math.

Which fish though? Fish eat fish too. What if seals eat
significant amounts of the fish that eat cod? ....

'culling harp seals in an attempt to reduce the predation
on cod could even backfire. Harp seals eat fish like capelin,
which may themselves eat young cod, he says. So culling
harp seals might even boost the number of cod predators.'
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994877

SNIP Pearls standard retardation

*The point pearl is that Mr. Lavigne is making a statement not
grounded in any science, much like the statement Mr. Reid
made. You were critical of Mr. Reid's stance, but not of Mr.
Lavigne's.*

So, you bash any pro-sealer who makes a statement such as . .

"There is no doubt that seal predation on groundfish is impeding
the recovery of those stocks" (Gerry Reid)

but not when the IFAW does it . . .

"So culling harp seals might even boost the number of cod
predators" (David Lavigne)

"I R Canuck" wrote in message
news:gyYgc.35281$mn3.24244@clgrps13...
"pearl" wrote:
"I R Canuck" wrote:
"pearl" wrote:
"Invective" wrote:
More than five million seals. Thirty pounds of fish per seal per day. Do the
math.

Which fish though? Fish eat fish too. What if seals eat
significant amounts of the fish that eat cod? ....

'culling harp seals in an attempt to reduce the predation
on cod could even backfire. Harp seals eat fish like capelin,
which may themselves eat young cod, he says. So culling
harp seals might even boost the number of cod predators.'
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994877

snip canuck's standard retardation

*The point pearl is that Mr. Lavigne is making a statement not
grounded in any science, much like the statement Mr. Reid
made. You were critical of Mr. Reid's stance, but not of Mr.
Lavigne's.*

Mr. Lavignes statement is a call for some careful research, and
is a warning which demands halting the kill until more is known.
(Yet we know the primary reason for the seal slaughter is fur).

So, you bash any pro-sealer who makes a statement such as . .

"There is no doubt that seal predation on groundfish is impeding
the recovery of those stocks" (Gerry Reid)

'no doubt'? -- That is not grounded in science- as you said.

'The current scientific knowledge is insufficient to determine
the impact of a seal cull on cod fisheries in the short, medium
or long term. Science and resource managers question the value
of a cull in a fishery driven by economic market conditions. More
importantly, there is no way of knowing how other predators
and prey might respond to a decrease in the seal population..'
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/backg...hq-ac01b_e.htm

but not when the IFAW does it . . .

"So culling harp seals might even boost the number of cod
predators" (David Lavigne)

True.

'There is not a simple, straight-line relationship between seal
predation and the state of fish populations. The interaction
between seals, groundfish and other species is complex and
variable. For instance, seals eat cod, but seals also eat other
fish that prey on cod. '
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/backg...hq-ac01b_e.htm

'Moreover, other factors such as environmental changes and
fishing levels must be considered in trying to determine why
cod stocks have not yet recovered.'
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/backg...hq-ac01b_e.htm

Again;

'Seals have long lived in marine environments and their overall
contribution to these systems cannot have been negative (or
else they would have been eliminated millions of years ago(4)).
Therefore, although it is counterintuitive to many, the removal
of more seals at this point may not be without added risk to
the health of today’s declining fish stocks.

Positive contributions to ocean health that can be seen to be
made by seals include the production of zooplankton (via the
excretion of vast numbers of live worm eggs(5)), and the
scavenging consumption of dead or dying fish that might otherwise
undergo bacterial decay on bottom, with a resulting dangerous
depletion of oxygen from the water. In an oxygen stressed, low
zooplankton aquatic situation, air-breathing/zooplankton-excreting
marine mammals such as seals may therefore perform a unique
system-stabilizing role by consuming dead or dying fish, while
not removing oxygen from the water or succumbing to hypoxia
themselves.

These observations are intended to suggest some directions in
which the holistic effect of seals (and other marine mammals) on
ocean health might usefully be investigated. They also serve as
a warning of the nature of the adverse impacts on the marine
environment that may result from the removal of seals (less
zooplankton, less oxygen). Seals are an integral part of life in a
healthy ocean, and their actions today appear only to be part
of what naturally occurs when such a living system tries to
recover from damage inflicted on it. As fish eaters, the seals
will actively work towards the stabilization of an ocean
environment that supports fish…but the same cannot be said
for the bacteria that will break down dead fish in the absence
of larger animal consumers such as seals. The recent decision
to allow fishermen to shoot “nuisance seals,” as well as the
planned implementation of “seal exclusion zones” in Atlantic
Canada should be carefully reconsidered in this light. ..'
http://www.fisherycrisis.com/DFO/commons.htm