Gail Shea spokesperson responds to Morrissey's statement about Canadian seal hunt

A spokesperson for Gail Shea has responded to Morrissey's comments :

Morrissey attacks Fisheries Minister Gail Shea in blog post claiming ‘Canada’s sorry image is due entirely to its seal slaughter’ - National Post

Excerpt:

A spokesperson for Shea has responded to Morrissey’s statement, saying his comments “reveal a total ignorance of the Canadian seal hunt.”

Anyone who takes a careful look at the seal hunt will see that it is humane, sustainable, and well-regulated,” minister spokesperson Sophie Doucet said in an email to the Post. “In fact, the process used in the seal hunt was designed by international veterinary experts, and is the most stringent of any wild animal hunt in the world.

This is clearly just another case of a millionaire celebrity, desperate for a hobby, shamelessly regurgitating misinformation and myths that fringe animal-rights groups have been pushing for years. In the future, I would urge Mr. Morrissey to consider the impact that his ignorant and inflammatory statements have on the livelihoods of thousands of hard-working men and women in rural communities."

Related item:

• "This sorrowful Canada" - Morrissey statement on true-to-you.net - Apr. 19, 2014

 

[MILKISMURDER]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

1. continue to have diverse number of life forms on the planet both domesticated and "wild", this can only be done by keeping said populations from going through the periodic famines that invariably reduce their numbers each time, eventually leading to extinction, once again I am relying on history, current experts opinion and these things called facts

Eh? We're making 200 species extinct every single day which is 1000 times standard rate. We're driving The Sixth Great Extinction Event in geological history and you seem to think we're sustainably "culling" and maintaining biodiversity.

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

The problem is over population by humans compounded by our lifestyles. We are the problem not animals. Anyhow, we'll soon wipe ourselves out so I guess we won't have to worry about these things forever but in the meantime if we want to paper over the cracks by killing a few seals then by all means crack on.

please try and remember this all started with a statement by Morrissey in which he once again singled out Canadians, of all people, as being responsible for some truly diabolical act while in the same statement praising China*, just to add a little insult to the injury

Eh? We're making 200 species extinct every single day which is 1000 times standard rate. We're driving The Sixth Great Extinction Event in geological history and you seem to think we're sustainably "culling" and maintaining biodiversity.

and with no park rangers, no wildlife conservationists, no field biologists, etc, etc and the recommendations they make there would be more biodiversity?
I know its hard, and we are on a website, but out in the real world these people have to make difficult choices in order to save animals
so things like common sense come into play and sometimes various animal populations are kept at sustainable numbers for the good of not just a few but the many
Is it perfect? no, will it likely lead to greater longevity of some species, if not many, than nothing being done?
of course, it will, arguing about that is just crazy dude


*=here in Chengdu "protecting animals" revolves around one seemingly determined to go extinct creature, the panda
but its so cute so millions and millions of dollars pour into the place to keep pandas alive while with just a small fraction of all that $
many other species could be saved, such as giant softshell turtles of all sorts of kinds in Chinese rivers, its a real shame

 

[Detritus]

"...impact that his ignorant and inflammatory statements have on the livelihoods of thousands of hard-working men and women in rural communities."

So it will impact people looking at an innocent little seal and blowing its brains out?

Good! Get another f***ing job!

Sometimes that's easier said than done. There are many people who do not have the luxury of basing their diets on ethics rather than survival. It may be possible for the First Nations to find an alternative means to feed their families and generate steady income, but I often wonder what hardline ethical vegetarians/vegans like Morrissey have to say about those living in certain impoverished third world countries where a vegetarian or vegan-based diet is not feasible (due to limited food availability/options, wealth disparity, etc.).

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Sometimes that's easier said than done. There are many people who do not have the luxury of basing their diets on ethics rather than survival. It may be possible for the First Nations to find an alternative means to feed their families and generate steady income, but I often wonder what hardline ethical vegetarians/vegans like Morrissey have to say about those living in certain impoverished third world countries where a vegetarian or vegan-based diet is not feasible (due to limited food availability/options, wealth disparity, etc.).

maybe I am wrong, but I highly doubt that people like Morrissey and those who choose to agree with him 100% / no matter what
I don't think those type of people give a shit about people in the third world, sure, they would never come out and admit it
mostly because they would have to admit to themselves that their beliefs, at least when it comes to animals
revolve around a type of cultural imperialism
but hey, this one is better than the one practiced by generation after generation of mostly white people all over the world
usually in the name of god
because this time its for the animals!

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

please try and remember this all started with a statement by Morrissey in which he once again singled out Canadians, of all people, as being responsible for some truly diabolical act while in the same statement praising China*, just to add a little insult to the injury

(

No, it started by the act of controlling animal populations for our own needs. Whether Morrissey gets mixed up in his messages is neither here nor there, the issue in hand is that our behaviour is f***ing the planet up never mind seals.

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

No, it started by the act of controlling animal populations for our own needs. Whether Morrissey gets mixed up in his messages is neither here nor there, the issue in hand is that our behavior is f***ing the planet up never mind seals.

Oh, OK, so just to be clear here, you believe that all those people out there spending their lives trying to protect animal populations by you know, actually working with them, governments, etc, etc.
That these people are actually doing more harm than good and what would be better is if they just stopped.
Seeing as people created the problem, I mean there is no way they could be a part of the solution, right Charlie?
or help to minimize the damage done, or at least the rate which is done at

to each their own I guess
anyways, its always seemed to me the best way to combat evil is to do something about it
rather than nothing, then again, I am more of doer than most here at Moz-solo

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

Oh, OK, so just to be clear here, you believe that all those people out there spending their lives trying to protect animal populations by you know, actually working with them, governments, etc, etc.
That these people are actually doing more harm than good and what would be better is if they just stopped.
Seeing as people created the problem, I mean there is no way they could be a part of the solution, right Charlie?
or help to minimize the damage done, or at least the rate which is done at

to each their own I guess
anyways, its always seemed to me the best way to combat evil is to do something about it
rather than nothing, then again, I am more of doer than most here at Moz-solo

Hang on, at what point did killing a shit load of seals in order to maintain their fishing industry are Canada doing something good for the environment? That one's gone right over my head.

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

Hang on, at what point did killing a shit load of seals in order to maintain their fishing industry are Canada doing something good for the environment? That one's gone right over my head.

you think the fishing industry is going to go away or that only seals and us eat fish?
once again, I state I am no expert on this matter but people with PhDs and that study this field and work in it
have long ago decided that the 2nd best way
you know, since the best, an end to the fishing industry is NOT an option
to keep a diverse range of animal populations that rely on those fish too is to cull some seals
I repeat, is it the best option?
of course not, we don't have the power to get that one through and even if we did
without culls, the absence of enough "natural predators" on the seals would mean that they would eat up all the fish that other species rely on
unlike with commercial fishing which is strictly, regulated, see, seals don't work that way
I understand this is somewhat of a theoretical prediction in this case
even though these types of facts have been demonstrated time and time and time again with other animals in other habitats, I suppose for some that is not relevant
still, even if commercial fishing ends up there, the culls will likely be necessary to sustain those other populations
however, keeping alive a myriad of other animal populations by killing off a % of baby seals is the, kind of, real world bargain that goes on when people have to make difficult choices and it being regulated by the government actually keeps the number lower, not higher
the first thing that would happen if these annual seal culls ended is unregulated, unlawful and massive killing of far more seals
of course, one must think in real world terms in order to see that, I doubt someone like Morrissey is capable of that, what about you Charlie?
I mean, I know its distasteful, and I would much prefer no seals to be killed.
However, that is not an option in the world we actually live in.
In this one we must instead, take what we can get, its called compromise:
some seals die, the fishing industry limps on and so do a number of endangered or near endangered species
the seals, by the way, do not fall into that last category
OK, enough now, I see the latest episode of "Supernatural" has finished DLing, bye

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

you think the fishing industry is going to go away or that only seals and us eat fish?
once again, I state I am no expert on this matter but people with PhDs and that study this field and work in it
have long ago decided that the 2nd best way
you know, since the best, an end to the fishing industry is NOT an option
to keep a diverse range of animal populations that rely on those fish too is to cull some seals
I repeat, is it the best option?
of course not, we don't have the power to get that one through and even if we did
without culls, the absence of enough "natural predators" on the seals would mean that they would eat up all the fish that other species rely on
unlike with commercial fishing which is strictly, regulated, see, seals don't work that way
I understand this is somewhat of a theoretical prediction in this case
even though these types of facts have been demonstrated time and time and time again with other animals in other habitats, I suppose for some that is not relevant
still, even if commercial fishing ends up there, the culls will likely be necessary to sustain those other populations
however, keeping alive a myriad of other animal populations by killing off a % of baby seals is the, kind of, real world bargain that goes on when people have to make difficult choices and it being regulated by the government actually keeps the number lower, not higher
the first thing that would happen if these annual seal culls ended is unregulated, unlawful and massive killing of far more seals
of course, one must think in real world terms in order to see that, I doubt someone like Morrissey is capable of that, what about you Charlie?
I mean, I know its distasteful, and I would much prefer no seals to be killed.
However, that is not an option in the world we actually live in.
In this one we must instead, take what we can get, its called compromise:
some seals die, the fishing industry limps on and so do a number of endangered or near endangered species
the seals, by the way, do not fall into that last category
OK, enough now, I see the latest episode of "Supernatural" has finished DLing, bye

All of this real world stuff will destroy everything. Have a look at where we are now, then take another look in twenty years, then another twenty years. You might wish by then that change was seen as an option.

We've created an unsustainable World, unfortunately nature isn't interested in compromise, it just gets ruined.

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

All of this real world stuff will destroy everything. Have a look at where we are now, then take another look in twenty years, then another twenty years. You might wish by then that change was seen as an option.

We've created an unsustainable World, unfortunately nature isn't interested in compromise, it just gets ruined.

The climate's always changed. We'll be fine.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Yum! I'm getting HUNGRY just looking at Ms. Shea's grizzled & bloated body. Granted, due to her age, one would of course have to thoroughly skin Gail. The skin of an old woman is tough, not tender enough to chew, no matter how long you smoke it in like a brisket. However, her blubberous interior is likely well-marbled. Cooked just right, I imagine her flesh would just FALL RIGHT OFF THE BONE! Tasty!! The stews one could make from Gail... and oh God, those fat-drippings could make some delicious gravy! Let the purge of old fat women in government begin! Get out the clubs, and the veterinarian's guide to humanely ending the lives of fat aged cowish women, and then let's have a barbecue! I'm getting hungry just looking at her picture!

Are you 'fat-shaming' Ms Shea? Morrissey is prone to fat-shaming in his "Autobiography". Your cannibal/Cormac McCarthy "The Road" scenarios are an outlier possible end-stage for the human species if, say, there is a 'gamma shine' catastrophe at Fukushima. If such a scenario unfold, I suppose it will be darkly amusing to watch the next concocted rationale for clubbing radioactive seals and dolphins for the restaurant tables of Tokyo and some Inuit "igloo" kitchen with a petroleum powered snow-ski parked outside and satellite telly blaring all day.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-17/radioactive-water-leaking-fukushima-what-we-know

 

[BrummieBoy]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

also, I just realized something, even when no one buys seal fur and that day will come
won't they have to still "cull" the seals since we have basically annihilated or severely reduced the numbers of their natural predators
culls go on all the time in order to keep populations of different animals from overpopulating their dwindling environments
and these are mainly done by people whose livelihoods revolve around actually caring for and protecting animals*
once again, with his lack of understanding** of a deeply complicated issue
Morrissey is only playing right into the hands of rabid animal hunters, when will he realize he does far more harm than good now?


*=these people do not include a faded pop star that once wrote a song which actually inspired others to do some good for animals
**=I am beginning think of the word "moron" intermediately after I think of Morrissey, granted I don't believe he is that dumb, but pretty dumb it seems, perhaps what I took for past brilliance on his part was just him "channeling the muse" in some way, that what made him seem so great really exists independent of this clearly uneducated, thoughtless and unable to change 54 year old man.


ps: Still, if I like some of the new album, all forget what a moron he is, for at least a little while.

Wheat (and rice) are indeed planetary weapons of mass destruction and have been for the last 12,000 years at least.

"Daniel Quinn, in The Great Forgetting, an excerpt from The Story of B:

"Many different styles of agriculture were in use all over the world 10,000 years ago, when our particular style of agriculture emerged in the Near East. This style, our style, is one I call totalitarian agriculture, in order to stress the way it subordinates all life-forms to the relentless, single-minded production of human food. Fueled by the enormous food surpluses generated uniquely by this style of agriculture, a rapid population growth occurred among its practitioners, followed by an equally rapid geographical expansion that obliterated all other lifestyles in its path (including those based on other styles of agriculture). This expansion and obliteration of lifestyles continued without a pause in the millennia that followed, eventually reaching the New World in the 15th century and continuing to the present moment in remote areas of Africa, Australia, New Guinea, and South America.

Totalitarian agriculture is more than a means of getting what you need to live, it's the foundation for the most laborious lifestyle ever developed on this planet. This comes as a shock to many readers, but there isn't any question about it: No one works harder to stay alive than the people of our culture do. This has been so thoroughly documented in the past 40 years that I doubt if you could find an anthropologist anywhere who would argue about it." (http://www.davidsheen.com/b/b1.htm)"

Meat is Murder. Milk is Murder. Rice is Murder. Wheat is Murder. And the Human Race is a heading for a mighty fall. Morrissey, with his extravagant life-style and use of fossil fuels in air travel is just as complicit in the destruction of the planet as some foolish people with clubs on the Canadian tundra. In fact, everyone reading this is, as the Internet is hardly 'green', is it? Etc. This is an apocalypse in slow motion, and it's speeding up. How's the air today in Chengdu? Etc.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

Well, I am no animal protection specialist, but people who are usually are the ones that decide these things. See, before that many animals went extinct not just because they were hunted to extinction but because we humans have taken over where they lived, and that is not going to change so the choices are isimple:
1. continue to have diverse number of life forms on the planet both domesticated and "wild", this can only be done by keeping said populations from going through the periodic famines that invariably reduce their numbers each time, eventually leading to extinction, once again I am relying on history, current experts opinion and these things called facts
2. do nothing, leading, eventually(see #1 for why), to a planet with just us, domesticated animals and a tiny group of niche species whose environments we don't encroach on, YET
3. give a bunch of the planet back to "wild animals" I wouldn't hold my breath on that one happening

-so yeah, the choice is pretty simple to me, since I actually prefer existing in a world of NOT of just me, cows and spiders
but one where the diverse forms of life currently on the planet have an actual chance to survive on for generations, call me selfish I guess

4. The Gaia Hypothesis of James Lovelock whereby the 'yeast' of the human species is eradicated by bacterial/viral war from other life-forms. Many serious diseases emerge from agriculture and animal husbandry. When the chattering classes start eating dried bat in sub-Saharan dinner parties, expect a variant of Ebola to cleanse the planet of the toxic human waste. As the father of 2 children, this prospect doesn't make me happy, though it clearly creates mayhem amongst serious scientific researchers:

"Pianka welcomed the potential devastation of bird flu and spoke glowingly of China's enforced one child policy, before zestfully commenting, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth!” Asked if he believes nature will bring about this promised devastation, or if humanity’s own dissemination of a deadly virus is the only answer, and if this was the motive behind his talks, Pianka said “Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.”

Pianka was subsequently interviewed by the FBI in Austin, Texas.

But the most disturbing thing about Pianka is that his speech received a warm welcome from the Texas scientists, and that he continues to be held in high regard in his own academic circles. "

http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/GW lunacy.asp

 

[BrummieBoy]

oh, thanks for reminding of that, at the time it made me wonder if Morrissey does not so much like animals, but really at heart, he hates people
and furthermore, he really only likes animals because he can "project" all these nice, happy, whatever floats his boat things onto them
when the truth is, if they could actually talk to him like we humans do to each other, he might not like them all that much either

Excellent point. There's surely a link between Morrissey's faux-radical "animal rights agenda" and his seeming inability to find a sustainable relationship with another human. When I have a row with the missus, it's tempting to take our 'canine companion' for a long walk and discuss the issues with him, as he never says the row was my fault, he just looks at me and offers unconditional love. Not like the neighbour's cat that only turns up when bored or scrounging for food.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Sometimes that's easier said than done. There are many people who do not have the luxury of basing their diets on ethics rather than survival. It may be possible for the First Nations to find an alternative means to feed their families and generate steady income, but I often wonder what hardline ethical vegetarians/vegans like Morrissey have to say about those living in certain impoverished third world countries where a vegetarian or vegan-based diet is not feasible (due to limited food availability/options, wealth disparity, etc.).

As humans terraform the earth, destroying most other species with Totalitarian Agriculture and a few chosen Ruminant Herbivores, large parts of the landscape become effectively ecological desserts which cannot sustain human life healthily. Most of Wales is now a 'green desert' as the forest abundance of the climax ecology was stripped so a plague of sheep could rule. Soon, most of the remaining climax ecologies of the Congo and Amazon will be stripped for similar reasons, as were "the cedars of Lebanon" for goats. We didn't save any of our temperate rainforest cover so it's a bit ridiculous to expect 'developing' nations to do so. Not all deserts are sandy.

"Two friends of mine once walked for six days across the Cambrian Mountains in mid-Wales, and did not see another human being. Yet there is scarcely any wildlife either. Cross that bleak plateau and you will see plenty of moorgrass, some tormentil and moss, a few crows, perhaps the odd pipit and skylark, but almost nothing else, except sodding sheep. The hills have been grazed to destruction."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/may/22/britain-uplands-farming-subsidies

 

[Anonymous]

Sometimes that's easier said than done. There are many people who do not have the luxury of basing their diets on ethics rather than survival. It may be possible for the First Nations to find an alternative means to feed their families and generate steady income, but I often wonder what hardline ethical vegetarians/vegans like Morrissey have to say about those living in certain impoverished third world countries where a vegetarian or vegan-based diet is not feasible (due to limited food availability/options, wealth disparity, etc.).

Anywhere you go in the world you can't escape the fact that getting nutrition from animals is less efficient (and therefore more expensive and wasteful) than getting nutrition from plant matter, for the simple fact that the amount of plant matter needed to feed food animals could feed far, far, far more people than the amount of animal products produced by said food animals could feed. Basically, by using animals for meat and animal products you're prioritising having a small amount of animal products over a much, much larger amount of plant-based food that could feed many, many poor people. Not only should this principle work in the 'third world' places you refer to, but I find it particularly disgusting that if all the plant matter that we use in sustaining our Western appetite for meat and animal products were used as food for humans, there would be far, far more food in the world than there is now and then perhaps such places wouldn't be so impoverished.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

The climate's always changed. We'll be fine.

Who is this "we"?

The dominant cultural, religious and technological narratives of human culture have coalesced to terraform the planet, largely unconsciously. There is no certainty about the nature and extent of climate change, other than it is a volatile situation. We are not fine now, haven't been since before the last Ice-Age and there's absolutely no certainty that we aren't heading for an apocalyptic disaster. Still, we can always build space-ships and go and f*** up Pandora.

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

Who is this "we"?

Not you, apparently.

The dominant cultural, religious and technological narratives of human culture have coalesced to terraform the planet, largely unconsciously.

It's called nature, Brummie. It seems to be the very thing you are arguing for. It is what happens when you leave things to develop naturally. One species dominates. Your argument doesn't seem to be a problem with nature taking its course. You seem to dislike the result.

There is no certainty about the nature and extent of climate change, other than it is a volatile situation. We are not fine now, haven't been since before the last Ice-Age

Yeah, my Grandad used to say things were better during the Pleistocene era, too. Personally, I think it all started to go wrong after the Yucatan impact.

there's absolutely no certainty that we aren't heading for an apocalyptic disaster. Still, we can always build space-ships and go and f*** up Pandora.

There is no certainty that we are, either. What we have is a small group of scientists who have discovered a way to access billions in government subsidy for shouting "the sky is falling." The duplicity of some of these men and women is a matter of record.

Yes, the planet needs to be protected, and luckily the human species can and will do so.

 

[Peterb]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

Not you, apparently.



It's called nature, Brummie. It seems to be the very thing you are arguing for. It is what happens when you leave things to develop naturally. One species dominates. Your argument doesn't seem to be a problem with nature taking its course. You seem to dislike the result.



Yeah, my Grandad used to say things were better during the Pleistocene era, too. Personally, I think it all started to go wrong after the Yucatan impact.



There is no certainty that we are, either. What we have is a small group of scientists who have discovered a way to access billions in government subsidy for shouting "the sky is falling." The duplicity of some of these men and women is a matter of record.

Yes, the planet needs to be protected, and luckily the human species can and will do so.

Hi Johnny,
I'm a little confused here because disagree with you as I might sometimes, I always trust what you write.
However, you say it is a small group of scientists that support the idea of human affected climate change.
But surely it is the vast majority of scientists who argue this?
Is it not a minority who deny climate change?
Also, is it not a little disingenuous to cite a single instance of a scientist sending a dishonest E-mail as evidence of the whole idea being bogus?
Secondly, what evidence is there that humans are protecting the planet?

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Re: is Gail Shea an idiot? yes, but Morrissey seems to be too

so I liked a lot of what you said Brummie and I was in the process of responding to much of it piece by piece
when I just all over my floor, luckily not the bed, still, hope I've cleaned it all up and maybe I can say more about this when not so