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
[...] https://climatelab.com.au/blog/2007/04/choosing-between-a-whale-kangaroo-or-beef-steak-a-note-from... [...]
>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.
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!!
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 !
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
"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.
"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.
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???
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...