CASE NUMBER: 378
CASE MNEMONIC: HARP
CASE NAME: Harp Seal and Trade
CONTENTS
To understand the multiple issues related to the seal harvest
in Canada, it is necessary to divide the evidence into two camps.
On one side there is the information offered by the animal
protection agencies and interest groups who are adamantly opposed
to the deadly reality faced by the harp seal population. The other
side is represented by those who believe the seal harvest is
essential and should continue to grow en masse in the coming years
(i.e. Canadian Ministry of Fishery and Newfoundland fishermen).
Reflective of this division, the following description of the issue
itself will be separated into the two respective camps: those for
the seal harvest, and those against the seal harvest. Pursuant to
the scope of this particular assignment, I will not go into great
detail on all of the components of the harp seal dilemma; yet, it
is crucial to remember that the interplay of all of these disparate
components is what makes this issue so difficult to both comprehend
and resolve.
The first point of contention concerns the depleting stores of cod in the Northern Canadian waters. Those who oppose the seal hunt remain that seals have nothing to do with the fact that the cod industry is withering.
Brian Davies, the man who founded the IFAW in response to the
"slaughter of baby harp seals", argues that despite the fact that
"70% of Canadians are opposed to killing harp seals" the Canadian
government continues to endorse it (IFAW) . Though the Canadian
government claims that the seals must be killed in order to keep
the cod fish stock thriving, Davies states that "scientific studies
have repeatedly shown that this is nonsense, as on average less
than 1% of seal's diet is cod."(IFAW) A related study conducted by
the International Wildlife Coalition has demonstrated that over "97
Fishery Biologists and Researchers from Canada and 15 countries
around the world" have concluded that "the cod fish industry is
shrinking as a result of over fishing NOT the seals."( MFO
(Fred Miffin), p. 1) Furthermore, at the Eleventh Biennial
Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, held in Orlando, FL
from 14-18 December 1995, "ninety-seven scientists from at least 15
countries signed onto a petition" which stated that:
As professionals in the field of marine mammal biology we disagree with the Canadian government's statement that North Atlantic seals are a 'conservation problem'. All scientific efforts to find an effect of seal predation on Canadian groundfish stocks have failed to show any impact. Overfishing remains the only scientifically demonstrated conservation problem related to the fish stock collapse. If fishing closures continue, the indicates that the stocks will recover, and killing seals will not speed that process. (IMMA (Lavigne), p.1)
Not only does the research suggest that harp seals are not to blame
for dwindling cod supplies, the IMMA insists that harp seals "spend
probably less than 50% of the year in areas where interactions with
Canadian commercial fisheries can occur.(IMMA, The Facts), p.2)
Moreover, The IMMA refutes the claim that fewer harp seals
translates into more fish. Conversely, the IMMA posits that only in
a "simplified food web" would removing the top predator result in
a larger supply of prey. In this case, which involves a complex
ecosystem in the Northwest Atlantic, a drop in the existence of a
top predator can have multiple consequences "including a decrease
in the species of commercial importance." (IMMA, The Facts), p.
2)
Another point of discord concerns the harp seal population itself.
The number of harp seals that comprise the population are at issue
for both groups. This is of key importance, some argue that the
harp seal population is in danger of extinction, thus it should be
protected. The harp seal population has been estimated at somewhere
between 2.7 - 3.5 million animals with the annual production of
seal pups at 580,000.(Wialliamson, p. 1) It is important to note
that this figure comes from the 1990 census formulated by
overflight pictures in Northwest Canadian territory and normal
pregnancy patterns. The protectionist groups argue that with a
rise in the TAC and the diminishing food stores for the seals, the
population is at risk. The opposing camp refutes this claim,
reemphasizing that the seals jeopardize the cod.
The third, and most controversial, component of the harp seal debate centers around whether or not the seal killing and the use of the seal corpses is indeed "humane". This is where the sale of seal penises to China as aphrodisiacs comes into play. But first it is important to describe exactly how these 250,000 seals are terminated. The various agencies against the seal harvest all agree on this issue: there is no such thing as a humane seal harvest. As recounted by the IFAW, the Canadian government "has decided to pay a bounty of 20 cents per pound of seal meat that is landed" and has given "sports hunters approval to join in the killing."(IFAW (Moliterno), p. 1) As far as the sports hunters are concerned, the IFAW reports that "sports hunters will have to pay just $10 for their license and will each be allowed to land six seals."(IFAW (Moliterno), p. 1) The most problematic facet of the hunt for these opposition groups is that often seals are shot at random from ships and not all of the dead seals are recovered. Some of these wounded seals are left to find their fate sealed in the icy Canadian waters. The IFAW stated in a release dated February 24, 1995:
You are going to get a pack of amateurs with a blood lust and their six packs of beer going on a shooting spree near where the seal pups are born. Under the law they can kill any pup over two weeks old. This slaughter for fun goes beyond anything that has ever been allowed before. It is dehumanizing and degrading.(IFAW (Moliterno), p. 1)
In addition, these sports hunters can land up to six seals for
"personal use"; however, there is no limit on the amount of seals
these same hunters are allowed to shoot.( IFAW (China Trade), p. 1)
The IFAW reports that "hundreds of new 'sports' licenses have been
issued and more than 2,000 people have taken a special course on
how to kill seals." (IFAW, China Trade), p.1) Some of the seals
are shot while others are beaten to death with large wooden clubs.
It has been said that "76 percent of seals that are shot may not be
recovered from the water" resulting in "many more being killed than
are recorded in official government figures." (IFAW, China Trade),
p. 1)
The main issue that has added fuel to the fire of these rampant
killings of harp seals is the economic and/or trade aspect. It is
becoming common knowledge to those involved in the issue that the
China trade is a thriving factor in this debate. Seal penises are
being sold in Chinese markets because of their alleged benefit as
an aphrodisiac in East-Asian markets. Pursuant to the most recent
reports from the Marine Mammas Research and Conservation
Discussion, seal penises are "made into cocktails and potions at
the notorious child brothels of so-called "sex-port" centers
catering to the beliefs, strong in Asia, that sex with very young
persons can restore youth; that sex with children avoids AIDS; and
that men of enhanced virility sire sons." (MMRCD, p. 1) In fact,
these seal penises are "dried and powdered as an oral remedy for
male impotence for markets in Asia."(ARRS, p. 1) The Sea Shepherd
Archive offered evidence that "in mid-march 1995 it was confirmed
by the fish processing plants, that over 10,000 seal penises were
sold in 1994, to the Asian market." (Sea Shepherd Archive, p.1)
These penises fetch a price of about $130-$170 a piece n the
current market which is lucrative when considering that the pelt,
meat, and oli of a seal go for approximately $20. (MMRCD, p. 2)
The IFAW offers the most comprehensive evidence of the seal penis
trade with China. The IFAW drew the majority of its evidence from
the talks between officials from China's Shanghai Fisheries
Corporation and an eight-strong delegation representing the sealing
industry from the Magdalen islands in Northwest Canada.
In 1994 Shanghai Fisheries bought 50,000 seals from Canada's Terra Nova Fishery LTD. in Newfoundland.( IFAW (China Trade), p. 1) The IFAW believes that the Canadian government has assumed an active role in expanding this trade market in China. Because of the European import ban on baby seal products (1983) and a closed US market due to import restrictions resultant from the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Canadian government has been unable to sell seal meat to fur companies raising fox and mink. So, alternatively, the Canadian government has turned its economic hopes toward Chinese markets. The IFAW responded to the actions promoted by the Canadian government by sending film crews to the Magdalen islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence to take footage of the seal hunt in progress. What these crews saw was abhorrent to the protectionist agencies around the world. The footage shows "seals being shot and butchered". (IFAW (China Trade), p. 2) The sealers would "slice open the animals, cut out the penis and the testicles of the males" and then "take off the pelt, blubber, and meat." (IFAW (China Trade), p. 2) The IFAW notes that "Canada is also trying to develop a market within China for health oil derived from seal blubber." (IFAW (China Trade), p. 2)
The IFAW has responded to the continual sale of seal parts by
encouraging Tesco, a major supermarket chain in the UK, to stop
selling fish in protest to the slaughter of the baby seals. This
boycott and other such initiatives on behalf of the other
opposition groups haven't had a corrective effect. The main
problem surrounding the seal trade with China is the paucity of
data due to Canada's covert dealings with China, and the outdated
figures (mostly 1994 figures) of the past transactions between
China and Canada.
The second point of contention that must be addressed is the size
of the seal population itself. Unlike the aforementioned estimate
of 2.7-3.5 million forwarded by the opposition, the pro-harvest
camp has come up with a population figure of 4.8 million for the
same year.(NAFC (Stenson),p.4) They argue that the seal population
is growing by leaps and bounds and without some form of population
control, the seals will overly tax the environment, especially the
cod stores. The MFO stated that the seal population in Canada is
growing by about a quarter of a million per year.(MFO (Mewdell), p.
1) They further insinuate that "the number of seals that can be
harvested without changing the total population, is approximately
287,000 (95% C.I. 208,000 - 293,000). (NAFC,Stenson, p. 5) This
is the argument behind the increase in the TAC to 250,000. As of
April 17, 1996, 185,000 harp seals had already been taken, and this
was before the complete seal harvest season was over.
The third issue of controversy revolves around the question of
humanity. Could there be such a thing as a humane seal harvest,
and if so what about the trade with China for seal parts? Is that
legitimate government action? Obviously, the pro-harvest group
believes that the seal harvest is humane because it is salvaging
the future of the cod while ensuring that these seal population is
not hurt beyond its replacement capacity. They believe that they
have taken steps to ensure that the seal harvest is humane because
the dead seals are put to use in a variety of ways, so the bodies
are not wasted. It is interesting to note that in the discourse of
the MFO, the China trade of seal penises is ignored for the most
part. It is ignored, but not denied. The MFO makes mention of
the China trade only to say that it is not the primary market that
is being explored in the sealing industry. The government points to
their tight regulation of the seal harvest to demonstrate that the
harvest is not random but is humane. Here are a few of the
regulations that were released by the MFO on April 16, 1996 on how
to collect the remaining 65,000 seals of the TAC of 250,000 this
year:
And on the issue of the trade with China, the Canadian
government "is publicly opposed to the killing of seals for the
purpose of taking only their male organs." (IFAW (Your Right), p.
2) In fact, the HNA has put forth a series of ideas for the
possible use of seal meat and fur. Here are just a few of their
ideas:
a. Continental Domain: North America
b. Geographic Site: Northern North America
c. Geographic Impact: Canada
27. Trans-Boundary Issues: Yes
Some transboundary issues due to the cultural prong of the issue.
The fact that this is a western market intermingling with an
eastern market, the regulations, and the philosophy behind them,
differ along cultural lines.
The Pro-Harp Seal Harvest Camp
The Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans (MFO) of Canada is the primary
voice in favor of the seal harvest and the increases in the TAC.
The MFO has a very different stance than do the protectionists on
the cod issue. The MFO believes that the seals are a very real
threat to already dwindling cod stores. Even the Canadian High
Commissioner in the UK, Mr. Royce Frith, wrote that , "--a massive,
increasing (harp seal) herd with an appetite which is disastrous
for the regeneration of depleted cod and other white fish
stocks...If the herd carries on unchecked, there will be no fish
left for anyone." (IMMA (Lavigne), p. 1) The Minister of Supply
and Services in Canada published a release in 1995 stating that
"Approximately 1,2 million tonnes of Arctic cod and 88,000 tonnes
of Atlantic cod are eaten by harp seals in the waters of
Newfoundland". (Ministery of Supply and Services, Canada, p.1) This
1.2 million measure plus the added 88,000 forms the base of the cod
argument for the MFO. Here is one example of the clashing evidence
between both groups. One side offering evidence that cod is in
fact a major portion of the diet of the harp seal, while the other
side in opposition refuting that very position. This is why this
issue is so hard to fully comprehend. The science branch of the
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Center in Newfoundland, reported that
harp seals in the Northwest Atlantic have increases consumption of
prey from 3.6 million tonnes in 1981 to 6.9 million tons in
1994.(NAFC (Stenson), p. 5) The MFO research committee found that
a recent consumption analysis proved that "harp seals ate an
estimated 6.0 million tonnes of fish and other prey last year
including 142,000 tonnes of Atlantic cod; overall, representing one
billion Atlantic cod eaten by harp seals." (MFO (Mewdell), p. 1)
Brian Tobin, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans in Canada sums up the
stance on Cod stores and harp seals when he stated that it is
"...intellectually dishonest to claim that seals have not had an
impact on recovering fish stocks...There is only one major player
fishing that stock, he said, and his first name is Harp and his
second name is Seal." (HNA, p.
As for the alleged "sports hunt" criticized by opponents to the
seal harvest, the High North Alliance (HNA) defend their position
writing:
There is no "sports" hunt of seals and no such license
exists. Only two types of licenses are issued annually.
Commercial licenses, which are awarded each year,
involve stringent licensing requirements which are
rigorously enforced. These requirements include
training as well as regulations to ensure a safe
and humane harvest. Personal use licenses are awarded
only to certified residents living in communities
adjacent to established sealing areas in Newfoundland
and parts of Quebec. These individuals are permitted to
harvest annually up to six seals for food.(IFAW (Your Right), p.
2)
Seal Meat:
The fact is that most of the seal meat does not go toward human
consumption. The small segment that is consumed by humans consists
of the "6,000 frozen flipper pies per year."(MMRCD, p. 2) The
monetary reward from the seal industry is an undeniable asset to
the Northwest Canadian economy that has been suffering due to
depleted stores of many types of fish, cod in particular. John
Efford, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture wrote that the
gains would sum up to about "$10 million", not to mention the gains
in employment.(MFO, p. 1)
Seal Leather/ Suede:
3. Related Cases - Keywords:
4.Draft Author:
Francie Makris. December 1996
B. Legal Cluster:
There are no legal rules at this time surrounding the seal harvest
except for those regulations that the Canadian government has set
forth to ensure a "humane" seal harvest. These regulations can be
referenced in the description portion of this analysis.
5.Discourse and Status:
The status of the case is clouded by controversy especially
in reference to the China seal penis trade. There is no legal
action aimed at either side. Due to the contradictory nature of
the facts as forwarded by the two camps, it is almost impossible to
know who is right. There hasn't been a negotiated treaty to end
this trade and slaughter of harp seals in Canada to date. Some
countries like the EU and the USA have stopped any seal trading due
to legal acts like the CITES treaty; however, the seal harvest
continues and new markets are being explored for the sale of seal
products .
Status: Allegation
6.Forum and Scope:
This problem involves the domestic law of Canada as well as the
domestic laws of its trading partners, like China. If the Chinese
government continues to expand in the trade of seals parts with
Canada, they may risk retaliation from one of their other trading
partners who are opposed to the seal harvest, i.e. the EU and/or
the USA. There are international agreements and bilateral
agreements; however, the Canadian government has managed to get
around these obstacles.
7. Decision Breadth
Number of parties
Affected:
8. Legal Standing:
There is no formalized legal standing to this case at this stage.
The issue has surfaced as a propaganda war between the two opposing
camps. There has yet to be any type of treaty on the particular
case of the Canadian Harp seals (not including baby seal
litigation).
9. Geography:
In terms of trading parties, this case involves Canada and China,
as well as other countries who will potentially trade with Canada
once the new uses for seal meat and pelt are established. In terms
of the species itself, harp seals inhabit waters bordering Canada,
Newfoundland, Hawaii, and Namibia.10. Sub-National Factors:
There are several subnational factors involved in this
dilemma. For example, the Fishery groups within Canada,
particularly in the Magdalen Islands are foisting the contraversey
within the domestic politics of Canada where there is division
between animal rightists and those who support the seal hunt. 11. Type of Habitat: Cool
12. Type of Measure:
Import Ban
13. Direct vs. Indirect Impacts:
Direct.
If this issue were to be resolved, there would be both direct and
indirect effects. There would be trade impacts that are direct,
and environmental impacts that are indirect. If the seal
population is, indeed, at risk, then the destruction of a species
is an indirect impact. If Canada or China faces sanctions from the
EU (including the Tesco Boycotts) or the USA there will be direct
trading impacts.
14. Relation of Measure To Impact
a.
Directly Related To Product: There have been no formal measures
taken as of yet, except those legal regulations taken by the
Canadian government to increase the TAC. So, at this stage it is
very difficult to measure this impact.
15. Trade Product Identification
Product Type: SEAL
16. Economic Data
Due to the covert nature of the trade of seal penises with China,
I was not able to find any hard economic data on the quantification
of the trade itself.
Industry Output: $10 million in profits
to the Canadian government from the seal harvest. 17. Degree of Competitive Impact
HIGH
18. Industry Sector: FOOD
19. Exporter and Importer: CANADA and
CHINA
20. Environmental Problem Type
Species Loss
21. Species Information
The two species at risk in this dilemma are the harp seals that are
being harvested, and the cod which may be threatened if the harp
seal population continues unchecked.
Name of
species: Pinnipedia Phocidae
Type: Harp Seals
Diversity: Focus is on the Canadian Harp Seals,
though there are other types of harp seals that live off the coast
of Hawaii and Namibia. IUCN Status: According to the
opposition, the status is endangered, or at least vulnerable. The
FMO would argue that the species is not at risk, but rather
threatens the cod as a species.
22. Impact and Effect
23. Urgency and Lifetime: Low and 5-10
years
24. Substitutes
In the case of the trade with China, perhaps an aphrodisiac
substitute could be manufactured that would not make it necessary
to remove the penis from dead harp seals. My research did not
guide me in that direction, however, so I am not aware if any such
substitutes exist or would be viable on the Asian market. Still,
it is crucial to note, that even if these substitutes do exist, the
harvest would most likely continue. The government is exploring new
avenues to market the seal meat, so there will not be a reason to
terminate the harvest due solely to the formation of substitutes in
Asian markets.
25. Culture
Yes, culture has an undeniable role in this debate, especially the
third component which is the China trade. Obviously, the fact that
the Chinese culture believes that the seal penis has value as an
aphrodisiac is a cultural value. Many countries around the world
would find this belief ludicrous, thus they would readily ask for
termination of this procedure. But, to a Chinese culture who
believe in its medicinal value as an aphrodisiac, this request for
termination would be a denial of free trade. The fact that the
part that is taken from the seal is the penis adds another
dimension to this issue. Most western cultures would find the
slaughtering of an animal for its penis a cruel and unusual method
of ensuring trade success in another country. The exploitation of
an animal for one of its parts has long been frowned upon (See
Shark Fin Case).There is also the culture of the fishermen in
Canada who find no problem in exploiting excess seal stores to
buttress their withering economy. They cite the seal harvest as
part of their culture.
26. Human Rights
Yes.
The opposition could argue, with questionable degrees of
persuasiveness, that the prohibition of a seal harvest is a
violation of their human rights. It would inhibit one of their
first generation right, the right to life. Without an economy, and
a hope for sustenance through cod fisheries that are now depleted,
they have no recourse but to market the harp seals. Why should
they be denied their human right to exploit the resources at their
disposal, especially since that resource is in no danger of
extinction. The opposition would scoff at this argument, of
course, reemphasizing their theory that the harp seals are indeed
at risk due to the increasing TAC in seal harvesting.
28. Relevant Literature: Bibliography