Question: Why are Canada’s Harp seals being found further south these days?

Seals from Canada found as far south as N. Carolina

That’s the title of an article in USA Today Monday. It goes on to say that, “Harp seals from Canada are showing up in U.S. waters in greater numbers and farther south than usual, and biologists want to know why.”

My first thought was “because if they stay in Canada, they will be bludgeoned to death for seal products that no one but Canada’s Federal Fisheries Minister, Gail Shea wants.” Seems obvious to me.

Wouldn’t it just be great if that was the reason they were leaving Canada? That they realize their possible fate if they remain there? Surely you have seen the photos where seals are being smacked in the head with some killing tool and several feet away, other seals just lay and await their fate. Everything about that picture makes my heart hurt.

Wouldn’t it just be so appropriate if they decided, “To hell with it. These people mean us only harm. Let’s get the hell out of here once and for all.”

Anyway, without spending millions of dollars to research why the Harp seals are heading south, that is my opinion. They are tired of being smacked up the side of their head for no good reason. GO SEALS!

Here’s the article:

“The government of Canada is wasting the hard earned money of Canadians to fight a battle that the citizens of the European Union have said is already lost,” said Sheryl Fink, Director of IFAW’s Seal Program, “the EU does not want products from commercial seal hunts, period.”

Launching a formal challenge at the World Trade Organization could take more than three years, and there is no guarantee that it will be successful. Canadian taxpayers will be footing a bill that will run into the millions. Polling has shown that the majority of Canadians are opposed to the use of government funds to challenge the EU seal product ban at the WTO, and would rather see their taxes used to phase out the hunt.

“The seal trade ban was written in anticipation of a WTO challenge and is expected to comply fully with the EU’s international obligations,” said Lesley O’Donnell, IFAW EU Director. “Once the open consultations at the WTO begin in Geneva the world will see and hear once again just how indefensible Canada’s commercial seal hunt really is and how completely unnecessary it is to the economy of a G8 country.”

The EU has previously made it clear that it will “vigorously defend” the values of EU citizens in the face of a WTO challenge.

“The Canadian government should be investing money to help Atlantic Canadians by supporting industries that don’t stain our international reputation, not wasting it on life-support for the dying seal hunt,” Fink added. “IFAW and our supporters fought hard to achieve this ban. You can be sure we will be speaking out to defend it.”

For more information, please contact

IFAW Canada
Michelle Cliffe, Communications Officer
647-986-IFAW (4329)
mcliffe@ifaw.org
Twitter: @michellecliffe

Kentucky, North Dakota, Idaho, Mississippi and Iowa are the five best states in the country to be an animal abuser, according to a new report released today by the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF). Based on a detailed comparative analysis of more than 4,000 pages of statutes, tracking fourteen broad categories of provisions, the report recognizes the states where animal law has real teeth, and calls out those like Kentucky — the single worst in the nation for animal protection laws for the fourth year running — where animal abusers get off easy. ALDF’s fifth annual state rankings report, the longest-running and most authoritative report of its kind, ranks all fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories for the general comprehensiveness and relative strength of their respective animal protection laws.

Why are these five states in the dog house when it comes to getting tough on animal abuse? The legislative weaknesses seen in the states at the bottom of the animal protection barrel include severely restricted or absent felony animal cruelty provisions, inadequate animal fighting provisions, and lack of restrictions on the future ownership of animals for those convicted of cruelty to animals.

On the other end of the spectrum, this year’s “best five for animals” list remains unchanged from 2009, with Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Oregon and California demonstrating through their laws the strongest commitment to combating animal cruelty; for the fourth consecutive year, Illinois was the very best of the best for the strength of its laws protecting animals. Alaska showed the most improvement, moving from 44th last year to 37th overall this year. West Virginia, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Arizona all improved their standings due, in part, to the adoption of laws that allow animals to be included in domestic violence protective orders.

“While many states continue to make positive progress for animals, there are, unfortunately, still many places where the laws are incapable of providing the legal protections that our country’s animals need and deserve,” says Stephan Otto, Animal Legal Defense Fund’s director of legislative affairs and author of the report. “Even in those jurisdictions that have today’s best laws, there remain many opportunities for improvement. Animals do not vote — but those who love them do. We encourage lawmakers throughout the country to take heed and commit to working to improve these critical laws.”

ALDF was founded in 1979 with the unique mission of protecting the lives and advancing interests of animals through the legal system. For more information, including a copy of the state rankings report and a free downloadable version of the complete compendium of state anti-cruelty laws (US and Canada) on which the report is based, please visit www.aldf.org.

2010 State Animal Protection Laws Rankings
Comparing Overall Strength & Comprehensiveness

Note: The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands and other territories are included in this report and are italicized. The Best Five and Worst Five categories are limited to states.

Annual Animal Protection Laws Rankings Reports
United States: 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010
Canada: 2008 | 2009 | 2010

I am not at all comfortable with that statement. I feel it gives us permission to not try as hard as we might. It gives our heart an “excuse” when things don’t work out. And for some, it gives reason to not even get involved in the first place because “we can’t save ‘em all.”

With that logic in mind, who CAN we save? Which animal will we wave our magic wand over and rescue?

Do we pick the one that just needs to be brushed off and will likely be easy to place, say a healthy, cute one…. or do we pick the one with immediate and perhaps long-term needs? The one that may never look quite “normal;” the one whose life may not be as long because of it’s physical maladies?

In a kill-shelter where animals are routinely culled, the animal with serious injuries is often the first to be eliminated. Her life is deemed not worthy of the chance. She is too much bother, so put her on the kill list. And within hours of coming through the front door as living, breathing, feeling sentient beings, animals like this go out the back door dead — they are waste to be disposed of as you would trash, often to be sent to landfills.

But what if the answer doesn’t seem so obvious? What if from the outside both candidates look like they have good potential to be selected by a loving family?

In this case, the dog on the right, Jerome, is dead. A seven month old dog originally adopted from the ASPCA, the richest humane society in the US, was euthanized by a New York city pound who claimed that Jerome guarded his food, a condition which should never result in a dog being killed because the prognosis for rehabilitation is always good.

Who are the people making these life and death decisions? Are they even trained behaviorists/veterinarians?

I looked at the stats for a Canadian SPCA. The number of cats and dogs in the “euthanized for space” column seemed low with regards to their overall numbers, but the numbers for animals killed because they were sick/behavioral (yes, the two were lumped into one column) seemed high. They certainly seem to have a lot of very sick and/or very ill-mannered cats: 1844 killed in 2009 alone! And of the 316 dogs killed that year, 311 had medical/behavioral problems.

Wow! Maybe they need to re-evaluate the way they assess animals in their “care.”

NS SPCA 2009 stats

I think we need to take a closer look at the statement, “We can’t save ‘em all.” We should change the word “can’t” to “won’t” — because that is what the original statement actually implies.

Then maybe we can add a few words at the end of the sentence so it reads something like –

We won’t save ‘em all — if we don’t try.

I am much more comfortable with that statement. It leaves me infinitely more positive that we WILL affect change.

With regards to the animals used in this post today:

Bottom right: Jerome — dead because the ASPCA refused to pick Jerome up from the pound even though his microchip was registered to them..

This will help you understand the problems Brindi and Francesca Rogier have been suffering during the last 19 months.

This recording is for entertainment purposes only and cannot be used for any purposes in any legal proceedings.

Pls share this post on your profiles.

It is time for Brindi to go home and to be reunited with her owner, Francesca Rogier.

If you are in Canada please CALL Mayor Peter J. Kelly, Mayor of Halifax on ph: 902-490-4010 and tell him that Brindi must be spared AND returned to her owner.

If you are abroad please email kellyp@halifax.ca and express the same… We have 4 days.…

For Brindi

For the Animals

Viktor Larkhill
Let’s Adopt!
………………………………………………………
reprinted from Let’s Adopt! Canada

But first reflect on these wrong propositions.

A wrong proposition: Humans own animals as property.

Companion animals are much more than that. They are a part of your family, they are a part of your life. Their value is not measured by cash. Society needs to rethink its stance as a whole.

A wrong proposition: You make a mistake, your animal pays for it. (pounded, killed).

You make a mistake, it is you who should pay. It is never the animal, it is the human, who makes things go wrong. The payment should be in proportion to the crime.

Letting your dog run without a muzzle CANNOT constitute a crime.

Wrong proposition: Breed Specific Legislation

A dog cannot be executed based on his looks. Breed Specific Legislation is a monstrosity and needs to be fought by all.

Your dog is right now at the merci of whomever decides to report him based purely on the way he looks. This leads to absurdities like the case of Rambo and Brittany.

A wrong proposition: If there is a law, even if unjust, we must obey.

If there is an unjust law, we must fight to change it. We must fight not only for ourselves but for those who follow, for those who might suffer, for those who believe in us.

And now pls watch this video because this is the very basic proposition we are trying to change.

It is time for Brindi to go home and to be reunited with her owner, Francesca Rogier.

Let’s Adopt!
………………………………
reprinted from Let’s Adopt! Canada

Watching Tiger make his statement this morning, I was reminded just what is missing from the SPCA. It’s time for them to own up to their mistakes, make right where they have failed so far, and apologize profusely for letting us down and so many of the animals that have depended upon them. It’s time for them to rebuild from the top down and bring honor to their organization.

Stand up to HRM and tell them the truth about Brindi. Mention that she sleeps under a staffer’s desk like she was the mascot for that facility because she is so sweet and gentle. Show everyone the “family photo” taken on her birthday that you sent to Francesca. Do right by this dog before it is too late! Be the voice she does not have and help her get home to her family! They have waited entirely too long!

Drop your ridiculous charge against Janice Bingley for the errant seizure of all her dogs. Yes, you seized 22 dogs under the guise of cruelty, then laid a single charge because a nursing mother was thin. This was a wrongful seizure and you need to own it. You need to do right by this family, too!

Do you have any idea the unnecessary pain you have inflicted upon both these women?

And where is the tire biting dog?

It’s time for you, NS SPCA, to stand up like Tiger Woods did today and start your journey anew on the right path. It is true, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” Martin Luther King Jr. And you have been silent too long to the detriment of Francesca Rogier and Janice Bingley.

Thank you for contacting Bally Total Fitness.

Bally Total Fitness shares your concern regarding advertising on “The Michael Vick Project” and we have blocked all future advertising during this program. We never intended to support this show and any Bally Total Fitness commercial seen during this programming was not placed in support of this program. Advertising is placed on the BET network to air during a broad rotation of hours based upon audience criteria. As a result, the Bally Total Fitness advertisement was broadcast during this program.

Bally Total Fitness
Member Support Center

www.Ballyfitness.com
Your Total Fitness Resource

Please e-mail the sponsors of the Michael Vick Reality Show and express your opposition to their financial support of the program. Here’s the list.

AND PLEASE sign the petition here.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

HERE IS THE LETTER TO SEND:

To Whom It May Concern,

It has come to my attention that your company is considering to sponsor Mr. Michael Vick’s potential reality television show, and I am writing to request your decision to deny such promotion. Based on his indefensible actions torturing and killing dogs, Mr. Vick neither deserves favorable attention nor should be considered as a valued spokesperson. In fact, I have difficulty understanding how any respectful business would choose to sponsor an animal torturer and killer like Michael Vick. The fact that Mr. Vick’s victims were non-human animals neither negates their possession of sentience nor their capacity to experience emotion, including joy, pain, fear, and love. Mr. Vick’s activities were not only criminal, they were also extremely savage and demonstrated an absolute lack of compassion and integrity. You should be aware that any person who can deliberately subject animals to such reprehensible conditions and practices has the disturbing ability to inflict similar on humans, and criminal behaviour studies clearly illustrate the parallels between animal and human abuse…. See more

Indeed, had Mr. Vick tortured and killed humans, we would not be involved in such an exchange. Inequitably and immorally, non-human animals are considered as inferior to human animals, their treatments and lives only a reflection of how they benefit us; humans create false parameters distinguishing us from animals to justify how they are valued only as commodities. In fact, our estimation of animals begins and ends with their involvement in our egotistical goals, and societal approval is unconditionally granted to preclude conscious immorality, but we culturally embrace our “companion animals” in a demonstration of nullifying ethics: as long as we consider some animals as family, we can defend our actions against other animals. As such, a collective of people is willing to accept Mr. Vick’s actions and now champions him as a spokesperson and model citizen regardless of his previous behaviour. However, if people were so easily persuaded to forgive all unprincipled or unethical acts, we would not need a justice system, and those who deviate from accepted mores would encounter no repercussions of such.

I am therefore respectfully requesting that you sever all associations with Mr. Vick. To sponsor Mr. Vick in any capacity would indeed demonstrate your complicity in animal cruelty by accepting his actions as profitable; indeed, if not for his severely cruel and illegal dog-fighting business, he would never be considered for promotion via organizations or television. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that people are increasingly choosing companies that refuse to participate in and profit off the brutal enterprises exploiting animals, and I would personally boycott your business if efforts to support Mr. Vick are realized. Please consider the victims in this case who no longer have voices, and make the compassionate decision to refuse cruelty rather than sanction it.

Thank you for taking the time to consider this important message.

Name/Country

 

P.S if the webforms only support a certain amount of characters, the letter can be revised by dropping the second paragraph.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WHERE TO SEND :

KFC
http://www.kfc.com/contact/

Buick
http://www.buick.com/pages/mds/helpcenter/contactUs.do

Bally Fitness
http://www.ballyfitness.com/contact-us.aspx?culture=en

PLEASE DO NOT SEE THE FOLLOWING MOVIES WHO ADVERTISED DURING THE SHOW:
From Paris with Love
Shudder Island
The Crazies

Hershey’s
https://www.hersheys.com/contactus/contact-form.asp

Footlocker
http://www.footlocker.com/customerserv/help:contactUs/

Chevy
http://www.chevrolet.com/pages/mds/helpcenter/contactUs.do
CHEVY HAS EXPRESSED THEIR FULL SUPPORT FOR MICHAEL VICK’S SHOW. PLEASE CONTINUE TO E-MAIL THEM UNTIL THEY GET THE MESSAGE.

Appelbee’s
http://www.applebees.com/GuestContact.aspx

Sprint
http://www.sprint.com/contactus/
SPRINT HAS EXPRESSED THEIR FULL SUPPORT FOR MICHAEL VICK’S SHOW. PLEASE CONTINUE TO E-MAIL THEM UNTIL THEY GET THE MESSAGE.

Broadview Security (formerly Brinks Security)
http://www.broadviewsecurity-home.com/contactus.htm

Dave and Buster’s
http://www.daveandbusters.com/Misc/ContactUs.aspx

Please also contact BET and tell them what you think of the show:
https://bet.wufoo.com/forms/contact-us-bet-programming/

2/4/10 Update: Nivea ended their commercial sponsorship of the show after being inundated with customer e-mails complaining about their support of the program.

2/5/10 Update: Pizza Hut issued a press release informing the public that they asked BET to end their commercial support of the show.

2/5/10 Update: Denny’s Restaurant contacted BET and ended their support after receiving e-mails from concerned customers expressing their opposition to the show.

2/6/10 Update: L’Oreal issued a press release that they have terminated their support of the Michael Vick “Reality” Show and apologized for offending L’Oreal customers.

2/8/10 Update: Nationwide Insurance issued a press release announcing that they asked BET to pull their ads from the Michael Vick Reality Show and that they do not support the program and do not wish to have any association with it.

(I will DVR the next episode and FF to the commercials to confirm these advertisers’ commitments and identify any new advertisers who may have filled their shoes.)

If Vick hadn’t killed dogs, he would never have this show. He’s making money off his killing spree. He recently said the reason for the show is to clear his family name. He also said that he will not speak about dog fighting anymore after the show. When Vick said he was going to dedicate his life to speaking out against dog fighting, apparently he meant he would do it twice per month for a year until people forgot about it and it was safe for him to be rich and famous again and profit from his crimes. He did a masterful job of using the HSUS to help him re-enter society. He was never sincere. He still thinks he’s a victim as evidenced by his arrogant and callous remarks after being nominated for the Ed Block Courage Award:

“I’ve overcome a lot, more than probably one single individual can handle or bear,” Vick said. “You ask certain people to walk through my shoes, they probably couldn’t do. Probably 95 percent of the people in this world because nobody had to endure what I’ve been through, situations I’ve been put in…”

Some people argue “everyone deserves a second chance…it’s time to move on” and “everyone makes mistakes”. Vick did not make a mistake; it was a conscious and calculated decision that he knew was wrong. He is diabolical, transparent, and evil. There is no cure for evil. He doesn’t deserve a second chance for his heinous and unspeakable crimes against animals. Those of us who speak for animals will not “move on” as Vick is emblematic of a larger problem in a society that shows disregard for the welfare of animals and believes lenient sentences and fines equate to justice. They do not.

If people want to idolize this sadistic killer, cheer for him from the stands and wear his jersey, they can do it. We draw the line with a reality show that allows him to profit from his felonies. Let us send a clear message — if you brutalize helpless animals, you will not be accepted back into society and return to fame and wealth without opposition. Our silence allows the opposite message to be sent. Complacency breeds acceptance. Acceptance leads to continued violence against animals. We do not have to accept things as they are and we will not.

Please help us send a message to the shameless sponsors of this show that we will boycott their products until they end their support of the program. You can click “Share” on this note and post it to your profile page to spread the word. Thank you.

On behalf of the dogs Michael Vick fought, kicked, shot, hanged, electrocuted, drowned, and tortured,

Andrew Kirschner

PLEASE TAKE ACTION

The Ed Block Courage Award Foundation is dedicated to improving the lives of neglected children and ending the cycle of abuse. The purpose is to raise Awareness and Prevention of child abuse. That objective is coupled with the Foundation’s commitment to celebrating players of inspiration in the NFL.

In my wildest dreams, I cannot imagine Michael Vick as an inspiration — unless I misunderstand the definition of “inspiration.” If you feel something similar, please add your name to the petition and pass it along to your friends.

…I am the Outreach & Communications Coordinator at Change.org. One of our community members recently started a great petition targeting Sam Lamantia, the CEO of the Ed Block Courage Award Foundation, asking him to deny Michael Vick the Ed Block Courage Award. In just a few days, the petition has already garnered nearly 1,000 signatures:

Petition Against Awarding Michael Vick the Ed Block Courage Award

I saw your recent post on this topic, and I thought you might be interested in helping us spread the word by posting the petition along with your blog entry. Thank you for your help.