B Explanatory
memorandum by Mr Pasquale Nessa, Rapporteur
1 Introduction
1. The harp seal (Pagophilus
groenlandicus) is a marine mammal whose habitat lies
between the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. Its life expectancy
is 30 to 35 years. The pup has a characteristic white coat, which it
keeps until about the twelfth day after birth.
2. Seal hunting is one of the few remaining examples of the commercial
hunting of a marine mammal population in the world. This report
is mainly concerned with harp seals, which are hunted commercially
mostly in Canada (74%) but also in Russia (11%), Greenland (13%)
and Norway (2%). The aim of this activity is to sell seal products
on international markets.
3. The population of harp seals in the north-west Atlantic –
the largest resource for the sealing industry – is estimated at
some 5.8 million. The introduction of hunting quotas in the 1970s
did result in a recovery in the harp seal population. However, over
the past decade, quotas have reached record levels (975,000 animals
in Canada alone for the period from 2003 to 2005).
4. The international controversy surrounding seal hunting is
first and foremost a political debate, bringing different and sometimes
conflicting values, objectives and attitudes into play.
5. The rapporteur is aware that the Canadian government has made
significant changes to how seal hunting is managed and to the regulations
governing the hunt, and since 1987 has prohibited the hunting of harp
seal pups (whitecoats) and hooded seal pups (bluebacks) along with
the trade, sale or barter of the fur of these pups. The Marine Mammals Regulations have
been amended several times, most recently in 2003, to ensure that
seals are killed humanely. And enforcement and monitoring measures
have been regularly strengthened.
6. Nonetheless, as rapporteur, I consider that hunting harp seals
is cruel. I would point out that documentary evidence supplied by
international non-governmental organisations contradicts the Canadian government’s
claims to enforce humane hunting practices. This activity is not
ecologically sustainable and is “market-based”, to use the terms
of the Canadian government’s Atlantic Seal Hunt Management Plan
Note.
A declared objective of the seal hunt is to curb the seal population.
However, there is no scientific justification for this hunt, and
the current management plan disregards the precautionary principle.
According to the Canadian authorities, quotas are designed to ensure
that the harp seal population does not fall below 70% of the maximum
observed population.
7. I believe that supporting this hunt as a profit-making economic
activity resulting in a market-driven harvest is incompatible with
preservation of the seal population in the context of safeguarding
the natural heritage and natural resources.
8. In addition, given the remoteness of the areas where seals
are hunted, it is difficult to monitor compliance with the law,
in particular verification that an animal is clinically dead before
being cut up. It is in practice difficult to check that the humane
killing practices recommended by the government itself are systematically
followed. Nevertheless, sealing tends to take place within fairly
small, well defined areas. With the mandatory use of satellite
transmitters aboard vessels, sealing vessels can be monitored and
their locations identified daily. However, only if inspectors accompanied
each expedition would it be possible to monitor such hunting activities properly.
2 Position
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
9. On 24 January 1978, the Parliamentary Assembly of
the Council of Europe adopted Recommendation 825 on the protection
of wildlife and on seal hunting. The Assembly was concerned about
the risk of certain species of seals becoming extinct as a result
of the deterioration of their natural environment and of large-scale hunting,
in excess of demand. It was also worried about the cruel hunting
methods used and recommended, among other measures, imposing a two-year
ban on the hunting of harp seals.
10. This recommendation is important in its political significance,
especially with regard to the fact that the quotas set in the present
Canadian management plan for harp seals are close to the numbers
killed in the 1950s and 1960s, the period that marked the beginning
of the at least 50% decline observed in this species’ population.
Moreover, hunting methods continue to pose problems, despite this
recommendation and other representations to the governments concerned.
11. At a more general level, in its Resolution 1012 (1993) on
marine mammals the Parliamentary Assembly called on the governments
of Council of Europe member states, other governments concerned
and the European Community to develop and/or improve global and
regional legal regimes for the protection and sustainable management
of all species of marine mammals (large whales and smaller cetaceans,
walruses and seals). Countries which licensed the hunting of marine
mammals were already asked to make sure that hunting methods met
standards of humane killing or were brought into line with those
standards as far as possible. Attainment of that objective was to
be facilitated through research and development. The resolution also
called on those countries to ensure that adequate control mechanisms
were provided for in protection and exploitation agreements to prevent
misbehaviour and violations.
12. In 2004 the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and
Local and Regional Affairs was asked to prepare a report on seal
hunting
Note.
In that connection, the committee organised an expert hearing on
the subject on 5 October 2004. At its meeting on 5 October 2005
the committee held an exchange of views on the preliminary draft
of this report
Note. The present revised draft report
is the outcome of that discussion and incorporates the additional
information provided, including by the Canadian delegation.
i European Union legislation
13. Until the 1980s demand on the international markets was mainly
for goods made with the fur of ‘whitecoat’ and ‘blueback’ seals.
It was to counter the trade in those products that the European
Parliament voted to suspend importation of “whitecoat” and “blueback”
sealskins in 1982.
14. In November 1983 the European Union adopted a total ban on
trading in young seal products, which was extended for a further
two years the following year, and then indefinitely. The European
Parliament had an extremely influential role in the preparation
and subsequent development of these regulations.
15. Following these European initiatives, in 1987 Canada passed
a law prohibiting the taking of whitecoats and blueback seals. However,
these two measures protected harp and hooded seals only within a
specified age band, and therefore not the total population, unlike
the provisions of US law (see below). Canada also adopted a number
of regulations to promote humane hunting methods.
16. The EU Directive (EEC/83/129) prompted the Canadian government
to pass similar legislation, banning the importation and sale of
whitecoat and blueback sealskins and protecting harp and hooded
seal pups, while they were under 12 days and one year old respectively.
Unfortunately, this ban has failed to stop the current trade in
harp and blueback sealskins in Europe. At present, seals of just
a few days old are hunted and their skins can be sold legally in
the EU.
17. Norway also came in for strong criticism from the European
Union. On 18 January 1998 the European Parliament, “appalled by
Norway’s resumption of the slaughter of seals and by the recent
granting of new catch quotas by Canada and other countries”, invited
the European Commission “to condemn the seal hunt and ... ensure
that products derived from slaughtered seals cannot be traded on
the European market”, to quote the European Parliament resolution
on the resumption of seal hunting by Norway, published in the Official
Journal of 5 February 1996.
18. However, it would seem that the ban on importing products
derived from the hunting of baby seals into the European Union is
being contravened and that seal furs originating from Russia are
entering the European market via Norway.
19. In February 2006, Italy temporarily suspended the import of
sealskins and products.
3 Legislation and
practice in Council of Europe member states
20. Although it is true that 74% of seal hunting takes
place in Canada, hunting for harp seals is also permissible under
the laws of Greenland, Norway and Russia.
3.1 Greenland (Denmark)
21. The Atlantic seal hunt in Greenland is primarily
a subsistence activity. These activities are still the only – or
most important – source of income for the country’s 2,500 inhabitants
Note. It must
nonetheless be noted that Canada’s and Greenland’s harp and hooded
seal catches are taken from the same herd. The two countries’ governments
hold regular discussions on their hunters’ catches and have decided
to pool the information they collect so as to strengthen conservation
measures
Note.
22. The rapporteur cannot but encourage such consultation, but
points out that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) requires states whose nationals exploit identical marine resources
in the same area, marine mammals in the case under consideration
here, to implement a joint management scheme with a view to effective
conservation of those resources. Canada and Greenland have never
drawn up such a scheme and have applied their own separate hunting
quotas to the same population of animals.
23. Although animal welfare organisations’ campaigns against seal
hunting have largely helped to bring about a significant decrease
in the exportation of sealskins and other seal products, all sealskins
exported from Greenland go to Denmark.
24. In January 2006 the main Danish television channel, DR, broadcast
video footage of commercial seal hunting in Canada
Note.
In the wake of this broadcast, the Greenland government announced
its decision to end sealskin imports from Canada and ordered its
public company not to trade in sealskins originating from Canadian
seal hunting. However, on 19 May 2006, the Greenland Home Rule Government
decided to cancel the recommendation of 6 January 2006 made to Great
Greenland A/S regarding a provisional stop on purchases of Canadian
seal skin.
3.2 Norway
25. In Norway seal hunting takes place in the Barents
Sea, in the Russian-administered economic zone, and off Greenland.
Norwegian quotas are determined on the basis of the scientific recommendations
of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES),
the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) and the Institute
of Marine Research. Norway’s legislation on seal hunting determines
the hunting season, quotas and permitted forms of killing and makes
training compulsory for hunters. Hunters are solely permitted to
use rifles and what is known as the “hakapik” (a type of gaff).
The same applies in Canada. In Norway, as in Canada, the law forbids
hunters from taking suckling pups.
26. In 2004, Norway’s overall quota was 30,600 adult seals, 10,000
in the East Ice and 20,600 in the West Ice. Russia is responsible
for managing the harp seal stock in the East Ice, while the stocks
in the West Ice, which live partly in international waters, come
under the fisheries jurisdiction of several countries.
27. Sealers are required to take a course and a shooting test
every year before the sealing season. Each sealing vessel carries
an inspector on board. The inspectors have veterinary qualifications
or the equivalent, and report directly to the fisheries authorities.
28. The Norwegian government contends that seal hunting is necessary
to safeguard fish catches, since it prevents proliferation of the
seal population. If there was no hunt, certain species of seal might
move to Norway’s coasts in search of food. The national scientific
community has nonetheless shown that there is no sound scientific
foundation for these arguments.
29. Norway formerly allocated large subsidies to seal hunting,
in the form of finance for boats and payment of a fixed sum for
each seal killed. Over the period from 1985 to 1994 Norway invested
two million dollars per year in sealing industry subsidies. At present
the state subsidises the seal hunting infrastructure. The aim of subsidising
the hunt is to regulate seal numbers and keep traditional seal-hunting
skills alive. At the same time, efforts are being made to develop
markets for new products derived from seal hunting, so that the
activity can be viable without state subsidies. It can be noted
that the government is nonetheless steadily cutting back the subsidies
granted, in the hope of seeing the trade die out. It must be said,
however, that the market for seal products is currently expanding,
particularly in Asia (see below).
30. Official documents issued by the Ministry of Fisheries in
2004 state that seal hunting would not be economically worthwhile
if it was not state subsidised. Norway intends to extend its hunting
activity into Russian territory so as to take advantage of the marked
decline in seal hunting in Russia following the Russian government’s
withdrawal of subsidies for an activity it regards as economically
unviable. The Norwegian government also reportedly intends to develop
a sealskin processing industry in Russian territory, which it will subsidise.
31. In 2005 the quotas
Note were
set at 15,000 harp seals and 5,600 hooded seals for the West Ice
(Norwegian territory) and 10,000 harp seals for the East Ice (where
the hunt takes place in Russian territory).
32. In January 2005 the Norwegian government also gave the green
light for foreign tourists holding a hunting licence valid in their
country of origin to hunt grey seals and common seals. Hunting must
take place in the presence of authorised Norwegian seal hunters,
and all participants must hold a hunting licence. Ordinary tourists
may not take part, since permits are granted only to qualified hunters
who have passed the big-game test in their home country. This type
of hunting is carried out with a rifle and in Norway is open to anyone
over 16 years of age, after obtaining a hunting licence. For these
species, the quotas provide for the killing of 949 common seals
and 1,186 grey seals. The State Secretary of the Ministry of Hunting
and Fisheries offers a bounty of NOK 500 (€ 60) for each animal
killed.
33. Shooting of seals with a rifle is a practice that very often
inflicts severe suffering on the animals. Instant killing is in
fact difficult, and wounded seals dive underwater to escape the
projectiles and are only later recovered by boat.
34. Scientific research is being conducted to determine whether
the size of seal (and whale) populations has an impact on fish stocks,
but for the time being the theory has not been validated.
3.3 Russian Federation
35. Russia has been on the brink of prohibiting harp
seal hunting several times. A bill to that effect was passed by
the Russian Duma but later vetoed by the President. Russian law
permits the killing and marketing of whitecoat seals irrespective
of their age. The skins are principally exported to east European
countries.
36. In 2005 the quotas were set at 45,100 harp seals (equivalent
to the killing of 112,750 whitecoats), 35,200 ringed seals, 16,700
ribbon seals, 11,700 bearded seals and 9,140 Caspian seals. The
rapporteur regrets that neither journalists nor investigators are
authorised to observe the hunt.
37. In early May 2001 Vladimir Potelyov, director of the marine
mammals laboratory of the Polar Institute of Fish and Oceanography
in Archangelsk, issued a warning that about two-thirds of the approximately
350,000 harp seals born in the Barents Sea that year were at risk
of starving to death following the large-scale migration of the
capelins and crustaceans on which they feed, caused by a change
in White Sea currents, as had already occurred in the past, most
recently in 1966. However, during an aerial survey performed by
an international committee of biologists no seal pups were observed
in the zone indicated by Mr Potelyov. According to the Polar Institute’s
critics, the laboratory director’s aim was to exaggerate the number
of seal pups in order to justify their mass slaughter.
4 Legislation and
practice in Council of Europe observer states
4.1 Canada
4.1.1 Brief historical
background
38. North-West Atlantic harp seals are migratory animals.
They spend the summer in Northern Canada and Western Greenland and
the winter in the Gulf of St Lawrence. They are hunted in Southern
Canada, the Arctic and Greenland. The largest numbers of seals were
hunted in the 1830s, 1840s and 1880s. The seal harvest then gradually
declined before increasing again in the 1950s. A new decline followed
in the 1980s, with a further resumption in 2000. These trends mirror
historical events. It was in the early 1970s that quotas were introduced,
and 1980 was the year in which the European Union banned seal hunting.
39. The earliest information relating to sealing in present-day
Canadian territory dates back to the 16th century, to the period
of the major waves of colonisation. However, it was in 1723 that
seal hunting acquired more significance as seal oil began to be
used as a lamp fuel, chiefly in the United Kingdom. This was the
first mass marketing of a product derived from seals.
40. Between 1808 and 1862 sealing attained a huge scale. These
years are indeed referred to as the “Golden Age of Sealing”. A decisive
factor in the later expansion of Canadian seal hunting was the 1949
union of the territory subsequently designated as Newfoundland and
Labrador with Canada. In the 1950s the first scientific studies
were made concerning the possible repercussions of hunting on the
conservation of the species. In 1971 those studies prompted the
finding by a scientific commission that the harp seal population had
decreased by 55%. These years of scientific research also saw the
beginning of the first protests against seal hunting. One of the
earliest protest demonstrations was led by Brian Davis, founder
of the SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) and
marked the beginning of campaigns to raise awareness and rally public
opinion against the hunting of seal pups. The protests later gained
an international dimension and attracted support from international
organisations such as the IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare) and
Greenpeace. In 1977 film celebrities including French actress Brigitte
Bardot and American Yvette Mimieux entered the battleground of opposition
to the hunting of seal pups.
41. Following the scientific studies referred to above, the first
quotas were introduced in 1971 to limit the number of animals killed.
The decline in the harvest over subsequent years allowed a recovery
in the harp seal population. Nonetheless, over the past decade the
situation has again been reversed, and the seal quotas have now
reached record levels – 975,000 animals for the 2003-2005 period.
4.1.2 Current situation
42. It should first and foremost be said that one of
the reasons advanced by the Canadian government for its protective
attitude towards seal hunting is that this hunt constitutes a means
of subsistence for the country’s aboriginal peoples. Aboriginal
hunting is in fact an altogether different activity from commercial
hunting. Its sole aim is subsistence, and every part of the animal
killed is therefore used. Nonetheless, a considerable number of
seal skins are sold on international markets. For example, in 2002
the government of Nunavut “purchased nearly 10,000 ringed sealskins
from hunters in all three Nunavut regions. … These skins generated
more than $500,000 in sales at the December auction. The maintained
market for ringed sealskins is attributed mainly to a sustained
market interest in Europe. Two buyers from Denmark purchased more
than 90 per cent of the skins”
NoteNote.
43. A ban on seal hunting would nonetheless have an impact on
aboriginal communities which capture other seal species. As was
seen in the early 1980s, when the European Community introduced
a ban on the importation of whitecoats and bluebacks, the market
for ringed seals, of vital importance for the Inuit population, also
began to diminish. “In Labrador alone, the lost sealing revenue
reduced total Inuit income by one third”
NoteNote.
44. It is precisely out of consideration for these customs and
traditions that aboriginal hunting is granted exemptions under existing
legislation, including the above-mentioned EU legislation on whitecoats
and bluebacks. It should also be pointed out that Canada’s aboriginal
populations mainly hunt grey seals, not harp or hooded seals. In
2004 aboriginal hunters killed about 1.5% of the quota prescribed
by the Canadian government, and the remaining 98.5% was hunted by
non-aboriginal Canadians, most of them residents of Newfoundland.
The 2006-2010 plan makes provision for an additional allowance
of 10,000 harp seals for new aboriginal initiatives, for personal
use and for hunting in the Arctic. When this is compared with the
Total Allowable Catch (TAC) of harp seals, set at 325,000 for 2006,
it is clear that this represents but a small proportion of overall
hunting.
45. The Canadian seal hunt takes place in and around the whelping
areas where the pups are born each spring off Canada’s Atlantic
Coast, in the North-West Atlantic, off the coasts of Newfoundland
and Labrador and in the Gulf of St Lawrence
Note.
46. Six seal species are to be found off the Atlantic Coast of
Canada: harp, hooded, grey, ringed, bearded and harbour seals. Almost
all hunting is targeted at harp seals.
47. In 2004, 350,000 harp seals were counted on terra firma, over
90% of which were pups born that year. Today, seals are being hunted
on the same scale as led to the decline in the population between
1950 and 1970 before the introduction of the quotas.
48. In 2004, 15,468 hunting licences were issued (8,778 professional
licences, 4,999 assistants’ licences and 1,691 licences for personal
use). By way of comparison, in 1995 only 9,118 professional licences
and 1,265 personal use licences were issued. To obtain a professional
licence, a commercial sealer must serve a two-year apprenticeship
with a professional hunter. This requirement ensures appropriate
training of sealers and proper transfer of the necessary skills.
No quotas are imposed for ringed, harbour and bearded sales, but licensing
is used to control commercial hunting of these species
Note.
49. Today, Canada’s management of commercial seal hunting is,
in the government’s words, market-driven and economically viable
(2003 management plan). The seal hunt is managed taking account
of socio-economic factors and so as to maintain seal numbers at
70% of the maximum observed population. Should the population fall
below the 70% reference point (corresponding to an estimated 3.85
million seals), a new management approach would be adopted to bring
it back above the threshold. Should the population fall to 50% (2.75
million animals), major conservation measures would be implemented.
If a combination of circumstances resulted in a decrease below the
30% mark (1.65 million individuals), a total ban on seal hunting would
be introduced
Note.
50. Seal hunting long received economic support from the Canadian
government which, for example, invested nearly 20 million Canadian
dollars in seal hunting subsidies between 1995 and 2001. Following
the entry into force of the EU regulations prohibiting imports of
products derived from whitecoat and blueback seals, the sealing
industry recorded substantial market losses. In the mid 1990s, the
Canadian government launched a plan to boost seal products and supported
the industry. The rapporteur believes that, if the seal industry
operated under free market conditions, it would have trouble in
remaining sufficiently competitive. At present the Canadian government
considers that seal hunting is an economically viable activity and
no longer subsidises it.
51. To enable the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to devise
a new multi-annual management strategy for 2006 and subsequent years,
an Atlantic Seal Forum took place in St. John’s, Newfoundland, on
7 and 8 November 2005. This forum was attended by representatives
of the industry, governments, the scientific community, aboriginal
groups, conservation organisations and animal rights organisations.
52. In response to the conclusions of the Atlantic Seal Forum
and to concerns raised internationally about the seal hunt, the
new Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Loyola Hearn, announced in
March 2006 that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans was “looking
at long-term changes in order to further improve on humane hunting
practices and overall management of the hunt”
Note.
The Department is working towards implementing the recommendations
made by the Independent Veterinarians’ Working Group on the Canadian
Harp Seal Hunt in its report
Improving
Humane Practice in the Canadian Harp Seal Hunt, where
necessary through amendments to the
Marine
Mammals Regulations.
53. This working group was formed in May 2005 following an initiative
by the World Wildlife Fund - Netherlands in order “to contribute
to the promotion of animal welfare and to minimise or eliminate
animal suffering within the context of the hunt”. Its nine members
originating from Canada, the United States, the Netherlands, France
and the United Kingdom include a specialist who sat on the international
veterinary panel commissioned by the International Fund for Animal
Welfare to observe the hunt in 2001. The working group’s report
sets out a number of specific and general recommendations on improving
regulation and supervision of the seal hunt with the aim of making
it cruelty-free. It discusses a range of factors and issues related
to the hunt and makes eleven recommendations to the sealers, industry
and regulators.
54. The following are the general recommendations of the report:
- Reducing the competitive nature
of the hunt can result in improved animal welfare, better compliance and
enforcement, and a safer work environment.
- The Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)
should take steps to improve supervision, monitoring and enforcement,
including the training of officers.
- Sealers would benefit from strong professional associations
that support and promote humane practices.
- Research and observation should be undertaken on a regular
and systematic basis.
- It is important for observers to work in collaboration
with sealers.
55. At present, the 2006-2010 Seal Management Plan is currently
being prepared, but the government has already undertaken to implement
the following recommendations
Note.
- The
three steps in the humane killing process – stunning, checking that
the skull is crushed (to ensure irreversible loss of consciousness
or death), and bleeding – should be carried out in sequence as rapidly as
possible.
- Confirmation of irreversible loss of consciousness or
death should be done by checking by palpation that the skull is
crushed, rather than checking the absence of corneal (blink) reflex.
- A seal should not be shot in the water or in any circumstance
when it is possible the carcass cannot be recovered.
- Bleeding to achieve or ensure death, following stunning,
is an important element in the three-step humane killing process.
The Marine Mammal Regulations should
be amended to replace the requirement for death to occur before
bleeding, with a requirement for unconsciousness before bleeding.
56. Moreover, the Department has undertaken to “increase [this
year] its monitoring and enforcement efforts on the sealing grounds”
so as to provide “a high ratio of enforcement capability per active
sealing vessel – approximately double the capability of other fisheries
in the area”
NoteNote.
57. For fishermen, the seal hunt represents a provisional income
closely associated with the hunting season, which for practical
purposes lasts only a few weeks per year. A fisherman’s average
income for a whole hunting season amounts to about 1,500 Canadian
dollars, before expenses. This income accordingly supplements the regular
annual income these persons derive from employment in the fishing
industry or other local industries.
58. In terms of revenue, sealing throughout Canadian territory
contributes a mere 0.0009% of the country’s GDP. Moreover, the sealing
industry accounts for just 0.064% (official figure for 2003) of
the economy of the Newfoundland and Labrador region, where this
industry is most extensive.
59. In 2004 commercial seal hunting in the Atlantic region of
Canada generated over 16.5 million dollars of direct income from
the sale of products. This represented an increase compared with
the estimated 13 million dollars for 2003, but was well below the
estimate of 21 million dollars for 2002.
4.1.3 Legislation
60. Canadian law (the “Marine Mammal Regulations” of
1993, amended in 2003) prohibits the killing of whitecoat seals.
Canadian legislation protects seals up to their 12th day of life
Note, as does the above-mentioned EU Directive,
although indirectly. The purpose of hunting is to market sealskins
which, from the 12th day, show the first grey tinges. Canadian regulations
are designed to permit killing when the seal’s coat is still almost
pure white and therefore in demand on the European and Asian markets.
US Senate Resolution No. 229 of 2003 points out that 97% of the
seals killed in 2003 were pups between 12 days and 12 weeks old.
61. Each hunter is required to hold a hunting licence, the cost
of which is only five Canadian dollars for a full year, whereas
a permit to observe the hunt costs 25 Canadian dollars per year.
Licences and permits must be renewed annually. In 2004 there were
15,468 hunting licences issued, but the number of actively participating hunters
is only some 4,000 per year, based on Canadian official estimates.
4.2 United States
62. The “Marine Mammal Protection Act”, in force since
1972, is aimed at protecting all marine mammals, including seals.
It places a moratorium on the catching, killing and importing of
all marine mammals and all products derived from them. It also prohibits
the importing of all such products into the territory of the United States.
63. Specifically, the Marine Mammal Protection Act prohibits:
- The possession of any marine
mammal or product thereof, if the animal was captured in breach
of the Act;
- Transporting, purchasing, selling, exporting or offering
to buy any marine mammal or product thereof by any natural or legal
person;
- The taking of any marine mammal by a boat or any means
of maritime transport subject to US jurisdiction, whether inside
or outside US territorial waters;
- The taking of any marine mammal in waters or territory
under US jurisdiction by any boat or other means of maritime transport,
except as otherwise provided by an international treaty;
- Infringement of the Marine Mammal Protection Act is punishable
by a fine of up to 10,000 US dollars for each provision infringed,
and in certain cases a prison sentence of up to a year may be imposed.
5 Trade in seal products
and importing countries
64. Seal products include skins and furs, oil and fat,
and meat. Harp seals over twelve days old can be killed, and their
pelts and derived products may be marketed, also within the European
Union.
65. Sealskins are imported into European Union countries as unfinished
goods directly from Canada and Russia, and as tanned goods from
Norway and Denmark.
Note Norway is home to one of the world’s
principal sealskin tanning enterprises. Canada is the chief exporter
of raw sealskins to the European Union, followed by Russia. However,
some of the sealskins exported by Canada and Greenland are imported
by Denmark, which in turn re-exports them to EU member states, in
particular Italy.
66. Among seal by-products mention should be made of oil and fat.
These products are used as ingredients in the production of cosmetics
and soap and in sardine canning. They are also a source of “Omega
3” dietary supplements, commonly found on the market but usually
as an element extracted from various kinds of fish. The market for
oil and fat is extremely small in terms of volume and sales figures.
Canada is the biggest exporter to the European Union, where Italy
is the principal importer.
67. The countries exporting seal products are Canada (the chief
exporter), Norway, Russia and Greenland. Europe is the main importer
of the raw products and an exporter of manufactured goods. In 2004
the main importers of furs were Greenland, Germany, China, Poland,
Denmark, Hong Kong, Greece, France, the Russian Federation and South
Korea (by decreasing order of quantities imported).
68. The principal market for seal by-products is the countries
of Europe, followed by Asia. There is no market for these products
in North America, as their sale is strictly prohibited in the United
States, and there is virtually no demand for them in Canada. It
can also be noted that there is a limited local seal hunting activity
in certain EU member states, but since it is not a commercial hunt
it does not come within the scope of this report.
69. In recent years the selling price of a seal pelt has increased,
leading to corresponding growth in the income derived from trade
in this product. A growing interest has also been shown in seal
products such as oil, meat, bones and fat for use in certain medicines.
70. There is virtually no market for seal meat as a product in
itself despite the support policies pursued by the governments of
Canada and Norway through subsidies. The main reason is the unusual
taste of the meat. For years the Canadian government used seal meat
as feed in fur farms (mink and fox) but its use was later prohibited.
The hunters in fact usually leave the seal carcasses on the ice
and only harvest the skins.
71. Despite the ban, according to Eurostat data, in the period
between 2002 and 2004 tanned furs produced from whitecoat and blueback
(trading in which is prohibited according to European legislation)
were imported into the EU 15 countries from Denmark, Canada and
Norway. Fur goods and accessories containing whitecoat and blueback
were also imported into the EU 15 countries, principally from Russia,
Denmark and, to a lesser extent, Canada and Greenland.
72. Italy ranks second after Denmark among European countries
involved in the trade in seal products. The seal products legally
marketed in Italy are raw skins, tanned non-assembled skins, tanned
assembled skins, pieces of clothing and accessories and oil and
fat, but excluding “whitecoats” - at least as a lawful activity.
Italy imports the bulk of its skins from Canada and Denmark, and
processes them to re-export them worldwide as finished manufactured
products
Note.
Virtually all the seal oil exported by Canada to the European Union
is purchased by Italy. Seal oil exports from Italy to other countries
are of negligible value, in the region of € 170,000 for the whole
of 2003.
73. Conversely, imports of sealskins and seal products have decreased
drastically in the Netherlands. According to data supplied by the
Netherlands government, total income from trade in seal products
is less than € 140,000. Over the last five years the Netherlands
has recorded the importation of only 58 sealskins, 38 of which came
from Canada and the remaining 20 from Brazil.
6 Conclusions
74. Canada’s three-year plan for 2003-2005 envisaged
the killing of slightly under a million seals (950,000 over the
three years, 350,000 having been killed in 2004 alone). The present
three-year quota is the highest ever fixed. 95% of the seals hunted
in Canada are less than one month old. This also raises ethical considerations
with regard to an animal whose life expectancy is approximately
30-35 years.
75. Despite the restrictive measures introduced in the 1970s and
1980s to counter the extinction of seal species (threatened by excessive
hunting pressure), the present three-year quota allows the killing
of a number of seals similar to the figure for the 1950s and 1960s,
which were the very years that saw a marked decline in the population
and led to the introduction of a quota system by the Canadian government.
76. The current three-year plan moreover failed to take into consideration
certain factors that influence seal population trends, such as alteration
of the ecosystem, pollution and climate change. A large number of
seals are also killed each year as a result of accidental catching
during fishing operations and shooting without recovery of the animal’s
carcass, classified as ‘struck and lost’. Added together, all these
factors lead to an increase in the final number of animals killed
each year. The total number of harp seals killed in Canada and Greenland
between 1996 and 2002 is estimated at just under three and a half
million. So, although the population of these seals is now estimated
at some five million, the size of the overall kill is all the same
very large.
77. This increase in the quota could cause a severe reduction
in the population of these animals for the following reasons:
- the harp seal is a migratory
animal which is hunted in Canada and Greenland without the two countries ever
having defined a common management scheme, in breach of the provisions
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS);
- the quota does not include the extremely high number of
animals killed during the hunt and classified as ‘struck and lost’;
- nor does the quota include the large number of animals
killed accidentally in the course of human activities at sea (chiefly
because of collisions and accidental catching by fishermen);
- the quota does not take account of other adverse elements
like climate change, which has a negative influence on these populations.
For the reasons given above, the overall number of harp seal deaths caused
by human beings is thought to be far in excess of the Total Allowable
Catch stipulated in the Management Plan;
- the Canadian Government claims to enforce “acceptably
humane” hunting methods, whereas many films and news reports together
with eyewitness accounts by credible individuals (including members
of the European Parliament and of national parliaments, journalists,
NGO representatives and representatives of European veterinary federations)
show that seal hunting is carried out using extremely cruel methods
that inflict severe, needless suffering on these marine mammals;
- the conditions for strict enforcement of the legislation
in force are not satisfied and there is insufficient supervision
in the hunt areas, which are often difficult to accessNote.
78. Furthermore, although Canadian regulations officially limit
the hunting of seal pups, the enforcement of those regulations today
raises substantial questions. Statistical data (cf Eurostat statistics,
paragraph 65) point to the existence of a trade in baby seal fur,
and it is not easy for customs personnel to distinguish between
true whitecoat pelts and those beginning to be tinged with grey.
Into the bargain, investigations conducted on the sealing grounds
have revealed breaches of the regulations by hunters in several
cases. The rapporteur finds it hard to comprehend that governments
subsidise this activity, when the remoteness of the seal hunting grounds
makes it difficult to verify that the law is being observed, particularly
as regards checking that the animal is clinically dead before being
cut up.
79. Some claim that the principal argument for raising the annual
hunting quotas is that this would allegedly help to increase the
number of cod caught in the North Atlantic. Others maintain that
that seals feed predominantly on fish that prey on cod, whose preservation
is thereby furthered. However, the Canadian government has stated
in official documents its view that the cod crisis in the Western
Atlantic was brought about by over-fishing.
80. The horror of the slaughter is now notorious worldwide and
various opinion polls show that 79% of United States citizens and
80% of people interviewed in France, Germany, the United Kingdom
and the Netherlands are against seal hunting
Note.
81. Many European countries also have laws that should protect
seals as marine mammals and migratory animals. The UN Convention
on the Law of the Sea of 1982 likewise contains general provisions
on the subject. However, in spite of that, Europe remains the world’s
principal seal product importer, the main manufacturer of seal products
and one of the biggest exporters of goods made from seal fur.
82. Conversely, in the United States the Marine Mammal Protection
Act of 1972 prohibits the import, export, sale, hunting and possession
of all types of products derived from marine mammals, and the marketing
of seal products is hence prohibited in United States territory.
83. The rapporteur concedes that the scientific arguments put
forward are interesting, but notes that there are still some unanswered
questions and contradictory pieces of evidence. He defends the
cause of these animals and cannot accept their gratuitous suffering.
The current legislation is obviously being flouted, and this is
where he considers the Canadian government’s responsibilities lie.
84. Nevertheless, the Canadian government appears to be well aware
of the current challenges and problems over seal hunting and is
planning to address the issue through amendments to and enforcement
of its regulations.
85. The rapporteur welcomes the fact that the recommendations
made in the report by the Independent Veterinarians’ Working Group
on the Canadian Harp Seal Hunt have been endorsed by the St. John’s
Forum, and that the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans
is working towards “implementing these recommendations for 2007
through further consultation with the Independent Veterinarians’
Working Group and the industry. This will require amendments to
the Marine Mammal Regulations”
Note.
86. The rapporteur also welcomes the March 2006 announcement made
by Mr Loyola Hearn, the new Minister of Fisheries and Oceans that
his Department was “also looking at long-term changes in order to
further improve on humane hunting practices and overall management
of the hunt”
Note.
The Department is to step up monitoring and enforcement efforts
on the sealing grounds. This will provide a high ratio of enforcement capability
per active sealing vessel – approximately double the capability
of other fisheries in the area
Note.
87. The rapporteur wishes to thank the Canadian observers to the
Parliamentary Assembly for the transparent way in which the exchange
of views has taken place and for their active co-operation in the
work of the Committee which has led to the drafting of this report.
