SHOW YOU CARE FOR THE CAPE FUR SEALS, WEAR THIS T-SHIRT
PETITION FOR THE CAPE FUR SEALS NAMIBIA
PRESS RELEASE - 11th July 2006
15 Very Good Reasons Why
Namibia Must Stop the Seal Cull
Now
!
The commercial slaughter of seals has
become a much more complexed affair since, seals were forced off
islands onto the mainland in 1940 and South Africa abolished
its Seal Cull policy in 1990 and incorporated seals and the
environment into its constitution in 1994. Namibian fish
stocks have since collapsed, and as such needs urgent review
and an immediate moratorium on further seal culls. Simply - the
commercial culling of seals in Namibia must end - now! If
long term ecological damage in this region, that has already cost
billions and millions of seal lives, and threatens the
future stability of the this entire southern African
marine ecology region, South Africa and Angola included is to be
prevented.
◦
Both the offshore colonies (yellow) and the mainland colonies
(green) - just thirty years previously originated from one single
offshore population which was at least 50% less than the (mainland
and offshore) colonies combined populations in 1972. Based on
offshore colony trends, no human interference or sealing, the
(green section) would not have existed this last 30 years, neither
would its growth - and therefore its sealing industry.
◦
The commercial cull or sealing industry upon seals breeding in
their natural state (offshore islands) - is a non-sustainable
utilization of a resource - as it directly causes colony extinction
- therefore under the constitutions of both South Africa and
Namibia would not be permitted.
◦
The seal cull in Namibia has been a complete scientific and
management failure. Far from being a sustainable utilization of a
resource, it has lead directly to an imbalance in the breeding
population, and has directly lead to a population explosion that
has cost the fishing industry (once one of the most productive
fisheries in the world) over half a million tons annually (equal to
the entire Namibia's fishery TAC) with losses in the past 16
years, exceeding N$ 30 billion. Its direct benefit to fishery from
seal culls, TAC fishing benefit of 0.02%.
◦
Although sealers have slaughtered over seven hundred thousand
nursing baby seals (illegally under international law) and the
seals themselves have endured two mass die-off's from starvation
from overfishing (or non-sustainable policies of fishing), where
one third to one half of the population starved to death since
Namibia's independence, clearly indicating the ecology in the
region has collapsed - this should have sent massive Warning Signs
to marine scientists - who instead did nothing. These two mainland
colonies, which did not exist in 1940, have grown to exceed half a
million seals unnaturally. With an overall Namibian mainland
population exceeding seven hundred thousand foraging fish eating
seals, and growing - preventing any future recovery of
fisheries.
◦
Seals are a marine resource and as such in the case of Namibia's
constitution, any right to harvest them would be within the
territorial waters of Namibia and up to the low-tide water mark on
the coastline. The current harvest of these seals (on the two
mainland colonies) occurs outside of this jurisdiction and is
therefore invalid and all permits/rights should be revoked.
◦
In comparison, after South Africa stopped sealing at its only
mainland colony, where equally 75% of the seal population in South
Africa, equally began breeding on the mainland in 1940, its
population although rising to become the largest mainland colony in
the world (during its sealing years), actually declined after
sealing stopped in 1990 and has seen no further growth. With Cape
Cross in Namibia where sealing continued now becoming the largest
in the world - the direct result of the sealing industry.
◦
In comparison to all the above, seals have lived for at least
5 million years on off-shore islands exclusively, until mankind
interfered. With the near extinction in 1900 of this seal species
on islands, there should have been no migration onto the mainland
40 years later. In fact although island population of seals
represented 100% of the population in 1940, 50% of the population
when first surveyed in 1971, they have effectively declined to
represent now just 20% - without the management of
culls.
◦
Although seal breeding has only occurred on 18 ha or 2% of the
offshore protected islands over the last 30 years, with 23 major
former island colonies remaining extinct, the overall offshore
island population, which has not experienced any major die-off nor
intensive sealing or culls since the early 1970's has actually
declined on its own, without human interference.
◦
Disturbing and banning seals from 400 ha of limited island seal
breeding space over 4000 km, and displacing it onto 32 000 ha
(80 times more) mainland space within just 1000 km, in
the oldest desert and least populated country in the world, has
been one of the greatest mismanagement of our marine resources this
past century.
◦
Facilitating proven diseased infested land predators to
freely prey on unnaturally displaced seal colonies, could pose very
real threats to future food security and to human
health. Should these land based diseases and viruses like
rabies and distemper, enter the marine food-chain and fish stocks
humans consume. Either it has already happened or could pose
serious threats in the future, noting that starvation is a
by-symptom of distemper.
◦
With three major mass die-off's in only the last 16 years, where
one third to one half starved to death in each
incident. Namibia should have ended sealing. Instead Namibia
doubled its sealing quota to 60 000 in 2000, it also reported its
largest mass die-off of over 300 000 seals, one month after sealing
season had ended. Instead of ending it then, it lengthened the
sealing season in 2001. Sealers still struggled to
harvest their full quota, averaging around 50% of sealing TAC. Then
clearly under the Namibian constitution sealing is not sustainable
and has to stop.
◦
Not in Canada, Greenland, Norway or Russia is the slaughter of
nursing seal pups legal, even though the US, the world's biggest
trading partner through its US Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
has banned the imports of seal skins from South Africa and Namibia,
as far back as 1972, whose decision was upheld by the US
appeal court in 1977 - Namibia has continued to slaughter over
seven hundred thousand nursing baby seal pups illegally. Even with
the US the biggest buyer of its gem diamonds. In 2002 Namibia
illegally exported 112 000 skins, when the quota was only 60 000,
without CITES approval. With CITES showing that Namibia has
exceeded its sealing TAC by over 26% since independence - clearly
indicating that sealers are not sealing according to set
TAC's.
◦
The mass die-off's in 1988, 1994 and 2000 - where the Minister of
Fisheries stated in 2001, "We know they are going to die, so why
not harvest them?", "We cannot afford to let them go to
waste", could have already resulted in the transmission of
serious health risks to both the livestock this "Seal/Fish-meal"
was exported into South Africa to feed, and the resultant risks to
human health, as no "health certificate" is required for these
exports to livestock. Fishery Ministers urging their citizens to
develop a taste for seal meat and supplied recipes - is
just plain irresponsible.
◦
With the mining industry the largest contributor to Namibia's GDP
at 20%, and De Beers the largest mining company and in partnership
with Namibia in diamond mining, completely opposed to sealing or
culling seals - can Namibia afford to continue and upset it biggest
mining partner and US market?
◦
The Cape fur seal population is one species of seal that occurs
between South Africa, Namibia and Angola - Namibia's unlawful
harvest of nursing protected baby seal pups, is therefore an
infringement on the constitutional rights of South Africans under
our own Constitution.
After Italy's win, the focus is now on South Africa to host
the 2010 Fifa World Soccer Cup and the high crime rate already
an issue and concern to millions of potential overseas supporters,
does Namibian think that images of "Africans in gum-boots standing
over struggling alive helpless nursing baby Cape fur seal pups and
plunging a knife into its chest or clubbing it with a pic-axe" will
instil confidence in the minds of these millions of potential
visitors, that Africa is a safe country, when images are beamed
into millions of peoples homes for the next four years - should
Namibia decide to not end sealing.
For the Seals
Francois Hugo Seal Alert-SA
021-790 8774
PRESS RELEASE
SEAL ALERT-SA, 11th July 2006.
Minister's
Statement Irresponsible - Risks Health of his Fellow
Namibians
Seal Processing Factory of a Namibian Sealing Concession
Holder
Francois Hugo of Seal Alert-SA, which has
started this campaign to end the Namibian Seal Cull, was shocked to
read of the Minister's reply yesterday, when he stated, "If culling
seals is a problem, the solution is to eat them".
Is the Minister not aware of the incident
reported in the Mail & Guardian in 1997, where his one of only
two concessionaires was caught attempting to process seal meat to
be sold as sausages for human consumption. The subsequent
impounding by Health Inspectors from the Ministry of Health or the
statement made by Albert Brink of Sea Lion Products at Cape Cross,
"criticised the move by health ministry to impound the meat, saying
it was unwarranted as no health certification was necessary".
Is he further unaware that the hundreds of
Jackals and Hyenas predating on the two mainland sealing colonies
have all tested positive or as carriers of rabies and canine
distemper virus. Is he aware at all, of the multitude of
viruses, diseases and parasites that seals can potentially carry,
such as Pox virus, Hepatitis, Influenza, Morbillivirus, Salmonella,
Mycobacteriosis, Staphylococcus, Clostridial, Mycotic, Candidiasis,
Sarcocystis, Toxoplasma, Lung, Stomach, Heart, and Hook worms,
and the resultant as yet, untested threats these could pose to
human health.
Is the Minister willing to risk an
outbreak similar to "bird-flu" or in this case, "Seal-Flu", for the
sake of two concessionaires who employ part-time a few unskilled
workers, whose culling at best benefits Namibian fishery by only
0.02%.
Francois Hugo of Seal Alert-SA therefore
urges not only the authorities in Namibia, but the Ministers in
South Africa and the general public - to call for an immediate end
to the Namibian Seal Cull and in addition, the resignation of the
Minister, before his irresponsible behaviour plunges this region
into another health crisis.
Disease, viruses and parasites, just waiting to happen
For the Seals
Francois Hugo Seal Alert-SA