You be the judge.

As far as I am concerned this is sickening!

Click here (http://stuff.co.nz/4005389a11.html).

If you have a spare 11 mins (or so), watch this video (http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/593718/) ..... you'll see the man himself (Talley that is) ... and a few unhappy conservationists! (Click beneath the picture.)

Wow, bold words. What a jackass.

Whoa. After reading the article, I am not sure I could stomach the video.

it's not like this a government official... he owns a seafood company, big deal... he's still bound by the laws... let him speak his peace...

interesting how the synopsis at the top ranked these issues... and what is mmp?

MMP, stand for "mixed member proportional" it's the way we elect our government. Generally, the way it works is we vote for the member of parliament and also the party we want (which isn't necessarily the one our preferred member belongs to!). The member with the most votes is elected to a seat and depending on how many votes each party gets they'll also have a certain number of non electorate members taken from a party list, the so called "list MP's" 'tis very confusing!!!


As for Peter Talleys talk :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: fur seal diet studies show that these animals target very few commercial fish species and as for whaling..............................:ma d: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

And yes WK of course he's entitled to his opinion but he really need to do his research BEFORE he spouts off! Often the way quota's get assigned in NZ means that fishing companies get the last access to the Minister who sets quota's so actually this chap and others like him have a great deal of influence over these issues, but they are completely blinkered by commercial concerns. This is the same man who said that there is absolutely no evidence to show that bottom trawling does any damage!!!!!

J

:mad: :mad: :mad:

Do you think that if we sent Mr. Talley an anonymous letter informing him that 'Ph'nglui inglw'naf Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah' nagl fhtagn' is a magic spell for getting rid of seals and greenies, he'd bite?

MMP (http://www.elections.org.nz/mmp.html) = mixed-member parliament, our governing system. Until the stars are right, anyway. :cthulhu:

Wow, I find it terrifying that there is a man like that and that he's talking to high school kids, why would anyone let him do that?

Well, feedback is mixed (http://stuff.co.nz/4005389a11.html#feedback)....

What a D.S.

The feedback (http://www.stuff.co.nz/4006258a4621.html) pours in!

Whoa. After reading the article, I am not sure I could stomach the video.

I'm with you. I couldn't watch it after reading his obscene comments. I'll bet his company violates all kinds of regs.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

The video is an old 20/20 piece we did in 2005

Ok...didn't watch, just read the accompanying article.( The tv and computer are in the same room, and my husband is watching.) I guess we can say about that Talley monster, once and ass always an ass.

Honestly, when i read the kill and eating seals bit... i laughed because this man is just trying to get someone's goat...

.... and an update (http://stuff.co.nz/4007794a7693.html) on the Talley tyrade.

As an aside, more bad (http://stuff.co.nz/4007509a7693.html) news for seals, this time in Canada.

Sometimes I do feel like becoming a vegetarian!

as for the canadian hunt, as long as it's well managed, closely watched and most importantly - sustainable, i say let them do their thing...

the anti seal hunt mob is the posterchild for 'save an animal because it's cute' category...

Humans find it hard to survive on greens alone. To wish to eat an animal, you will need to kill the animal, or alternatively amputate it, reducing its q.o.l. greatly in the process.

I am willing to kill or have killed an animal for food, provided it's done swiftly and with limited stress or pain, it had a good life up to the moment of death (anthropomorphism, I know, but we're not that physiologically distinct for the most part) and I don't take its entire habitat with it, that's just a basic premise. I take up a substantial amount of habitat by existing in a developed, mechanised society. As people we will have a great impact on our surroundings, BUT DOES IT REALLY HAVE TO BE SO MUCH MORE THAN IS COMPLETELY NECESSARY????

The return of all caps Olaf "500,000,000 people looks like historically sufficient for one planet" Blaauw

For me, the size of the animal is also important. If you kill one steer, many people can be fed, several times, from that one death. A salad with prawns, or baby octopus, involves the taking of many lives (some of which may be left on the plate and thrown away!!), and probably won't even fill one person, once! This is one of my main reasons for avoiding seafood. (Edit: Many of) the animals are just too small.

:twocents:

For me, the size of the animal is also important. If you kill one steer, many people can be fed, several times, from that one death. A salad with prawns, or baby octopus, involves the taking of many lives (some of which may be left on the plate and thrown away!!), and probably won't even fill one person, once! This is one of my main reasons for avoiding seafood. The animals are just too small.

:twocents:

Some of them aren't that small, for example toothfish, black spotted groper and some of the tunas. Of course harvesting larger animals tends to be linked to sustainability concerns.

With all food animals there is also the factor of how efficiently it is used i.e we can feed more people on fewer animals if we use as much of each one as possible.

One interesting point I've noticed people have different views on is whether intentionally raising an animal for slaughter or taking one that has lived it's lilfe in the wild (assuming no sustainability concerns) is more 'right'. I have heard arguments both ways.

Some of them aren't that small, for example toothfish, black spotted groper and some of the tunas.

True. But with fish like tuna, there are many other issues, such as whether we should be removing a top predator from the ecosystem, and I believe the heavy metal levels in tuna flesh (concentrated up the trophic levels) are now so high that they are not actually recommended for regular human consumption any more (http://www.oceansatlas.org/servlet/CDSServlet?status=ND0xOTE5NyY2PWVuJjMzPS omMzc9a29z)?

One of the postgrads here, Ann Bui, did a survey of heavy metal contamination in snapper, kahawai and school shark last year. She found excessive levels of cadmium, copper, zinc and lead in BOTH FISH FILLET AND LIVER tissues from fish collected in Manukau Harbour and Hobson Bay, Waitemata Harbour - two very popular fishing spots.

Levels of these three metals exceeded NZ/Australia standards for these heavy metals. The tragic thing is that the smallest fish (snapper ~ 20cm length) exceeded these levels EVEN IN FILLETS!

I'm in the process of editing Ann's report so that we can get it out in the public domain. You have to be extremely careful with what you eat!

Tis a shame.... tilefish is ubertasty.... but i am conscious of what i'm getting into in that case (old fish :hmm: but on the plus side it's so far in between samplings)

Where do those two popular fishing spots sit in relation to estuaries/ heavy industrial sites?

So, you're telling me I should have my junmai dai ginjyo without the buri toro sashimi? Anyway, heavy metals are a main concern when exposed via inhalation, mostly in heavily industrialised areas and places with high natural background, such as Fuchu province in Japan. Lead is most dangerous of the lot, leading amongst others to significant morbity in pregnancies. Ingestion is less dangerous, as only 10% of the ingested metal actually makes it into the bloodstream, but one should take into account that the half-life of lead in healthy individuals is 25 to 40 days.

10 half-lives for complete eradication, so sushi once a year only?

No, it's chronic exposure at high levels that is the culprit with lead, cadmium, and the likes.

To round things up, no one wants excess of naturally occurring levels of heavy metal in their system, bar our friends Dethklok, but as with every hazard, exposure (external and relevant internal!) defines risk, not the hazard itself.

If I therefore hear a fisherman explain he doesn't trawl an entire seamount, merely its slopes (summit accounting for 10%, that leaves 90% to destroy) the hazard times exposure takes on an extremely nasty risk quality in my book...

"The hunt is a humane operation closely monitored by Ottawa, clubbing seals is the best way of killing them, and it supports a traditional way of life, they say."

What does tradition have to do with anything even remotely relevant? Ridiculous.

"Hearn said the hunt helped keep numbers under control and protect fish stocks. "

I have a better way to protect fish stocks. Stop fishing them!



.... and an update (http://stuff.co.nz/4007794a7693.html) on the Talley tyrade.

As an aside, more bad (http://stuff.co.nz/4007509a7693.html) news for seals, this time in Canada.

Sometimes I do feel like becoming a vegetarian!

:banghead: :sad: :cry:

Ugh. Wow...

I agree. Toren, you have the right of it...I stopped eating fish two years ago, yeah, I know...p*ssing in the wind, but hey, at least I feel better about it, and I get to rant and rave in restaraunts !

i think that we should be able to hunt them, but we shouldn't go out and slaughter them and ahiallate the spiecies. there should be a limit like they put on deer or fish.

There is not one legimate reason to hunt seals.

Don't even get me going...I'm already in dutch.

For me, the size of the animal is also important. If you kill one steer, many people can be fed, several times, from that one death. A salad with prawns, or baby octopus, involves the taking of many lives (some of which may be left on the plate and thrown away!!), and probably won't even fill one person, once! This is one of my main reasons for avoiding seafood. (Edit: Many of) the animals are just too small.

:twocents:

How can you justify eating one steer if it has been raised on fish meal made from many thousands of prawns/krill/fish? The best conservation is to eat the lower trophic levels. The argument for eating large individual animals to satisfy several people in one meal also is wrong - we should eat the small fish, leaving the breeding stock.

One of the postgrads here, Ann Bui, did a survey of heavy metal contamination in snapper, kahawai and school shark last year. She found excessive levels of cadmium, copper, zinc and lead in BOTH FISH FILLET AND LIVER tissues from fish collected in Manukau Harbour and Hobson Bay, Waitemata Harbour - two very popular fishing spots.


Check out the mecury levels in trout from the volcanic plateau area - particularly Rotorua, Taupo & downstream Waikato River. The levels have been well known since the 1960s but strangely the studies have never been widely publicised. From memory the amount of fish that is safe to eat from some of the Rotorua lakes is less than 30 gm per day, 120 g/d from Taupo: you don't read that in the travel posters! . . . . and we won't even mention the radioactive isotopes derived from burning coal and dumping the residue ash waste which leached into the Waikato River- one (apocryphal?) story is that a :shock: student sent samples overseas for testing on a whim and the testers contacted them urgently saying the Nuclear Powerstation upstream must have a leak. Any thought of testing your fish samples for isotopes?

Yipes. Glowing fish.

Ban everything!

M, thanks for the tip; no, we haven't done that yet. Greg, those lentils look might appealing don't they.

What does a lentil look like in fish nets?

I am switching from a carbon-based life form to silicon, and no longer need oxygen. I have bacteria in my mouth that convert filth air into food.

What can I eat? Harvesting wheat kills tens of thousands of field mice, growing lentils takes up valuable habitat, now lost to insects and small mammals. Wild fruits and nuts only? (Please pass on my apologies a priori to my friends the fruitbats)

Five years ago or so, a friend who works in a lab for Game and Fish started noticing high levels of pollutants in the farm raised trout and smallmouth bass...all of which are released in Arizona lakes and streams for gamefishing.

The levels were....500X the EPA limit. 500 times. :shock:

We are lucky enough to live near a "natural/organic" food store, with locally grown and raised produce, some of the farmer's a friends of mine, which gives us a bit more of a feeling of safety, but still...

Anybody ever figured out a way to live on air?

There is not one legimate reason to hunt seals.

other than food or clothing. wait heres an idea! seal ranches. by eating them from ranches farmers would breed more and thus contribute to the overall population. it worked for the americann bison

How can you justify eating one steer if it has been raised on fish meal made from many thousands of prawns/krill/fish? The best conservation is to eat the lower trophic levels. The argument for eating large individual animals to satisfy several people in one meal also is wrong - we should eat the small fish, leaving the breeding stock.

last i checked there wasn't exactly a shortage of krill:roll:

i could be wrong

There's also no shortage of natural krill predators, large and small, that should be eating the krill before we get anywhere near it.

last i checked there wasn't exactly a shortage of krill:roll:

i could be wrong

There's an enormous krill fishery in Antarctic (http://www.lighthouse-foundation.org/index.php?id=176&L=1) waters these days. Yes, we are fishing down the food chain, further afield and deeper.

Bob, you shall inherit a biological desert, and will soon be eating bacteria patties.

Just think of how much vegemite you'd have to spread on those!:shock:

There's an enormous krill fishery in Antarctic (http://www.lighthouse-foundation.org/index.php?id=176&L=1) waters these days. Yes, we are fishing down the food chain, further afield and deeper.

Bob, you shall inherit a biological desert, and will soon be eating bacteria patties.

Ouch! Smackdown!:razz:

Okay, that might have been somewhat impolite of me...

There's an enormous krill fishery in Antarctic (http://www.lighthouse-foundation.org/index.php?id=176&L=1) waters these days. Yes, we are fishing down the food chain, further afield and deeper.

Bob, you shall inherit a biological desert, and will soon be eating bacteria patties.

this reminds me of the global cooling scare in the 70's. no offence, just expressing my opinion.

There is also phenomenon called global dimming; I always assumed this was a description of the constantly developing intellectual qualities of human environmental decision making :wink:

Tsk, tsk, naughty (http://stuff.co.nz/4080806a13.html) Amaltal Fisheries (and once again, the Talley name!).

Is one company bring all into disrepute? We seem to hear a lot about this Talley lot down under!

Sigh (http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/nelsonmail/4088331a6510.html)! More bad news from Sanford Fisheries re oil/diesel spills!

Re Talley, I just have to post this (found online)

That is absolutely beautiful! :roflmao:

" Are we not men?"

DEVO

I love seafood and there is no perfect way of determining what types of seafood is better to eat than others. The Monterey Bay Aquarium began a Seafood Watch program detailing the 'safest' fish to eat based on collection method and sustainability as well as the fish to 'avoid' based upon the same criteria. Obviously, the safe fish of today could probably end up being the fish to avoid to tomorrow (funny how everything is cyclic). It is a good start though. Since the fishing industry is a multi-billion? dollar industry, the only way of lessening the strain on the ocean is educating the consumers. If certain parts of the world choose not to order shark fin soup, the demand is no more, and thus there is no money in shark finning. A very difficult task to accomplish but it is not impossible. Fishermen will continue to fish and earn money for their families however they need to. And on and on...

Greg

What can I eat? Harvesting wheat kills tens of thousands of field mice, growing lentils takes up valuable habitat, now lost to insects and small mammals. Wild fruits and nuts only? (Please pass on my apologies a priori to my friends the fruitbats)

Soylent green anyone? :wink:

Talley's (http://stuff.co.nz/4096481a10.html) in the news again, this time for sexual discrimination and inequity in pay.

They must be spending a fortune on lawyers!

If certain parts of the world choose not to order shark fin soup, the demand is no more, and thus there is no money in shark finning. A very difficult task to accomplish but it is not impossible. Fishermen will continue to fish and earn money for their families however they need to. And on and on...

Greg

There are a couple of other ways for fisherman to use their skills to earn money too though. A program on sharks in the meditteranean was showing fisherman that were paid just to collect and tag gulper sharks. Supposedly these sharks are good to eat. I don't eat seafood dont ask me. The point of this was so that the next season, when they went fishing for gulper sharks to sell for food, the ones they pulled up that were tagged were measured and thrown back as opposed to sold and eaten. This was good in two ways because it helped research those glowing eyed sharks, and kept some of them that were tagged ( and probably mature and able to reproduce) from being killed. And I am so sure that the whole shark is eaten too. Just another quick note, I do not pretend to know more about anybody on ANY subject, but I am afraid of what is happening in our oceans, At this point it is pretty widely accepted that life began in the oceans, would it be illogical to assume that what lives in it should be very highly regarded?? How much food do we all throw away everyday?? the book of useless imformation says that the average human consume 6 elephants worth of food in a lifetime, 60,000 pounds. Really?? Is that how much we actually eat or is that how much we put on our plates?

I think the green peace is being a bit too violent, but don't get me wrong they are doing the right thing. Shouldn't there be "blue peace" dealing with this?