Animal Rights

Animals in the Blogs & News: Sea Lions, Salmon, & Self-Criticism

Published March 05, 2009 @ 07:34AM PT

Activists Pry for Truth at Sea Lion Killing Press Conference from Planetsave

Fish-eaters, take note. It's not just wolves in Alaska. It's not just mountain lions in Nevada. It's also sea lions in Oregon and Washington, sea lions who are being killed because they eat too many protected salmon, a part of the manner in which they must eat to survive--yet humans, of course, aren't being asked to decrease the number of salmon they unnecessarily kill and eat. A report from Portland IMC tells us this:

Activists were there to ask the hard questions that are not being asked by the corporate media. Questions like, "Aren't you again raising the fishing quota this year, at the same time that you are talking about the need to kill sea lions?" "How many years in a row have you raised the quotas for commercial and sport fishermen?" "Didn't you just raise the quota to 13%, and didn't you say in your own documents that a 13% take by fishermen would pose 'no significant impact' to the salmon population? How, then, can you tell the public that the sea lions' alleged take of 4% of salmon poses a significant impact to the salmon population?" "Haven't sea lions always co-existed with salmon on the Columbia river, without posing a threat to either species?" "Isn't it true that dams and over-fishing are causing salmon to go extinct, not sea lions?""Why are you not addressing the salmon crisis in a non-lethal, and far more effective, manner by curbing fishing?" And many other questions.

Bizarrely, the corporate "reporters" stood mutely by while these questions were blatantly skirted by the people who organized this press conference. When one activist demanded answers regarding the raising of the fishing quotas at a time when salmon populations are imperiled, Diana Fredlund of the Army Corps of Engineers leapt between the questioner and the government "expert" who could not answer the question. Diana brusquely told the questioner that "we are not here to answer questions." . . . At a press conference. The corporate reporters never even batted an eye nor asked a single relevant follow up question. The same thing occurred again and again, as activists and indy reporters sought answers to legitimate questions about this very misguided program.

On another note, we have The Importance of Criticism from L.O.V.E. I'll give you the conclusion here, but you'll have to go to the original post to get the rest:

Having experienced this fear [that my previous activism was not effective], I understand why the leadership of the animal welfare movement is so scared of challenges. The fear is so strong that they instinctively reject any criticism and often react by personally attacking those bringing up concerns as a way to avoid addressing the criticism. While understandable, this is unfortunate, as it results in an insular community that values the false comfort of self-deception over the continued critical analysis necessary for effective advocacy.

Criticism is valuable because it offers us the choice to face the fears that we might not choose to face on our own. If we opt to consider the criticism, we have the opportunity to test and refine our understanding and thereby develop a stronger, more confident, deeper understanding of the issues. It helps us pierce the bubble of complacency that forms when we listen only to opinions that match our own. And it helps us move from a reactive doing that may be satisfying but not necessarily effective to a thoughtful, considered action more likely to advance our goals.

So as not to overwhelm you with too much at once, I'll feature more in a second post later today.

Share this Post

Related Posts

Comments (8)

  1. Luella -

    This has nothing to do with animal welfare in the first place, which is what Victor is talking about on LOVE. It's about "protecting" Obama's "natural resources" (a.k.a. human "welfare" or profit). What Victor is talking about is actually a lot more interesting and should concern people who actually do care about animals.

    Posted by Luella - on 03/05/2009 @ 10:46AM PT

  2. Stephanie Ernst

    Luella, I'm sorry (sincerely) if it seemed like I was trying to connect these two stories/posts together. I wasn't at all. These two were actually a part of a longer roundup of recent blog posts and stories that I split into two posts, with the second coming later, simply because the roundup was too long. I wasn't trying to draw any connections here.

    For the record though, this issue with the sea lions has nothing to do with Obama.

    Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 03/05/2009 @ 10:54AM PT

  3. Reply to thread
  4. Luella -

    There's nothing to be sorry about. I didn't read carefully enough. I am probably doing way too many things right now and should stop posting here so much.

    And for the record, it does have to do with Obama. In one of your recent posts you quote Obama as referring to endangered animals as "natural resources." That is what I was referring to.

    Posted by Luella - on 03/05/2009 @ 11:14AM PT

  5. Lisa Smolen

    Quotas.  Man-made quotas.  I would what would have become of this world if we'd actually LIVED IN IT in the first place. 

    Posted by Lisa Smolen on 03/06/2009 @ 12:43PM PT

  6. Lisa Smolen

    ugh, I hate when my fingers get ahead of me!!

    >>Quotas.  Man-made quotas.  I wonder what would have become of this world if we'd actually LIVED IN IT in the first place.

    Posted by Lisa Smolen on 03/06/2009 @ 12:44PM PT

  7. Julie Brown

    Hello,
    I must admit, I enjoy smoked salmon, baked salmon, etc.  When I was a kid, I thought sea lions were 'really cute', but like any wild animal, they can prove to be ugly.  What I have noticed is that the sea lion is as greedy as the commercial fisherman.  The average fisherman who has to buy a sport license, a boat license, fish food license, parking permit, and then can only catch a few, during a changing season. . . I think a bit of legislation, regarding ALL fishers, human/animal should be looked into.  The salmon that eat all of the fingerlings at Bonneville Dam in Oregon/Washington, which WE all pay for, is another matter.  You see, you might as well feed the sea Lions $10, $20, etc.
    Give it another thought. please.

    Posted by Julie Brown on 03/06/2009 @ 04:16PM PT

  8. CHRIS HOOYMANS

    The imbalances are not created by a few hundred sea lions. Humans take much much more salmon and other fish than any wild animals ever could.

    For instance here is some recent info on just Alaskas commercial salmon take, then add in Canada's commercial salmon fishing and widespread aboriginal fishing and sport fishing to get the full picture.

    "Alaska's commercial fisheries harvested 206.1 million salmon of all species in 2005, The highest harvest on record, 217.8 million salmon in 1995."

    Sustainabilty must become the watchword for all industries and all countries and if that means we take less, then we must take less.

    Posted by CHRIS HOOYMANS on 03/26/2009 @ 10:28AM PT

  9. CHRIS HOOYMANS

    The nice thing about being a human is that when the salmon stocks fail we can eat something else, the sea lions only really have fish on the menu, so if we destroy the salmon stocks through overfishing or polluting our rivers, what will they eat? Are you going to bring them a peanut butter sandwich?

    Julie  Brown says:
    "What I have noticed is that the sea lion is as greedy as the commercial fisherman."

    Nothing equals the greed of man. Are the sea lions filling freezers full of fish to sell to the sea otters now? Greed means to take more that you need for financial gain or power. I just can't imagine sea lions doing that.

    Posted by CHRIS HOOYMANS on 03/26/2009 @ 10:58AM PT

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author
Stephanie Ernst

Stephanie is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.