http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070315/seal_ban_070315/20070315?hub=TopStories

“The European Commission will be sending an inspection mission to a seal hunt in Canada, it announced Thursday, after dismissing calls for an EU-wide ban on the import of seal products.

Under pressure from the European Parliament, which demands an immediate moratorium on seal products, the commission also ordered a study to assess the welfare of seals.

Many EU legislators have blasted what they see as inhumane hunting tactics used to kill seal pups for their skins.

However, the European Commission said Thursday “there is no scientific evidence” of serious damage as a result of seal hunting.

“There must be a proper impact study before any action can be taken,” EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas told the European Parliament.

“If it is established seals are hunted in an inhuman way, a ban on export and the marketing of seal products will be considered.””

Nope. “Murder”, in the English language, refers to the willful killing of one human being by another. Seals are not human beings, any more than cows, squid, or tomatoes. You’re inventing a new definition for propaganda purposes, rather in the way American politicians are fond of reinventingthe word “war”.

Your adaptation doesn’t have quite the flow of its original cousin, “Meat is Murder”, used by militant PETA folks to try to put people off their dinners.

The issue you raise has been and is being hotly debated in Inuit political circles. The problem is, as SL points out, the Nunavut and Labrador hunts are two VERY different hunts. The Nunavut hunt has always been about subsistence: the real point is the seal as food, but the pelts pay the cost of the hunt. I suspect many Inuit are not pleased at the mass commercial harvests in Labrador and Newfoundland, and are reluctant to associate themselves with it. But you may be right – I think it’s a little naive to think they can successfully distance themselves in the eyes of the earnest German university students demonstrating in Belgium in “baby seal” costumes.

The idea that “Seal hunt = Evil” has become very firmly embedded in the media, and it is an easy target for legislators to show that they are “doing something” about the environment.

The Inuit may want to take a page from the RKBA organizations in the USA, who have fought gun bans successfully by not allowing themselves to be divided into hunters, competition shooters, collectors, and defensive firearm owners. There have been many attempts to get hunting organizations to say “Ban the other guys’ stuff, but leave us alone” and most of these have been rebuffed, allowing American firearms owners to make gains in RKBA protections in recent years. “We must all hang together or we shall surely hang separately.”

It seems like the Inuit here are pursuing a strategy similar to “Fair Trade Coffee” where premium prices are charged for a luxury in order to provide increased revenues to coffee growers and workers. I’m not sure how successful that will be, since sealskin carries with it a very bloody set of imagery that has to be overcome–and at the end of the day, I assume that there is nothing to distinguish Inuit sealskin from East-coast sealskin other than a label.

Personally, I’d go the RKBA route and combat the negative imagery of all seal hunts–possibly even set up a national organization that acts to properly market seal hunting against the negative stereotypes perpetuated by the champaigne animal-rights set. Making all seal hunting acceptable in the eyes of the consumer will pay bigger dividends that trying to say “ban their stuff, but leave ours alone.”