Seals blamed for lack of cod recovery

Cull the seals, I'd rather have the cod.

The funny part about it all is that the animal rights groups are trying to stop the single greatest form of population control there is, humans.

Impossible, seals would never do that after all they're just cuddly, warm and fuzzy animals that only bring delight and joy to all who see them.

Pamela Anderson told me so.

Thanks for the morning chuckle!

Unfortunately, many well-meaning and naive people get hoodwinked into supporting the agendas of hard core activists who prefer seals over humans, Iranian oil over our own product, media lies over reality.

It’s an oft repeated pattern that is swallowed by some of our basement dwelling posters.

Well, from the oil argument, I for one am thoroughly against the northern gateway pipeline to Kitimat not so much because I prefer Iranian oil, but because of my years sailing the north coast and scale of devastation that a tanker leak up there would cause not to mention the degree of difficulty for cleaning it up.

So an tanker leaking Canadian oil would pose more of a problem to you than a tanker leaking Iranian oil in the same place?

I'm sure there are other options Gunny.

Getting a pipeline to a Canadian coast from Alberta is something we should do.

The Yanks seem to prefer to import oil from the blood-oil ME states, we can return the favour by shipping our oil to China and the pacific rim nations without it crossing into the US.

Damn Americans and their Special Forces!

Why Kitimat? Why not Rupert with direct access to open ocean. Why crude? Why not refine it first?
Bart, look at a map. We don't import oil on the West Coast.

http://www.centreforenergy.com/factssta ... rgyMap.asp



http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/sources/p ... arket/1358



According to Canadian sources, you do.

And, like the last site notes, Canadian barges (tankers) transport oil via ocean routes to BC coastal and off-shore locations.

So like I said, what's the big deal about oil being spilled from Iran when Canadian (and other) oil is already being shipped about the region anyway?

Because to get to PR you'd have to cross some very difficult terrain with high avalanche hazard. Costs more and has it's own set of hazards. But PR is the better port and closer to Asia too. How many pipelines are you going to build to ship all those refined products. But what should be done is the bitumen upgraded to heavy oil. Maybe that's what you meant? Just a quicker buck to ship the bitumen, and the Chinese love it because it creates more jobs for them. And Canada is all about the quick buck.

Kinder Morgan is all poised to double its existing pipeline to Vancouver. Far less regulatory hassle. Vancouver would have to upgrade it's port to handle the Suez class tankers, but otherwise it's an easy go. Much longer distance to Asia tho.

So an tanker leaking Canadian oil would pose more of a problem to you than a tanker leaking Iranian oil in the same place?

Appreciate you going out of your way to be obtuse.