Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

The Ethics of Eating Non-Human Animals


  • Please log in to reply
354 replies to this topic

#181 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,561 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:38 PM


  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#182 GodzillaDeuce

GodzillaDeuce

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:45 PM

http://youtu.be/KqqSj31zYR4


Posted Image

big meat eater just went to the top of the list of movies to watch
  • 0

well I'm sorry that gd is soo perfect


#183 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,002 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:34 PM

this thread makes me want foie gras.... not sure why.
  • 0

#184 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:13 AM

And moral values are things we can know. We know they are properties which supervene on states of affairs e.g. moral wrongness supervenes on an act of rape. That means they are cognitive in nature. That means they can be true or false. That means if rape is wrong, you ought not to do it. It is the sensible thing to do.

In any event, you only begged the question because you provided no argument showing that moral values are non-cognitive in nature.




It has become apparent that you are out to lunch. The video displays states of affairs. States of affairs are what is the case. What is the case are facts. Hence, the video displays facts.




http://youtu.be/GxV35EZ1px4

Now exactly what is an appeal to emotion:

source

It is common practice to dehorn livestock. source. And the practice can cause significant agony. The videos are evidential support for my arguments because i) they show how cattle dehorning is commonly practiced and ii) cattle dehorning does cause significant agony.

The videos are clearly evidential support fr this claim: given the agony cattle dehorning causes weighed against the reasons for subjecting animals to it, we have sufficient moral reasons not to act this way.


Hence, it is not an appeal to emotion.


Stop arguing about this unless you enjoy thinking like a nincompoop.




Given what I have shown above this is a non sequitur on your part. Given how difficult it is for you to understand what facts are, I'm not surprised you don't apply fallacies properly either.

In other words, the moral wrongness of the videos isn't predicated on emotion. The support the arguments I've given because they show what is the case.




Funny that you say this and yet somehow I've managed to complete a masters degree in philosophy on this very topic. In any event, rather than point fingers, you need to think more carefully. And change your name.


You never got my point. I suggest you look up the definition of ethics in a dictionary. Do you know that even intelligent people are capable of unethical behavior? Again intelligence does not equal to ethics.

I also want to know where you bought your masters degree in philosophy?
  • 0

Posted Image


#185 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,561 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:26 AM

Posted Image

big meat eater just went to the top of the list of movies to watch

By all means do! The Big meat Eater is a locally made sci-fi musical cult classic. Released in 1982, it was set in 1950's Burquitlam, "the small appliance capital of Canada".

Here's another musical number from the movie.


  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#186 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:29 AM

I mean that biologically humans eat meat. When found in our natural environment (some remote tribes actually do still exist) humans hunt and consume meat. Our digestive systems are made to consume it. A healthy, natural diet includes meat. It is also a part of many cultures.

Obviously suffering to animals should be minimized. That's why people like Temple Grandin are respected.

That it can not be eliminated does not mean that eating meat must be eliminated.


I agree. Humans are technically omnivores (closely associated with carnivores) and their body is designed to consume both meat and plants as food. In fact, most herbivores have large cecum with large number of bacteria which would help in the enzymatic breakdown of plant materials like cellulose. While the body of carnivores or a human has reduced cecum. There is a reason why we can't properly digest some plants such as corns or beans. There is a reason why we have four canine teeth and incisors for grinding and tearing. We are designed to consume meat and our body functions optimally when we do have meat in our diet. Obviously we could also function with just eating plants too, since our body is designed for consumption of both plants and meat.
  • 0

Posted Image


#187 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,011 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:54 AM

You are only partially right in a particular sense. Biologically speaking, an argument can be made that humans evolved eating meat. That led to evolutionary adaptations such as brain size, etc. This is a fact that I don't dispute. However, that fact is quite different from the claim about whether it is biologically necessary to eat meat. Obviously it isn't, and even high performance athletes don't need to. Protein, however, is necessary to sustain a healthy diet. So what you should have said, is that a healthy, natural diet includes protein.

Precision Nutrition has a two part article about plant based diets geared specificlly for high performance athletes/fitness types. If you don't know much about nutrition, you should find it informative.



Yes. So based on this, wouldn't eating meat that comes from factory farms fly in the face of minimizing suffering to animals? Shouldn't you at least try to exclude meat produced by these practices?



Not sure I follow you here. I don't think I ever said that eating must be eliminated, all together. Certain practices e.g. factory farming, ought to be.



It has nothing to do with "moral superiority". It has to do with doing the right thing. If that means recognizing the sensible and intelligent thing to do and acting rationally in accordance with these beliefs, then I guess yeah, some of us are intelligent whereas others are stupid. I used to eat meat before. I didn't really know any better. But once I realized how animals produced for meat are treated, the choice was easy. Sometimes you gotta face the facts.


Who says I don't? The cheapest highest quality meat is always going to be locally sourced anyways so it's not like it's a big challenge.

If your issue is factory farming instead of eating what you would assume to be my hairy brother then you might gain a bit more sympathy.
  • 1

#188 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:55 AM

Ok there's very little you've said here that is correct so lets go through it.

The video uses local anesthetics AND it is performed by a veternarian. By contrast, common practices for cattle dehorning do NOT use local anesthetics OR have it performed by veternarians (who have a professional obligation to mitigate animal suffering).

The problem is you keep saying the video you posted is common practice when in reality that's not the truth. Now having said that farms that practice that method should be avoided all together. Most large farms that mass produce do not use the method you posted because it is inefficient even with the small added cost but again big, medium or small if they are not taking care of their product then they should be avoided.

It is a straw man on your part to say that I implied always. I did say that cattle dehorning is commonly practicised. Within this practice I implicitly assumed without local anesthetics or veternarians. It is a standard practice, especially on large industrialized dairy farms. Why? Because local anesthtics and veternarians are expensive. If you want clarification that's fine. I'm not gonig into great detail here because I prefer simplicity over gory amounts of detail. Still, my points all follow.

1. You don't know what a straw man is do you? Your implications are pretty clear; I've misrepresented nothing and I've argued your point not some made up point.
2. It is common practice to take the horns off of cows. The method you posted is not common practice. Veterinarians are not necessary to use the method that is actually commonly practiced and the local is actually reasonably cheap and the tool is literally just a soldering iron...or even less invasive is with a paste.
3. You clearly prefer simplicity...it's too bad you don't prefer the whole truth.


You've only showed that cattle dehorning can be practicied in a more humane way. I never said that this wasn't or couldn't be the case. I did say that the less humane way of cattle dehorning is a common practice. That fact stands. So you havn't really demonstrated anything, other than trying to cherry pick non standard examples. You easily forget that everything you say is still consistent with what I have been saying all along. Keep trying though.

The facts do stand and the facts are that the method you posted is not the common method for the practice of dehorning cattle. It's also not any cheaper as it creates a much greater chance at an infection.
You've also blathered on about pain and agony when that is also not the case. Not more that if you catch your skin while clipping your nails.

Oh and as for my arguments, funny that you are now ridicule them and yet you already have rationally accepted them.

Your arguments are being ridiculed because they are worthy of ridicule. I are now? And no I haven't accepted many if any of your arguments. You bring up interesting topics that have the potential for discussion but that's quite different than accepting your poor arguments. I wish you were being more rationale but you have an agenda and a personal point to make...but you've gotten in the way of it.

In short for the TL;DR folks. -You're claims are wrong -You confuse common practice with common method -You haven't the slightest idea what a straw man is.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 06 November 2012 - 09:51 AM.

  • 4
Posted Image
Posted Image

#189 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,011 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:57 AM

I agree. Humans are technically omnivores (closely associated with carnivores) and their body is designed to consume both meat and plants as food. In fact, most herbivores have large cecum with large number of bacteria which would help in the enzymatic breakdown of plant materials like cellulose. While the body of carnivores or a human has reduced cecum. There is a reason why we can't properly digest some plants such as corns or beans. There is a reason why we have four canine teeth and incisors for grinding and tearing. We are designed to consume meat and our body functions optimally when we do have meat in our diet. Obviously we could also function with just eating plants too, since our body is designed for consumption of both plants and meat.


Function? Sure. Thrive? Meh. Be happy? For me not so much.

Could people eat less meat? Sure. In fact, with how things are going economically, they will.
  • 0

#190 thepedestrian

thepedestrian

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 339 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 06

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:27 AM

That video above was really silly. That is how you dehorn a large animal though. Its a frack up though and expensive. That vet costs alot to pay and that video doesn't show how long it really takes a vet to do it. Plus animals with horns are kind of assholes for the rest of their life because they've learned that if they smash their head around they can bully the other animals. You want to do them when they are young. Between 3-7 days with caustic paste. Xylazine is used as a sedative on many farms. Why? The animal doesn't rub off all the paste. It turns out the best way to minimize the calves "agony" is also the cheapest and most profitable. :)

Another thing that they're also doing is breeding for animals born without horns to lose the cost all togethor. This is not very common yet.
  • 0

#191 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,792 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:43 AM

Silly Goose seems to be obsessed with getting meat from horny animals.
  • 0
Posted Image

#192 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,002 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:47 AM

The more cows we eat the less methane they get to release (especially veal), and the less impact on climate change. Vegans are destroying the world by trying to preserve cows and their methane production, melting the ice caps and killing polar bears.
Posted Image
  • 0

#193 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:33 PM

The problem is you keep saying the video you posted is common practice when in reality that's not the truth. Now having said that farms that practice that method should be avoided all together. Most large farms that mass produce do not use the method you posted because it is inefficient even with the small added cost but again big, medium or small if they are not taking care of their product then they should be avoided.


I didn't say that the wire method in the video specifically is common practice. Cow dehorning without local anesthetics is. That coupled with cowdehorning in general is common practice. Go read through my posts and do I say anything about the wire method specifically? NO. Again, you are mischaracterizing my position.

If you want clarification e.g. "are you saying that the wire method is common practice?" all you have to do is ask.


2. It is common practice to take the horns off of cows. The method you posted is not common practice. Veterinarians are not necessary to use the method that is actually commonly practiced and the local is actually reasonably cheap and the tool is literally just a soldering iron...or even less invasive is with a paste.

You've also blathered on about pain and agony when that is also not the case. Not more that if you catch your skin while clipping your nails.


Cow dehorning with a soldering iron

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/undercover-video-cow-dehorning-9660948

Quite painful looking if you ask me.

Consider these facts:

A 2007 USDA report shows that hot irons had become a more popular dehorning method during the same period. Sixty-four percent of dairy operations that dehorned cattle used hot irons in 2007, compared to 40 percent 11 years earlier. Fewer than 20 percent of dairy operations that dehorned cattle used analgesics or anesthesia during the process.

Source
So local anesthetics are not common.

  • All methods of physical dehorning cause pain and side effects.

source

Dehorning calves is preferable, and it is statisticly more common on large dairy farms (500+ cows). Even so, it is quite painful. Ask Temple Grandin:

"It's a lot of stress and we should be giving them a lot of anesthetics. The research is clear. The dehorning is the single most painful thing we do."


So where does this leave us? Cow dehorning is painful without anesthics. That is common practice. We do it so we can use animals for food. Ethically speaking that is not justified.
  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#194 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,002 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:51 PM

I didn't say that the wire method in the video specifically is common practice. Cow dehorning without local anesthetics is. That coupled with cowdehorning in general is common practice. Go read through my posts and do I say anything about the wire method specifically? NO. Again, you are mischaracterizing my position.

If you want clarification e.g. "are you saying that the wire method is common practice?" all you have to do is ask.




Cow dehorning with a soldering iron

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/undercover-video-cow-dehorning-9660948

Quite painful looking if you ask me.

Consider these facts:


Source
So local anesthetics are not common.


source

Dehorning calves is preferable, and it is statisticly more common on large dairy farms (500+ cows). Even so, it is quite painful. Ask Temple Grandin:


So where does this leave us? Cow dehorning is painful without anesthics. That is common practice. We do it so we can use animals for food. Ethically speaking that is not justified.

just as a point of contention, we do it so they don't kill each other, not so we can use them for food. with or without the meat industry cows would be dehorned, unless you are trying to say they should just be released into the wild to become food for wild animals...
The Horns can pose a risk to humans, to other animals, and to the bearers of the horns themselves (horns are sometimes caught in fences or prevent proper feeding).
  • 0

#195 thepedestrian

thepedestrian

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 339 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 06

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:30 PM

So where does this leave us? Cow dehorning is painful without anesthics. That is common practice. We do it so we can use animals for food. Ethically speaking that is not justified.


Make sure you buy your meat from a farm that uses the paste/anesthetic then. Problem solved.
  • 0

#196 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

just as a point of contention, we do it so they don't kill each other, not so we can use them for food. with or without the meat industry cows would be dehorned, unless you are trying to say they should just be released into the wild to become food for wild animals...
The Horns can pose a risk to humans, to other animals, and to the bearers of the horns themselves (horns are sometimes caught in fences or prevent proper feeding).


The risks involved are predicated on the context of the overall practice. If there is less demand for cheapy dairy products, then you don't need intensive industrial dairy operations. Risk of injury, like you say, is high. Get rid of the industrialized practice and you end up with alot less cattle being dehorned.

If mom and pop wanted to have a few dairy animals, and assuming they are not treated cruelly, I wouldn't be absolutely against dehorning (assuming local anesthetics and the least invasive methods are used). Some animal rights advocates would object to having dairy animals in the first place, but as long as they are not treated like perpetual milk makers and they are not sperated from their calves, I'm not against it. Dehorning is tricky though because it is a painfull thing to do. The best thing to do is to not have to do it at all. There are ways which you can accomplish that as well.
  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#197 Monty

Monty

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,595 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:41 PM

I really wish there was a Fuddruckers outside my office window right now.
  • 2

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#198 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:43 PM

Make sure you buy your meat from a farm that uses the paste/anesthetic then. Problem solved.


But do most people do this? No. Most people don't even recognize this as morally obligatory.

Further, I've mentioned that it is unclear whether painless killing makes slaughtering animals for morally permissable. If I painlessly killed my cat because I think a fur hat would looko good, would the painless killing be sufficient justification? The experiences an animal has seem important. Whether those experiences are important to the animal itself is another discussion.
  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#199 goalie13

goalie13

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,076 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:47 PM

But do most people do this? No. Most people don't even recognize this as morally obligatory.

Further, I've mentioned that it is unclear whether painless killing makes slaughtering animals for morally permissable. If I painlessly killed my cat because I think a fur hat would looko good, would the painless killing be sufficient justification? The experiences an animal has seem important. Whether those experiences are important to the animal itself is another discussion.


No. You would have to eat your cat as well, otherwise it would be wasteful.
  • 0
Posted Image

#200 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,561 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:44 PM

The more cows we eat the less methane they get to release (especially veal), and the less impact on climate change. Vegans are destroying the world by trying to preserve cows and their methane production, melting the ice caps and killing polar bears.
Posted Image

Not to mention all the methane the infernal vegan's create themselves with all the damned damned fruits, veggies and grains that the consume. damned vegans are burning a hole in the sky with their diet.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#201 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:32 PM

Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image

#202 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:40 PM

Posted Image

So if I would eat a dog it's ok for me to eat a turkey?

Well where is the line?

Do you use plastic bags? Well then you might as well eat meat because plastic bags utilize animal fat. Hope you don't take your bike anywhere because several bike tires (and car tires) use stearic acid. Don't get me started on if you've ever enjoyed fireworks or don't research shampoo, toothpaste, sugar, fabric softener, beer, wine, glue, biofuel, marshmallows. And let me add that if your residence catches fire don't you dare use a fire extinguisher because if you do you might as well be eating meat.

Stupid arguments beget stupid arguments.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 10 November 2012 - 02:47 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#203 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

Not to mention all the methane the infernal vegan's create themselves with all the damned damned fruits, veggies and grains that the consume. damned vegans are burning a hole in the sky with their diet.


Truth.

I had vegan hotdogs the other night. Not only would I not feed them to my dog even though the smell was shockingly (or not) similar to his dog food but I'm pretty sure I am the cause of a new hole in the ozone directly above my house.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#204 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,679 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:51 PM

Posted Image


Because PETA's a bunch of loonies who don't understand the difference between pets and food.
  • 1

#205 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,679 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:52 PM

Stupid arguments beget stupid arguments.


Stupid people also beget stupid arguments, but that's just my take on life.
  • 0

#206 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:18 PM

My take...Stupid people are often confused by the word beget. ;)
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#207 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,679 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:39 PM

My take...Stupid people are often confused by the word beget. ;)


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=beget
  • 0

#208 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:52 PM

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=beget

Why do I get the feeling we're going in different directions here. You do know I was following your lead with a joke and not taking a jab at you right? Or did I miss a jab?

I'm having an aspie day today it seems.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 10 November 2012 - 03:56 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#209 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 10 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

I'm a big meat eater, thank you ma'am, I'm a big meat eater, pass the ham.
  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#210 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,679 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 10 November 2012 - 05:05 PM

Why do I get the feeling we're going in different directions here. You do know I was following your lead with a joke and not taking a jab at you right? Or did I miss a jab?


It was meant as a joke to anyone who didn't know the word "beget" and wanted to look it up. We might be going in different directions in other threads, but in this one, it looks like smooth sailing for you and me :)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.