Talk:Brown fur seal

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Brown fur seal is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Africa: Angola Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Angola (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Is it not true that the name of the animal has been changed to "South African fur seal"? Then I think that this article should be moved to South African fur seal; any thoughts? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 15:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it indeed true that these animals live at 2000 feet depth? I have added the metric measure, but I question the fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BbGideon (talk • contribs) 17:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Human interaction - Reference to Namibian cull seems inflammatory and biased.

"inflammatory and biased"? What do you want it to say -- that the seals' population is thankfully reduced by the hard work of pup-clubbers doing the work by hand? That the buyer is a great guy for paying poor Africans a fraction of the price Western designers will pay for the pelts? Come on. 50.14.33.235 (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat agree with the initial statement, although I don't personally want to try to reword it, since I'm generally against seal-harvest. The exception to this is regulated culling for population/damage control. The Namibia harvest IS regulated & the STATED purpose is to prevent over-population from damaging the fishing industry, although it APPEARS to be more monetary. However, there is truth to those reasons. Seals are voracious fish eaters & their population is in no way endangered or being harmed by the cull. Amost every reference except Wiki, such as the very trusted "iucnredlist", lists the population MUCH higher than in the disputed paragraph here. Wiki says 1 million, which seems low for a declared "Least Concern" species, a fact which Wiki agrees with. All other common sources range from 1.5 to 2.2 million, NOT including the smaller Aussie sub-species. And this figure is breeding population only, not adding in pups, juveniles, elderly "out-of-the-game", etc. Adding those in, the total population is likely between 3 & 4X the "now only a million" Wiki figure. The culling figures given don't even sound legit. "Around 85,000 a year", then, "until 2019, will be a million pups." That last figure would HAVE to mean 1 million for that entire period, which would be 125,000+/- each year. If the sole reason of the cull is monetary, as the offending paragraph implies, then surely the "businessmen" would take advantage of that remaining 40,000 per year they are allowed. Judging by all this, I would have to agree that the ONE offending paragraph seems to have a good deal of POV/Bias to it. But as previously mentioned, I only agree with the dispute, but won't try to correct it. Being as I am not usually for culling/killing seals, anything I did would most likely be biased also. But that's not appropriate for Wiki. Off-subject ... sarcasm directed at anothers statement of concern isn't necessary. Looking at your talk-page, you should already know that however. 98.159.69.146 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:05, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arctocephalus pusillus - SE Tasmania.jpg to appear as POTD

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Arctocephalus pusillus - SE Tasmania.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 23, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-02-23. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

A brown fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus) hauling-out on the Hippolyte Rocks off the coast of Tasmania. These large seals, which can measure over 2.2 metres (7 feet) in length, feed mostly on fish but are also known to eat squid and crabs.Photograph: JJ Harrison

Archive – More featured pictures...

is the Cape Fur Seal a 'seal' or a 'Sea Lion'? It has external ears like Sea lion! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.22.161.126 (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brown fur seal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080827225931/http://blog.lukaesenko.com/2008/07/17/cape-cross-seal-colony/ to http://blog.lukaesenko.com/2008/07/17/cape-cross-seal-colony/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brown fur seal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140701092909/http://www.botany.uwc.ac.za/envfacts/facts/seal.htm to http://www.botany.uwc.ac.za/envfacts/facts/seal.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]