Information AboutWhaling |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT WHALING | |
| fisheries science | |
| whalingfisheries science | |
| whaling | |
| hunting | |
| cetaceans | |
| commercial fishing | |
|
Whaling is the harvesting of free-roaming , which protests the moratorium, was adopted by a slim majority. HISTORY OF WHALING s in the Arctic .]] See Also: History of whaling See Also: Whaling in Japan Whaling began in prehistoric times, and was initially confined to (near) coastal waters. Early whaling affected the development of many cultures. Although prehistoric hunting and gathering is generally considered to have low ecological impact, early whaling in the Arctic altered freshwater ecology.2 The development of modern whaling techniques was spurred in the 19th century by the increase in demand for whale oil, 3 and in the 20th century by a demand for whale meat. MODERN WHALING Whale oil is little used today, thus modern whaling has primarily commercial value as a protein source. The primary species hunted is the Minke Whale , the second smallest of the Baleen Whales . Recent scientific surveys estimate a population of 180,000 in the central and North East Atlantic and 700,000 around Antarctica. International cooperation on whaling regulation started in 1931 and a number of multi-lateral agreements now exist in this area, the International Convention For The Regulation Of Whaling (ICRW) of 1946 being the most important. The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was founded by the ICRW for the purpose of giving management advice to the member nations on the basis of the work of the Scientific Committee. Countries which are not members of IWC are not bound by its regulation and conduct their own management programs. The members of the IWC voted on 23 July 1982 to enter into a moratorium on all commercial whaling beginning in the 1985-86 season. Since 1992, the IWC Scientific Committee has requested of the IWC that it be allowed to give quota proposals for some whale stocks, but this has so far been refused by the IWC Plenary committee. Norway legitimately continues to hunt Minke Whale s commercially under IWC regulations, as it has lodged an objection to the moratorium. Canada Canada left the IWC in 1982 and as such is not bound by the moratorium on whaling. Canadian whaling is carried out by various Inuit groups around the country in small numbers and is managed by the Department Of Fisheries And Oceans . The meat obtained from this whaling is commercially sold through shops and supermarkets. There is considerable consternation amongst conservationists about the hunt. The Whale And Dolphin Conservation Society says "Canada has pursued a policy of marine mammal management which appears to be more to do with political expediency rather than conservation." Much of Canada's whaling activity was centered in British Columbia, all through the Straits and Sounds and throughout the Pacific. Some of the major whalers in British Columbia were Thomas Welcome Roys, James Dawson, and Abel Douglass . Caribbean whaling carrying meat of a Humpback whale caught in 2007]] Some whaling is conducted from Grenada , Dominica and Saint Lucia . Species hunted are the Short-finned Pilot Whale , Pygmy Killer Whale and Spinner Dolphin s. Throughout the Caribbean, around 400 Pilot Whale s are killed annually and their meat sold locally. The hunting of small Cetacean s is not regulated by the IWC. In Saint Vincent And The Grenadines on the island of Bequia the International Whaling Commission allows natives of the island to catch up to four humpback whales per year using traditional hunting methods and equipment. Faroe Islands See Also: Whaling in the Faroe Islands Whaling in the Faroe Islands has been practiced since at least the 10th century. It is strongly regulated by Faroese authorities and is approved by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). Around 950 long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala melaena) are killed annually, although mainly during the summer. Occasionally, other species are hunted as well, such as the northern bottlenose whale and Atlantic white-sided dolphin. The hunts, called grindadráp in Faroese, are non-commercial and are organised on a community level; anyone can participate. The hunters first surround the pilot whales with a wide semicircle of boats. The boats then drive the pilot whales slowly into a bay or to the bottom of a fjord. Most Faroese consider the hunt an important part of their culture and history, and arguments about the topic rarely fail to raise strong emotions. Animal rights groups criticize the hunt as being cruel and unnecessary. The hunters claim in return that most journalists do not exhibit sufficient knowledge of the catch methods or its economic significance. With the ongoing marine pollution from large industrial nations, some speculate that the Faroese people will be without this source of food. Greenland Greenland Inuit whalers kill around 175 whales per year, making them the third largest hunt in the world after Norway and Japan , though their take is only about one quarter of either Japan's or Norway's, which take 600 or more whales each year. The IWC treats the west and east coasts of Greenland as two separate population areas and sets separate quotas for each coast. The far more densely populated west coast accounts for over 90 percent of individuals caught. In a typical year around 150 Minke and 10 Fin Whale s are taken from west coast waters and around 10 minkes are from east coast waters. Iceland See Also: Whaling in Iceland Unlike Norway, Iceland did not lodge an objection against the IWC moratorium, which came into force in 1986. Between 1986 and 1989 around 60 animals per year were taken under a scientific permit. However, under strong pressure from anti-whaling countries, viewing scientific whaling as a circumvention of the moratorium, Iceland ceased whaling altogether in 1989. Following the 1991 refusal of the IWC to accept its Scientific Committee's recommendation to allow sustainable commercial whaling, Iceland left the IWC in 1992. Iceland rejoined the IWC in 2002 with a reservation to the moratorium. This reservation is not recognized by anti-whaling countries. In 2003 Iceland resumed scientific whaling. Iceland presented a feasibility study to the 2003 IWC meeting to take 100 minke, 100 fin, and 50 sei in each of 2003 and 2004. The primary aim of the study was to deepen the understanding of fish-whale interactions (the strongest advocates for a resumed hunt are fisherman concerned that whales are taking too many fish). The hunt was supported by three-quarters of the Icelandic population. Amid concern from the IWC Scientific Committee about the value of the research and its relevance to IWC objectives,4 no decision on the proposal was reached. However under the terms of the convention the Icelandic government issued permits for a scientific catch. In 2003, Iceland took 36 minke whales from a quota of 38. In 2004, it took 25 whales (the full quota). In 2005, the government issued a permit for a third successive year - allowing whalers to take up to 39 whales. Iceland resumed commercial whaling in 2006. The annual quota is set to 30 minke whales (out of an estimated 174,000 animals in the North Atlantic5) and nine fin whales (out of an estimated 30,000 animals in the North Atlantic 6). Iceland broke the IWC ban on commercial whaling on 22 October 2006 after Icelandic fishermen killed a 60-ton female fin whale.7 Indonesia Lamalera, on the south coast of the island of Lembata , and Lamakera on neighbouring Solor are the last two remaining Indonesian whaling communities. The hunters have religious taboos that ensure that they use every part of the animal. About half of the catch is kept in the village; the rest is traded in local markets, using barter. In 1973, the UN 's Food And Agriculture Organization (FAO) sent a whaling ship and a Norwegian master whaler to modernize their hunt. This effort lasted three years, and was not successful. According to the FAO report, the Lamalerans "have evolved a method of whaling which suits their natural resources, cultural tenets and style."8 Japan See Also: Whaling in Japan When the commercial whaling moratorium was introduced by the IWC in 1982, Japan lodged an official objection, but withdrew this objection in 1987 after the United States threatened it with sanctions. Thus, Japan became bound by the moratorium, unlike Norway, Russia and (more disputed) Iceland. In 1987 Japan stopped commercial whaling activities in Antarctic waters, {Link without Title} but in the same year began a controversial scientific whaling program (JARPA - Japanese '''R'''esearch '''P'''rogram in '''A'''ntarctica). JARPA continued until 2005, but was immediately replaced by a new program called JARPA II. Catches of Antarctic minke whales under JARPA II have doubled (from 440 to 880 a year, plus or minus 10%), and beginning in 2007/08 will add takes of 50 fin and 50 humpback whales a year. The Japanese government mainly justifies this type of whaling by asserting that analysis of stomach contents provides insight into the dietary habits of whales, analysis of whale ear plugs is the only accurate way to ascertain the age of a whale, the degree of interbreeding in the population can only be ascertained from tissue samples and examination of whale ovaries is required in order to determine the age of sexual maturity. However, this approach has been criticized by many scientists on the International Whaling Commission's Scientific Committee.Clapham et al. 2006, Marine Policy doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2006.09.004 Japan's scientific whaling program has remained controversial, with anti-whaling groups maintaining that the killing of whales is unnecessary for scientific purposes and that the real reason for the scientific kills is to provide whale meat for Japanese restaurants and supermarkets. Countries opposed to whaling have raised similar concerns and passed non-binding resolutions in the IWC urging Japan to stop this program. The Japanese government points out that hunting of whales for research purposes is specifically sanctioned under IWC regulations and that those regulations specifically require that whale meat be fully utilized upon the completion of research. In 1994, Australia attempted to stop some of the Japanese whaling program by enforcing a 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) around the Australian Antarctic Territory . However, Antarctic territories are not generally recognized internationally. In particular, the Antarctic Treaty , to which Australia is a signatory, specifically states that all claims to Antarctic territories remain unresolved while the treaty is in force (the treaty was originally devised to prevent conflict between the USSR and USA during the Cold War ). Legal advice obtained by the Australian government indicated that attempts to stop Japanese whaling in the Australian Antarctic Territory by resorting to international courts may, in fact, have led to Australia losing its claim to that territory. In 2002, Japanese whalers took five Sperm , 39 Sei , 50 Bryde's and 150 Minke Whale s in the northern catch area and 440 Minke whales in the southern catch area. The catch was carried out under the IWC's special license for whaling research. In 2005 Japan announced that they would significantly expand their whaling. With the adoption of this plan, Japan’s take will include 100 Sei Whales, 10 Sperm Whales, 50 Humpback Whale s, 50 Fin Whale s, and 50 Bryde’s Whales, some of which are considered endangered, along with 850 (+/- 10%) Minke Whales which are not classified as endangered.9 The most vocal opponents of the Japanese push for a resumption of commercial whaling are Australia and the United States, whose stated purpose for opposing whaling is the need for conservation of endangered species. See also: International Whaling Commission for more details on controversy surrounding the Japanese whaling program. Norway See Also: Whaling in Norway Norway has registered an objection to the International Whaling Commission moratorium, and is thus not bound by it. In 1993, Norway resumed a commercial catch, following a period of five years where a small catch was made under a scientific permit. The catch is made solely from the Northeast Atlantic Minke Whale population, which is estimated to consist of about 110,000 animals. Norwegian Minke Whale catches have fluctuated between 503 animals in 1997 to 546 in 2006. Prior to the moratorium, Norway caught around 2,000 Minkes per year. The North Atlantic hunt is divided into five areas and usually lasts from early May to late August. Norway exports a limited amount of whale meat to the Faroes and Iceland. It has been attempting to export to Japan for several years, though this has been hampered by legal protests and concerns in the Japanese domestic market about the effects of pollution in the blubber of the North Atlantic Minke Whale . In May 2004, the Norwegian Parliament passed a resolution to considerably increase the number of Minkes hunted each year. The Ministry of Fisheries also initiated a satellite tracking programme of various whale species to monitor migration patterns and diving behaviour. The tagging research program has been underway since 199910 Russia Russians in Chukotka Autonomous Okrug in the Russian Far East are permitted under IWC regulation to take up to 140 Gray Whale s from the North-East Pacific population each year. United States In the United States whaling is carried out by Alaskan natives from nine different communities in Alaska. The whaling programme is managed by the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission which reports to the National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration . The hunt takes around 50 Bowhead Whale s a year from a population of about 8,000 in Alaskan waters. Conservationists fear this hunt is not sustainable, though the IWC Scientific Committee, the same group that provided the above population estimate, projects a population growth of 3.2% per year. The hunt also took an average of one or two Gray Whales each year until 1996. The quota was reduced to zero in that year due to concerns about sustainability. A review set to take place in the future may result in the hunt being resumed. The Makah tribe in Washington State also reinstated whaling in 1999, despite intense protests from animal rights groups. Bycatch and illegal trade Since the IWC moratorium, there have been several instances of illegal whale kills by IWC nations. In 1994, the IWC reported evidence from genetic testingBaker, Scott. Report to the International Whaling Commission (1994) of whale meat and blubber for sale on the open market in Japan in 1993.11 In addition to the legally-permitted minke whale, the analyses showed that the 10-25% tissues sample came from non minke, baleen whales species, neither of which were then allowed for take under the IWC rules. Further research in 1995 and 1996 shows significant drop of non-minke baleen whales sample to 2.5%.12 In a separate paper, Baker stated that "many of these animals certainly represent a bycatch (incidental entrapment in fishing gear)" and stated that DNA monitoring of whale meat is required to adequately track whale products.13 It was revealed in 1994 that the Soviet Union had been systematically underreporting the number of whales it took. For example, from 1948 to 1973, the Soviet Union killed 48,477 Humpback Whale s rather than the 2,710 it officially reported to the IWC.14 On the basis of this new information, the IWC stated that it would have to rewrite its catch figures for the last forty years.15 According to Ray Gambell, the Secretary of the IWC at the time, the organisation had raised its suspicions of underreporting with the former Soviet Union, but it did not take further action because it could not interfere with national sovereignty.16 In 1985, an activist organization, Earthtrust , placed undercover employees on Korean fishing vessels who took photographs of both fin and right whales being hunted and processed in violation of the ban.17 THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST WHALING Debates over whaling have drawn more world-wide attention and debate than for any other animal group. Whales are long lived (up to 200 years for some species) and slow to mature making establishing a sustainable catch difficult for many species, especially for species and stocks which have been depleted by industrial whaling. Whales have value both for tourism and to whalers and — as many whales are migratory — the value of an individual whale to each industry may be different across its range. International debates have focused on issues of ownership, conservation, sustainability, and national sovereignty. Also raised in debates is Cetacean Intelligence and the level of Suffering which the animals undergo during harvest. Since the International Whaling Commission (IWC) 1986 ban on whaling, the value of lethal sampling of whales for scientific research and to establish catch quotas has also been debated. Finally, the value of whaling to fisheries as a method of controlling whales' perceived negative impact on fish stocks is another point of debate. Conservation status The sharpest point of debate over whaling today concerns the conservation status of hunted species. Today there is widespread agreement around the world that it is morally wrong to exterminate a species of animal. The unregulated whaling before IWC introduced regulation and ban had depleted a number of whale populations to a significant extent and several whales species were severely endangered. Past ban on these species of whales which were implemented around 1960s has helped some of these species to recover, according to IUCN's Cetacean Specialist Group (CSG). "Several populations of southern right whales, humpbacks in many areas, grey whales in the eastern North Pacific, and Blue Whales in both the eastern North Pacific and central North Atlantic have begun to show signs of recovery."18 Other species, however, in particular the Minke Whale, have never been considered endangered and still other species or certain population group within particular whales species have shown signs of recovery. Still, those opposed to whaling argue that a return to full-scale commercial whaling will lead to economic concerns overriding those of conservation, and there is a continuing battle between each side as to how to describe the current state of each species. For instance, conservationists are pleased that the Sei Whale continues to be listed as endangered but Japan says that the species has swelled in number from 9,000 in 1978 to about 28,000 in 2002 and so its catch of 50 Sei whales per year is safe, and that the classification of endangered should be reconsidered for the North Pacific population. Some North Atlantic states have argued that Fin Whales should not be listed as endangered any more and criticize the list for being inaccurate.19 IUCN has recorded studies showing that more than 40,000 individuals are present in the North Atlantic Ocean around Greenland, Iceland, and Norway.20 As there is no information about Fin Whales in areas outside of the Northern Atlantic where they still hold the status of being endangered. Whale conservation statuses as determined by The World Conservation Union ( IUCN ) is shown below. Note that, in the case of Blue and Gray Whales, the IUCN distinguishes the statuses of various populations. These populations, while not regarded as separate species, are considered sufficiently important with respect to conservation.21.22 The Data Deficient category is not included. Value for research Since the 1986 IWC ban on whaling, Japan has conducted its whaling by issuing scientific research permits. The value of "lethal sampling" of whales is a highly contentious issue. The aim of the Japanese JARPA research program is to establish sustainable whaling in Antarctic Ocean''. Reporter/Producer: Dr Jonica Newby. (Transcript and full program available online). Lethal sampling is required to obtain age information, which can be reliably gathered by looking at the ear plug in the head of the dead animal. However, all other information can be gathered through non-lethal means. Dietary information can be gathered from analysis of whale faeces. Gender, reproductive status, and population profiles can be gathered from non-lethal Biopsies . Within the IWC, age data is not needed to establish a catch limit for whaling, which is the stated goal of the Japanese research. The IWC requires information on population structure, abundance and prior whaling history, all of which can be obtained through non-lethal means. Major discoveries claimed by JARPA 1 include: they have found the Population Structure of Minke Whales in Antarctic is healthy; they have detected change in the Ecosystem of Antarctic Ocean; and they have found "very low level" of contaminants in minke whales.24 Some of the research includes a paper named ''Fertilizability of ovine, bovine, and minke whales spermatazoa intracytoplasmically injected into bovine oocytes''. According to a review in 2006 by ABC TV 's '' Catalyst '', of the 18 year JARPA I program, which lethally obtained samples from 6800 whales, less than 55 peer reviewed papers were produced, 14 that could be relevant to goals of the JARPA program, and only 4 that would require lethal sampling. Joji Morishita of JARPA has said the number of samples was required in order to obtain statistically significant data. Method of killing Farming whales in captivity has never been attempted and would almost certainly be logistically impossible. Instead, whales are killed at sea often using hunters on safari. Whalers also say that the free-roaming lifestyle of whales followed by a quick death is less cruel than the long-term suffering of factory-farmed animals. In response to the UK's opposition to the resumption of commercial whaling on the grounds that no humane method of killing whales exists, or "is on the horizon", the pro-whaling High North Alliance points to apparent inconsistencies in the policies of some anti-whaling nations by drawing comparisons between commercial whaling and recreational hunting. For instance, the United Kingdom allows the commercial shooting of deer without these shoots adhering to the standards of British slaughterhouses, but says that whalers must meet these standards as a pre-condition before they would support whaling. Moreover, Fox Hunting , in which foxes are mauled by dogs, is legal in many anti-whaling countries including Ireland, the United States, Portugal, Italy and France (although not in the UK) according to UK Government's Burns Inquiry (2000). Pro-whaling nations argue that they should only have to adhere to the lowest standards (such as for the UK Red Deer hunts), and draw the conclusion that the cruelty argument is a mere expression of cultural bigotry, similar to the Western attitude towards the eating of dog meat in several East Asian countries.25 The economic argument The , Uruguay , Australia , and New Zealand also support proposals to permanently forbid whaling South of the Equator, as Indonesia is the only country in the Southern Hemisphere with a whaling industry. Anti-whaling groups claim that developing countries which support a pro-whaling stance are damaging their economies by driving away anti-whaling tourists. Pro-whaling advocates argue that the economic analysis assumes unsustainable whaling by arguing that whaling deprives the whale watching industry of whales. Whalers counter that if whales are hunted on a sustainable basis, there is no competition between the two industries and that communication between any whaling fleet and whale watching boats would ensure that whaling and whale watching occurred in different areas. Pro-whaling advocates also argue that whaling continues to provide employment in the fishery, logistic and restaurant industries and that whale blubber can be converted into valuable Oleochemical s and whale carcass can be Rendered into Meat And Bone Meal . Poorer whaling nations argue that the need for resumption of whaling is pressing. Horace Walters, from the Eastern Caribbean Cetacean Commission stated, "We have islands which may want to start whaling again - it's expensive to import food from the developed world, and we believe there's a deliberate attempt to keep us away from our resources so we continue to develop those countries' economies by importing from them."26 Intelligence See Also: Cetacean intelligence Animal intelligence |
|
|