TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

It is conceivable that during special permits whaling operations, aspects of the ‘sampling’ method render these hunts less humane that conventional commercial whaling. For example, special permits issued by Japan may allow the use, in certain circumstances, of the cold harpoon 5 , the weapon that was banned for commercial whaling by the Commission over 20 years ago as a result of concern over the protracted times to death which result from its use. Furthermore, Japan has stated that the harpoon is aimed at the thoracic region of the whale during special permit whaling as this provides a larger target area than the head (IWC 1999). It may also be the case that the requirement for preserving the ear-plugs of whales taken during Japanese special permit whaling may influence this choice of targeting the harpoon at the thorax and only targeting the head with the rifle during secondary killing. In which case, this ‘sampling’ technique may have a negative impact on time to death. It is now common practice within the scientific community for research involving animals to be subject to independent ethical review. It is also common that this ethical review process should seek, as a key aim, mechanisms for reducing the number of animals involved (chapter 13). Japan and Iceland have failed to submit their research to an ethical review process, and have not presented any mechanism for reducing the numbers of animals involved. In fact, the number of animals taken under special permit by Japan is increasing significantly. The expansion of the JARPN programme to include both more individual animals and a greater variety of species does not accord with the basic principles of ‘Replacement’, ‘Reduction’ and ‘Refinement’. Special permit whaling presents a unique case, since the products of this research are sold commercially and thus a degree of economic incentive is implicit. Japan has proved unwilling to subject the data from its special permit whaling operations to comprehensive peer review. It can be argued that the science of special permit whaling is fundamentally flawed due to the fact that commercial, political, social and cultural factors appear to significantly influence the experimental design of this research. The research priorities appear to pivot around justifications for the resumption of commercial whaling, rather than a desire to evaluate the many threats that cetacean species now face. This political drive has been most profoundly felt in Japan’s ‘Whales eat Fish’ argument. In simple terms, Japan claims that whales need to be culled in order to reduce their impact on global fish stocks, ultimately to benefit human fishers. This is now a primary focus of much of the current research. However, many scientists specialising in ecosystems dispute the validity of Japan’s claims, stating that the biggest single threat to the world’s fish stocks is over-fishing by humans. Moreover, an IWC Modelling Workshop on Cetacean-Fisheries Interactions concluded that the current early state of development of computer models and the existing poor data quality mean that reliable management advice cannot be given on the impacts of cetaceans on fish, or visa versa, at this stage (IWC 2002a). The future of whaling There is currently no strict independent monitoring or regulation of whaling activities. There is also no independent verification of the data collected in relation to welfare. This significantly hinders robust scientific analysis of the various welfare aspects of whaling activities. It is also possible that whaling may develop further outside of the auspices of the IWC (the only international body with the relevant mandate). NAMMCO 6 has been developed by the whaling nations in the North Atlantic as a management body (see chapter 7) and Japan has explored the WHALING & WELFARE 129
130 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIES possibility of establishing a similar body in the Pacific. To some extent it may appear that the development of such bodies is a political ploy; a threat to the IWC if it does not develop in the direction that the whalers desire. The question then arises as to how such bodies would take welfare matters into account. The face of whaling in the 21st Century is changing. There is already considerable ongoing whaling activity occurring outside of the IWC and significant attempts to blur the distinction between aboriginal and commercial hunts. New categories of whaling are evolving to fill the niche of conventional commercial whaling. One such category is special permit whaling (see chapter 13). It is also feared that a change in Japanese law to permit the commercial sale of whales caught in nets may provide an incentive for fishermen (who have neither the training, nor the equipment), to kill rather than release ‘bycaught cetaceans’. The consumption of whales caught in nets is permitted in other countries conducting whaling (see chapter 6). Other technological changes may include the use of noise to drive the animals 7 . The products of bycaught whales and whales taken under special permit are sold commercially in Japan, helping to stimulate the market for cetacean meat. This further promotes the market in cetacean products, which is also filled by small cetacean hunts and further fuels the desire to trade cetacean products internationally. Welfare potential of whaling operations A killing method that is truly painless and causes minimum distress to the animal can be classified as ‘humane slaughter’ and, therefore, a process with the potential for high welfare. From the analysis in chapter 12, it is clear that there are a number of factors inherent in current whale killing methods that mitigate against the potential for high welfare. These include the initial pursuit, and the difficulties involved in hitting a distant, largely submerged, moving target from a moving platform at sea. The killing methods themselves are often not well adapted for the species taken, or the variability of size between individuals of the same species. The significance of these variables and the inadequacies of the methods used are reflected in the poor instantaneous death rates, and average times to death, and the need for secondary killing methods during all types of whaling operation. In summary, when assessing the welfare potential of whale killing methods using accepted principles of humane slaughter, it is clear that current whaling operations have a low welfare potential, and are likely to cause pain and suffering in many hunted cetaceans. Other mammal hunts Whaling is sometimes compared to other mammal hunts and proponents of commercial whaling may even suggest that whaling compares favourably with such other hunts. Comparisons of this nature are highly contentious, inappropriate and outside of the scope of this book. However, two things are noted: First, most whaling is unlike the majority of other mammal hunting because it is a government-sanctioned and financially supported activity. Therefore, governments can be expected to shoulder the responsibility for the associated welfare concerns. Second, a culture of change can be identified in the hunting of some other mammals, whereby best management practices (BMPs) are being adopted with the intent of giving attention to animal welfare, safety for huntsmen, the public and other wild animals. These BMPs demonstrate that
Page 1 and 2:
TROUBLED WATERS A REVIEW OF THE WEL
Page 3 and 4:
II A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
Page 5 and 6:
IV A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
Page 7 and 8:
2 A REVIEW REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IM
Page 9 and 10:
4 A REVIEW REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IM
Page 11 and 12:
6 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATI
Page 13 and 14:
8 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATI
Page 15 and 16:
10 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84: 78 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
Page 105 and 106: 100 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICA
Page 133: 128 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICA
Page 145 and 146: Appendix II Colour plates ©Mark Vo
Page 149 and 150: Figure 13. Processing minke whales
show all

TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?