TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

For example, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, represented by Denmark, and Japan strongly oppose any action by the IWC on small cetaceans. They have not permitted the IWC’s Scientific Committee or its Working Groups and Workshops on Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues to examine their hunting practices, and have ignored IWC guidance (personal observation). These countries do not appear to have carried out conclusive research into the sustainability of hunts. Japan is thought to be putting huge pressure on small cetacean populations (see section on The Japanese Dall’s porpoise and Baird’s beaked whale hunts later in this chapter) and there are growing concerns about the status of beluga and narwhals which are hunted in Greenland but for which no quotas are set. Most small cetacean species live in coastal waters and several Latin American countries have resisted IWC actions on small cetaceans, claiming conflicts with their sovereignty over their 200-mile exclusive economic zones (EEZs). Recently, however, most of these countries have recognised the importance of the IWC’s work on small cetaceans, and have contributed to it constructively. Within the IWC, the decision as to which species is considered to be a small cetacean is not set by any specific criteria. Some inconsistencies have resulted. For example, the toothed Baird’s beaked whale has generally been considered to be a small cetacean despite reaching a size of 12.8 metres (42ft). Conversely the toothed North Atlantic bottlenose whale and the baleen minke whale, both about 10 metres (33ft), are considered to be ‘great whales’ and it is accepted by all countries that they are protected by the moratorium on commercial whaling. It is recognised that this type of anomaly can result in difficulties in determining what appropriate regulations do apply and there is clearly a need for a more uniform approach to be taken. This would enable regulations to be more readily applied. History of small cetacean action by the IWC The IWC set up a sub-committee on Small Cetaceans of its Scientific Committee in 1974, and has created a valuable database of information on small cetaceans. It has reviewed the status of species after species and made constructive recommendations to assist with conservation strategies. Until 1986, however, the Commission itself took no specific action to conserve or manage small cetaceans. In 1986, the Technical Committee of the IWC, in an effort to reduce the cruelty of the pilot whale hunt, called on the Faroese government to minimize the use of the gaff or whaling hook, restrict the use of the hook from boats, and reduce the number of official ‘whaling’ bays used in the hunts. The Faroese government enacted these recommendations only in part (IWC 1988). Concerned about the high numbers of Dall’s porpoises being killed in Japanese waters and responding to concerns of Japanese scientists about the sustainability of the hunt, in 1990 the IWC adopted its first ever resolution on small cetaceans with only one vote against – that of Denmark representing the Faroes. The resolution called on the government of Japan to reduce the takes of Dall’s porpoises to at least the levels taken before 1986, approximately 10,000 per year (IWC 1990). Japan abstained on the vote. The Commission has thus formally demonstrated its competence to make management recommendations on small cetaceans and, since 1990, has passed numerous other small cetacean resolutions. Repeatedly, the IWC’s working groups and workshops on whale killing methods and associated welfare issues have examined the Faroese pilot whale hunt and expressed concern about the THE SMALL CETACEAN DIMENSION 55
56 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIES methods used to kill these whales. Despite the Commission making numerous requests for submission of information on the killing methods used, the government of the Faroe Islands has been reluctant to submit data for international examination and peer review (IWC 1999). Similarly, Japan has consistently refused requests for information on the methods used in its hunts of whales, dolphins and porpoises and has also physically absented itself from some IWC discussions of its hunts (IWC 2000). At the 2003 IWC meeting, Greenland stated that it would not comply with a request to bring data from its small cetacean hunts to the next meeting. The politics of small cetaceans and the IWC Japan’s small cetacean hunting has been found to be linked to its large cetacean hunting and the commercial sale of these whale meat products. It would appear to have used its small cetacean hunts to try to influence the Commission to grant a coastal commercial whaling quota despite the moratorium. When criticised because the scale of the Dall’s porpoise hunt had reached nearly 40,000 animals, Japan stated that unless the Commission granted it a coastal minke whale quota, it would be compelled to kill even more small cetaceans (IWC 1989). Japan has used the issue of small cetacean competence to enable it to continue hunting Baird’s beaked whales despite the moratorium on commercial whaling, and despite the size of this species. By persevering with the argument that the IWC has no competence to set catch quotas for this large whale, Japan forced the issue off the IWC’s agenda in 1993. Japan has used this hunt to help maintain its capability to hunt large whales in it coastal waters in the hope that the moratorium will be overturned in the future. Traditionally, Dall’s porpoise products were used for local consumption in Japan. In the mid-1980s, as catch numbers rose, Japan’s big whaling companies started trading in porpoise meat, allegedly to compensate for the reduction in availability of products from the larger whales resulting from the moratorium. Most importantly, their intention was to maintain the demand for whale products in the hope of resumed commercial whaling (EIA 1999). Much of the small cetacean products have been openly sold as ‘little whale’ or ‘whale’, or been mislabelled as ‘minke whale’ (EIA 2002). The Faroes government has used the ‘traditional’ description of the pilot whale hunt to provide political support for this hunt, and has involved itself in the campaign to overturn the moratorium. For example, in a challenge to the IWC and the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in 2003, the Faroe Islands imported minke whale meat from Norway despite the CITES ban on international trade in whale products and the IWC’s moratorium (Associated Press, 25 March 2003). The Faroese government was also at the centre of the establishment of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO), an organisation that challenges the right of the IWC to manage whales and whaling globally, and which aims to control the management of cetaceans in the North Atlantic (Grindabod 1993). Small cetaceans and their killing methods – two case studies Small cetacean hunts around the world are largely unregulated. Even in Japan and the Faroe Islands, countries with high standards of living, there is little legal regulation of hunting of small cetaceans. Faroese pilot whale hunt Pilot whales have been killed in the Faroe Islands for over 400 years and it can be appreciated that in
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 59: 54 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
Page 105 and 106: 100 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICA
Page 111 and 112:
106 A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICA
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Appendix II Colour plates ©Mark Vo
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Figure 13. Processing minke whales
show all

TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?