An effective process which induces immediate unconsciousness <strong>and</strong>insensibility or an induction to a period of unconsciousness without distressIn livestock slaughter, there is clearly the potential for the stunning procedure to cause pain ifperformed improperly. It is essential that unconsciousness is induced quickly, so that the animal isunaware of the process. It takes more than 100 milliseconds for the brain to register the perception<strong>and</strong> experience of pain. To be effective, <strong>and</strong> thereby painless, unconsciousness must be inducedwithin this period for the stunning method to be classified as humane. The only exception would beif the induction period of unconsciousness could be shown to be non-aversive (Wotton, 2001).Modern stunning practices in slaughterhouses using properly designed mechanical <strong>and</strong> electricalequipment <strong>and</strong> executed by trained professionals can achieve this level of effectiveness.For the killing of a whale to be classified as humane, immediate unconsciousness or immediate deathmust be induced <strong>and</strong> no pain <strong>and</strong> suffering should be caused during the pursuit <strong>and</strong> securing of theanimal. However, Norway reported for the 2002 hunt, an instantaneous death rate of 80.7 per cent(i.e. 19.3 per cent of the whales taken were not killed instantaneously) <strong>and</strong> an average time to deathof two minutes 21 seconds. For the Japanese Antarctic hunt, recent data compares unfavourably withthese Norwegian reports. During the 2002/2003 season, Japan reported that some 59.8 per cent ofthe whales killed did not die instantaneously, <strong>and</strong> average time to death during this season was twominutes 37 seconds. Maximum times to death during whaling operations can be excessive, asdemonstrated by the report of a minke whale that took 300 minutes to die (five hours) during theaboriginal subsistence hunt in West Greenl<strong>and</strong> 3 (chapter 6).In comparison, legislation in the UK, for example, states that it is an offence to subject animals toavoidable excitement, pain or suffering before <strong>and</strong> during slaughter. Furthermore, with the exceptionof specific circumstances such as religious slaughter, animals are required to be stunned beforeslaughter (Druce <strong>and</strong> Lymbery 2002). Stunning is defined in this legislation as “any process whichcauses immediate loss of consciousness which lasts until death”. The IWC has no comparativerequirements, either for ensuring ‘avoidable excitement, pain or suffering’ or for pre-slaughterstunning. The only protection which cetaceans have been afforded during slaughter under theInternational Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) was the ban on the use of the coldharpoon for commercial whaling implemented in the early 1980s. Japan (<strong>and</strong> the RussianFederation) still hold a formal objection to the ban 4 <strong>and</strong> are thus exempt from its effect. Japan stillpermits use of the cold harpoon in its scientific whaling operation under certain circumstances (seechapter 6). Russia’s objection is redundant since it only undertakes aboriginal subsistence whaling towhich the ban does not apply.A COMPARISON BETWEEN SLAUGHTERHOUSES AND METHODS USED DURING WHALING97The ban on the use of the electric lance during whaling operations is only voluntary 5 . Furthermore,the electric lance was never intended as a pre-slaughter stunning device. It was administered after thewhale had already been injured <strong>and</strong> secured using a grenade harpoon <strong>and</strong> was administered as asecondary killing method. Concerns regarding the inefficiency of this method in supplying sufficientcurrent to the brain to induce death (due to many factors, including the dissipation of the currentthrough the surrounding sea water, the inappropriate placement of the electrodes <strong>and</strong> the insulatingnature of blubber) lead to the voluntary ban on the use of this device 6 . However, Japan continues touse electricity during the hunting of small cetaceans such as the Dall’s porpoise (chapter 7).For livestock, EU <strong>and</strong> other state legislation dem<strong>and</strong>s accuracy in the slaughter process in order to
affect an immediate <strong>and</strong> thereby lawful stun. Killing methods used during whaling aim to bringabout death by one of the following processes: direct disruption of the brain nervous tissue or heartmuscle by projectiles, hypovolaemic shock from blood loss through injury, ischaemia (inadequateblood supply to an organ or tissue) or neurotrama caused by the blast-generated pressure waves fromexploding penthrite (Knudsen <strong>and</strong> Øen 2003). However, efficiency of the slaughter method dependsentirely on the shot placement <strong>and</strong> how well the weapon used is adapted for the species taken (Anon2003b). In comparison to the degree of precision required in many states for the slaughter of foodanimals, the methods used during whaling are subst<strong>and</strong>ard. For example, during whaling operationsblood loss occurs as the result of various combined injuries, rather than the accurate severing ofmajor blood vessels.Some methods for religious slaughter of animals are legal in a number of countries including the UK,for example, which as a special exception omits the requirement to stun animals prior toexsanguination. Nonetheless, there are still legal safeguards to ensure that this type of slaughter iscarried out without prolonged suffering. This includes methods for restraining the animal beforeslaughter, ensuring that a captive bolt instrument is available for use in cases where an animal may besubject to avoidable pain <strong>and</strong> suffering or may be agitated or injured. In cases where stunning doesnot precede religious slaughter, the knife must be inspected before each incision to check that it issufficiently sharp <strong>and</strong> it must be ensured that both the carotid arteries <strong>and</strong> jugular veins are severed.Such provisions for the welfare of these slaughtered animals again exceed those of current whalingpractices.98A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIESGuarantee of non-recovery from stunning until death ensuesPre-slaughter stunning has been legally defined as “any process which, when applied to an animal,causes immediate loss of consciousness which lasts until death” (EU, 1993). In a two-stage slaughterprocess, the death of the animal is brought about by severing the major blood vessels to cause bloodloss or by irreversible destruction of the function of the brain or spinal cord. To bring about humaneslaughter through bleeding, it is essential that once an animal is stunned, it is bled as quickly aspossible to prevent recovery before or during the bleeding process (Wotton, 2001). Alternatively, thestun/kill method may be used, when the electrical current is applied both to the head <strong>and</strong> to thechest to cause both insensibility <strong>and</strong> cardiac arrest (Druce <strong>and</strong> Lymbery 2002). There are currentlyno practices exercised during whaling operations that would categorically ensure that the animals arestunned <strong>and</strong> therefore insensible to the pain from the commencement of the slaughter process.Scientific <strong>and</strong> practical studies have identified methodologies for recognising an effective stun inlivestock animals. Following an effective captive bolt stun, for example, the animal shouldimmediately collapse, become rigid, <strong>and</strong> its eyes should have a fixed, glazed appearance. There shouldbe no positive corneal (eye) reflex <strong>and</strong> no rhythmic breathing. For electric stunning methods, aneffective stun is indicated by the presence of epileptic fitting, no rhythmic breathing, rotation of theeyes, <strong>and</strong> uncontrolled involuntary motor activity (kicking) (Wotton, 2001). These methods can beused to ensure that animals are stunned effectively <strong>and</strong> remain unconscious until dead.During the 1980 Workshop on Humane Killing Techniques for <strong>Whale</strong>s, the IWC adopted thefollowing criteria for determining death during whaling operations: relaxation of the lower jaw or noflipper movement or sinking without active movement (Anon 1980). Various interpretations of thesecriteria have subsequently been made (Butterworth et al. 2003). The assessment of death using these
- Page 5 and 6:
ForewordWhales are highly evolved a
- Page 7:
1 Executive SummaryThis review exam
- Page 11 and 12:
2 A background to whalingPhilippa B
- Page 13 and 14:
y the weapon’s enormous recoil, w
- Page 15 and 16:
Japan currently whales in the Antar
- Page 17 and 18:
Otto, K. 1997. Animal Pain Behaviou
- Page 19 and 20:
Protecting the welfare of animals i
- Page 21 and 22:
Toothed whales (Odontoceti)Toothed
- Page 23 and 24:
Social behaviourMother-calf pairsOn
- Page 25 and 26:
to store and pass on information to
- Page 27 and 28:
Communication in great whalesThe mo
- Page 29:
Self-awarenessOne of the most compe
- Page 32 and 33:
J.G.M. Thewissen), pp. 158-162. Aca
- Page 34 and 35:
Whitehead, H., Waters, S. and Lyrho
- Page 36 and 37:
humanitarian purposes the time take
- Page 38 and 39:
Welfare and the modern IWCFrom 1980
- Page 40 and 41:
1996 UK proposes guidelines for col
- Page 42 and 43:
Section TwoWhale killing6 Commercia
- Page 44 and 45:
Table 1 Commercial, special permit
- Page 46 and 47:
It can be argued that the figures f
- Page 48 and 49:
Since struck and lost whales can in
- Page 50 and 51:
equipment to Russian subsistence wh
- Page 52 and 53: This is the time from the throwing
- Page 54 and 55: Table 3 Aboriginal Subsistence Whal
- Page 56 and 57: International Aid For Korean Animal
- Page 58 and 59: 29 In Resolution 1999-1, the IWC no
- Page 60 and 61: For example, Greenland and the Faro
- Page 62 and 63: the past they made an important con
- Page 64 and 65: however, has been made on the exten
- Page 66 and 67: hunt indicate that the whales are s
- Page 68 and 69: 8 Weather, sea condition and shipmo
- Page 70 and 71: chance of fog decreases from 15 to
- Page 72 and 73: experienced in December, or y could
- Page 74: 9 The potential stress effects ofwh
- Page 77 and 78: Both chase and pursuit cause stress
- Page 79 and 80: and manifest in a series of lethal
- Page 81 and 82: Ridgeway, S. H. (1966). Dall porpoi
- Page 83 and 84: 10 Euthanasia of cetaceansPhilippa
- Page 85 and 86: for the task. The correct target ar
- Page 87 and 88: whales the size of minke whales (Ø
- Page 89 and 90: 11 Review of criteria for determini
- Page 91 and 92: It is apparent from Figure 1, that,
- Page 93 and 94: interpreted criteria, comparisons o
- Page 95 and 96: 90A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATI
- Page 97 and 98: 12 A comparison betweenslaughterhou
- Page 99 and 100: include levels of premature mortali
- Page 101: the emphasis during some whaling op
- Page 105 and 106: Table 1 Animal welfare and the Sche
- Page 107 and 108: CIWF Trust, 2002. Farm Assurance Sc
- Page 109 and 110: 13 Ethics and whaling under special
- Page 111 and 112: Table 1. Consideration of the 3Rs i
- Page 113 and 114: skin samples, without the need for
- Page 115 and 116: IWC (2001) Report of the Scientific
- Page 117 and 118: Whales and the lawCetaceans (and wh
- Page 119 and 120: scientific and technical committees
- Page 121 and 122: ASCOBANS came into force in 1994. F
- Page 123 and 124: The Treaty of the Panama Canal, ena
- Page 125 and 126: 2 As a result, their need for prote
- Page 127 and 128: law says, but also the extent to wh
- Page 129 and 130: 15 Whaling and welfarePhilippa Brak
- Page 131 and 132: commercial whaling. Times to death
- Page 133 and 134: eath). Using the current criteria t
- Page 135 and 136: possibility of establishing a simil
- Page 137 and 138: international customary law and exi
- Page 139 and 140: 16 Summary of conclusionsModern day
- Page 141 and 142: Glossary136A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE
- Page 143 and 144: 138A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
- Page 145 and 146: Appendix IIColour plates©Mark Voti
- Page 147 and 148: 142A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICAT
- Page 149 and 150: Figure 13. Processing minke whales