TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

In 1978, another attempt to obtain data on the number of harpoons used and struck and lost ratesfailed, but the Commission agreed a resolution calling for information to be reported on “...time todeath from the time struck, and the reliability of the killing device” (IWC 1979a). The Commission alsoaccepted the Scientific Committee’s recommendation for a research programme into humane killing.However, a sub-committee on ‘humane killing techniques’ concluded that the explosive harpoon wasstill the most humane killing method available (IWC 1979b).In 1979, the working group considered reports on whale killing from expert witnesses who wereshocked by what they had observed (IWC 1980). The Commission adopted variousrecommendations to collect more data on killing times and planned to convene a ‘workshop toconsider more humane methods’.32A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIESIn 1980, the IWC held its first ‘Workshop on Humane Killing Techniques for Whales’. It consideredreports of killing methods including the use of the electric lance and rifle as secondary killingmethods in Japanese and Norwegian operations respectively. The group adopted a workingdefinition that “humane killing of an animal means causing its death without pain, stress or distressperceptible to the animal” (IWC 1980). However, neither the impact of the chase on the individual(see chapter 9) or the impact of the kill upon other group members, were considered because theparticipants said they lacked the expertise to assess these factors. The issue of how to determine thetime of death or unconsciousness in whales was also raised. However, attention focussed ondeveloping a penthrite explosive grenade that could be used during minke whaling, instead of eitherthe cold harpoon, which resulted in protracted times to death, or the black powder explosivegrenade which spoilt more of the meat (chapter 2).Japan reported to the workshop that whales might die “...within 4 to 5 minutes after the start ofelectrocution” and Norway reported that three or four rifle shots were needed to kill some whales thathad already been harpooned (IWC 1981). It was clear from the data presented that whales weresuffering extensively in whaling operations and particularly from the use of ‘cold’ harpoons. Thissparked a debate that led to a UK proposal to ban the use of the ‘cold’ or non-explosive harpoon tokill all whales except minke whales. Australia proposed that the ban be extended to include minkewhales by 1982 (although this did not come into effect until the 1982/83 pelagic and 1983 coastalseasons). In a landmark decision the IWC agreed to the ban (although, subsequently severalcountries filed objections to the ban 4 ) and the significance of this decision reverberates to this day.This was the first time that the IWC had acted to improve the humaneness of whaling by outlawingthe use of a specific killing device. The IWC had, de facto, accepted competence for humane killing,a fact the whalers refute to this day.Although the moratorium on commercial whaling was eventually adopted in 1982, the cruelty issueswithin whaling were still not comprehensively addressed by the IWC. In 1984, the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) endorsed the ‘Global Plan of Action for the Conservation,Management and Utilization of Marine Mammals’, which called for: “Ensuring that any exploitativeor low consumptive use of marine mammal populations is conducted in a humane manner....”. The IWCconsidered the UNEP plan that year and again “endorsed its implementation” (IWC 1985). However,the Commission did not at that time join the Planning and Consultative Committee (PPC) chargedwith implementing the plan, due to objections raised by some contracting governments.