This is the time from the throwing of the first harpoon to the time at which the crew traditionallyprays for the whale, having monitored it from a distance for at least 5-10 minutes post strike, beforeapproaching to confirm its death. The US conceded that this is a very inaccurate measure.The Makah tribe of Washington State took a single gray whale in 1999. A steel harpoon was thrownfrom a traditional whaling canoe <strong>and</strong>, once struck, the whale was shot with a .577 calibre huntingrifle fired from a motorised chase boat. The whale was reported to have been killed within eightminutes, with two shots from the rifle. In 2002, a US court concluded that the US’s issuance of agray whale quota to the tribe violated federal law, <strong>and</strong> prohibited further hunting.Greenl<strong>and</strong> huntsThree different hunts are conducted in Greenl<strong>and</strong>. On the west coast, up to 19 fin whales may behunted annually. Here, a 50 mm mounted harpoon cannon fitted with a penthrite harpoonpurchased from Norway is both the primary <strong>and</strong> secondary killing method. These are mounted onboats measuring between 36 <strong>and</strong> 72 feet. For the first time in 2003, Greenl<strong>and</strong> reported that aspecially constructed penthrite grenade with a longer trigger line is used for fin whales (Anon 2003c).Up to 175 minke whales may also be hunted annually on the west coast of Greenl<strong>and</strong>, but the samehunting method is not used in each case. For some whales, the primary killing method is the boatmountedharpoon cannon using a penthrite grenade purchased from Norway. For others, however, arifle (mainly of calibre 30.06 (7.62 mm)) is used. The secondary killing method for all west coastminke whales is a rifle.COMMERCIAL AND ABORIGINAL SUBSISTENCE WHALING47On the east coast of Greenl<strong>and</strong>, the whaling communities do not have vessels with mounted harpooncannons. Here, all minke whales are shot with rifles fired from small boats known as skiffs in a‘collective hunt’ comprising up to five boats. According to Denmark’s report to the IWC’s workshopon whale killing methods in 1999, the collective hunt “starts with shooting at the whale, then the h<strong>and</strong>harpoon was used, <strong>and</strong> thereafter the rifle to kill the whale”. The main target area is the whale’s head.Greenl<strong>and</strong> has historically reported its whale killing data to the IWC by species (or population) <strong>and</strong>not by method used. This makes it impossible for the IWC to assess the relative efficiency of the twohunting methods used on minke whales in West Greenl<strong>and</strong>, although the data provided from the eastcoast minke whale hunt (which only uses rifles) clearly demonstrates that the rifle results in longerTTDs, lower IDRs <strong>and</strong> higher SLRs. At the 2003 IWC meeting, in response to several requests,Greenl<strong>and</strong> reported TTD data by method for the West Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke hunt. This showed themaximum time to death for minke whales killed in the harpoon hunt in West Greenl<strong>and</strong> was 30minutes, whereas the maximum for those killed during the collective hunt, where only rifles are used,was 300 minutes (five hours). Furthermore, the average TTD for those killed in the harpoon huntwas seven minutes, whereas the average for those killed in the collective hunt was 33 minutes (Anon2003d).For East Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke whales the mean TTD was 21 minutes (maximum 90 minutes), <strong>and</strong> forfin whales it was nine minutes, with a maximum recorded TTD of 25 minutes. No East Greenl<strong>and</strong>minke whales died instantaneously in 2002 <strong>and</strong> none of the West Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke whales killedduring the ‘collective’ hunts (also killed only with rifles) died instantaneously. Almost 8 per cent ofWest Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke whales killed in the harpoon hunt <strong>and</strong> 7.6 per cent of fin whales were
ecorded as dying instantaneously (Anon 2003d). It should also be noted however, that data wereonly provided for 131 West Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke whales out of 139 hunted, therefore these TTD <strong>and</strong>IDR data are incomplete.Struck <strong>and</strong> lost rates are high in Greenl<strong>and</strong>’s ASW hunts. Between 1990 <strong>and</strong> 2002, West Greenl<strong>and</strong>minke whales were struck <strong>and</strong> lost in 11 out of 13 years, with an average SLR of 2.4 per cent peryear. In contrast, East Greenl<strong>and</strong> minke whales were only struck <strong>and</strong> lost in three out of 13 years, butthe rates were high on each occasion: three out of eight whales in 1992 (37.5 per cent) 31 ; three out of14 in 1997 (21.4 per cent) <strong>and</strong> three out of 17 in 2001 (17.6%) 32 . Greenl<strong>and</strong>’s SLR for fin whales isalso particularly poor in some years, but zero in others. In fact, the SLR for the East Greenl<strong>and</strong>minke <strong>and</strong> fin whale hunts is highest in the same years, which suggests that a common factor, such asbad weather, may be to blame.Despite longer TTDs <strong>and</strong> higher SLRs sustained by minke whales in Greenl<strong>and</strong>’s rifle hunts, the useof rifles appears to be increasing. In West Greenl<strong>and</strong>, the rifle quota was set at 50 Minke whales for2003, but in April was increased to 55 Minke whales with possible adjustment to 57 in September 33 .The number of skiffs participating in Greenl<strong>and</strong>’s collective hunts has also increased in recent years;from 506 reported for 1998 to 630 reported for 2000 <strong>and</strong> 2001.48A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIESGreenl<strong>and</strong>’s use of a 30.06 calibre (7.62mm) rifle on minke whales has been a subject of concern atthe IWC, with expert opinion expressed for several years that it may not be sufficiently powerful tokill this species swiftly (see chapter 10). Norway’s chief whale welfare expert commented to theIWC’s 1999 Workshop on <strong>Whale</strong> Killing Methods that he had seen whales shot by 7.62mm pointedbullets that did not penetrate the skull, but might only have caused concussion. He stated that he didnot recommend the use of 7.62mm bullets <strong>and</strong> that 9.3mm rifles are used in Norway as thesecondary killing method for the same species (Anon 1999). Despite this advice, <strong>and</strong> therecommendation of Greenl<strong>and</strong>’s National Association of Hunters that a .375 calibre rifle is used,Greenl<strong>and</strong> tells the IWC that use of a higher calibre rifle would be too expensive to implement.St Vincent humpback huntSt Vincent has not provided any data to the IWC in recent years on methods <strong>and</strong> vessels used, timesto death, instantaneous death rates or struck <strong>and</strong> lost rates.According to various reports, humpback whales are secured using a cold harpoon thrown by h<strong>and</strong>from a boat <strong>and</strong> are brought alongside the vessel. Then an 8-foot lance is “repeatedly thrown inattempts to puncture the whale’s heart or lungs” (Ward 1999). Sometimes the whale is finally killed by a‘bomb lance’- an exploding projectile discharged from a shoulder gun. In some instances, however, itappears that the bomb lance is administered at the same time as the initial cold harpoon. A finalkilling method, which may be applied in some extreme cases, is a projectile from a 40-pound bronzeshoulder gun or ‘bomb gun’. Females are traditionally hunted, with whalers targeting calves first inorder to lure their mother to the boat.In light of developing underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the dying process in cetaceans <strong>and</strong> their adaptation to lowlevels of oxygen, it is of particular concern that the objective in this hunt is to pierce the lungs or theheart of the whale, rather than to aim for a lethal shot to the brain.
- 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 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 and 102: the emphasis during some whaling op
- Page 103 and 104:
affect an immediate and thereby law
- 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