TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Norwegians 1 and Japanese 2 is, on average, between two and three minutes, but with some animalstaking over 40 minutes to die (IWC 2003). The number of whales apparently killed immediately 3 isvariable, with Norwegian hunts achieving an approximate four in five immediate kill rate (Øen,2003) (Figure 1). Japan’s Antarctic Whaling Research Programme (JARPA) achieved a less than twoin five immediate kill rate in the 1998/99 (31.6 per cent), 2000/2001 (36.1 per cent) and2001/2002 (33 per cent) seasons, and a slightly more than two in five immediate kill rate in the1999/2000 (44.4 per cent) and 2002/2003 (40.2 per cent) seasons (Ishikawa 2003b, Kestin 2001)(see chapter 6 for a review of these data). Recent data from the Greenland Home Rule minke huntprovide a mean TTD of 16 minutes (and a longest time of 300 minutes) for minke whales hunted inWest Greenland in 2002 (IWC 2003).Figure 1. Survival of minke whales in theNorwegian whaling operations100 –80 –83% 1981-1983REVIEW OF CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING DEATH AND INSENSIBILITY IN CETACEASurvival (%)60 –40 –55% 1984-198639% 1996-19988520 –20% 2000-20020 –I I I I I I I0 10 20 30 40 50 60Time (in minutes)Points on the y axis show survival if greater than 10 seconds after being hit by the harpoon for allwhales caught in the four time periods 1981-83 (cold, non grenade harpoons) 1984-86 (firstgrenade harpoons) 1996-98 (improved grenade harpoon and improved training) 2000-2002 (newgrenade harpoon).The decay lines show:Upper dotted- Survival / time for animals in the period 1996-98Lower solid- Survival / time for animals in the period 2000-2002(Source: Øen 2003)
It is apparent from Figure 1, that, while there have been improvements in the percentage of animalskilled within ten seconds from 17 per cent in 1983, to 80 per cent in 2002, there remain one in five(20 per cent) of whales which do not die rapidly (in less than ten seconds), and whose survival can beas long as 40 minutes. From the tail of the lower survival curve in Figure 1, it is apparent that,despite alterations to the design of the harpoon, and increased training and monitoring of whalers,the decay line for whales taking more than ten minutes to die has effectively remained unalteredbetween 1996 and the most recent recorded data in 2002. One can interpret this as meaning that,for approximately 10 per cent of all whales killed (the intersection of ten minutes on the time x axis,with approximately 10 per cent on the survival line, y axis) by the Norwegians, death takes at leastten minutes. This figure has not significantly improved since 1996.The interpretation of the three criteria used to determine time of death is likely to be critical.Differences in the perception of ‘flipper movement’ (passive or active), or ‘sinking withoutswimming’ can create differences in TTD data. Whales are capable of sinking without swimmingduring normal activity (Ridgeway et al. 1984, Dierauf & Gulland 2001), and so sinking alone is notlikely to be a fully reliable indicator of non-viability.86A REVIEW OF THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF MODERN WHALING ACTIVITIESIn practice, the use of the existing IWC criteria in the field by observers of the Japanese andNorwegian whaling operation has highlighted inconsistencies in their interpretation. For example, ina recent description of his experiences as a veterinary observer in the Norwegian hunt, Bruce (2003)states that the IWC criteria were used in an ‘inclusive’ fashion (relaxation of the jaw AND no Flippermovement AND no active movement). In contrast to this Norwegian example, recent data providedby Japan from the IWC Humane Killing Workshop in 2003 (Ishikawa 2003a) indicate that Japandoes not make the criteria ‘inclusive’ in general (but sometimes combine criteria such as motionlessAND slackened jaw, or motionless AND slackened pectoral fins) Table 1. For the largest part Japanuses ‘motionless’, a criterion which is not one of the IWC criteria, for determining TTD in mostanimals (Table 1, 514 out of 566 – 90 per cent).The IWC holds periodic scientific workshops to examine whale killing methods and associatedwelfare issues. It has been repeatedly noted at these workshops 4 that existing criteria are in need ofimprovement and that more reliable indicators of the point of sensibility and death should beproduced. An International Scientific Workshop on Sentience and Potential Suffering in HuntedWhales was hosted by the RSPCA in London in 2001 (RSPCA, 2003). The purpose was to reviewcurrent criteria for assessing insensibility in cetaceans and consider the welfare implications of thesecriteria for whales. A group of scientists and veterinarians with expertise in welfare, physiology andanatomy reviewed current data on times to death in whale hunts, and the current IWC criteria fordetermining the point of death in cetaceans. The group concluded that these criteria were notadequate to determine precisely the point of death, and it was agreed that it should be possible togreatly improve current indicators of sensibility and death in whales.If the scientific community is concerned that the existing IWC measures do not give confidence thatthe animal is dead, are there better measures? A preliminary study (Butterworth 2003a, 2003b)stemming from this workshop identified that the following measures would be likely to providereliable information on the sensibility of cetacea – “breathing rate when the animal is stimulatedaround the blowhole, electrocardiogram and heart rate, presence (or absence) of rhythmic swimmingactivity, and the temperature of the surface of the eye”.
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: 11 Review of criteria for determini
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
show all

TROUBLED WATERS - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?