OUTRAGE OVER WHALING ... #2 <cont>

Yes, there have been voted-rigging episodes within the IWC (including by the Japanese, I might add.) As I said, earlier, it is hardly a perfect organization. However the Japanese, if they disagree with IWC decisions, can choose to leave the organization, rather than stay within it and flout its decisions. Other countries have chosen to do this.

Indeed, Japan is by no means the only nation which has depleted fish stocks. But it is by far the worst offender.

http://geociti.es/RainForest/4620/overfishing.htm

However, it would be wrong to blame Japan for the serious decline in Asia Pacific fish stocks. No country keeps better records on catches and monitors stocks and environment damage than Japan. Japan has even cut the size of its commercial fishing fleet by a quarter and reduced the number of factory boats. The overfishing problem is generated by the fishing fleets of other nations scrambling to supply Japan with the fruits of the sea, in particular the prized tuna.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates Japan devours 30 per cent of the world's fresh fish, close on 80 kilograms a year for each man, woman and child. Australians manage just 18 kilos.

NZ may join anti-whaling lawsuit
By Claire Trevett
4:00 AM Monday Feb 22, 2010


Australia warns it will go to the International Court of Justice if Japan does not stop whaling. Photo / A

Foreign Minister Murray McCully says New Zealand will consider joining any legal action to force Japan to stop whaling in the Southern Ocean if diplomatic channels fail.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd last week put a deadline of November on his warnings to Japan that Australia would go to the International Court of Justice if it did not halt whaling.

Mr McCully said he remained hopeful of some success through diplomatic channels, a process he expected to end in "weeks not months".

"If that's successful we'll be delighted. If there is failure then obviously the ICJ proposition [Mr Rudd] has spoken of is one New Zealand has always been open to considering."

Labour's foreign affairs spokesman Chris Carter and anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd have both called for Mr McCully to pledge to join any ICJ action.

However, Mr McCully said it was not a straightforward decision whether New Zealand became a party to the ICJ action, despite it holding the same views on whaling as Australia.

He was getting "extensive advice" on the issue and was in touch with Australia's Foreign Minister Stephen Smith.

"New Zealand and Australia have never had identical policies, but we have policies that are the same in substance. We both want to achieve an elimination of whaling in the Southern Ocean at the earliest possible date." ... <cont>

But wild populations are not sustainable as domestic livestock are.

We're not going to run out of cattle, sheep, hogs and poultry--the same cannot be said about whales and wild fish species.

Here we are, two tiny, totally insignificant nations, who actually care about whales, our immediate environment... & who are constantly pushed around & bullied by far more "important" nations.

Hell, you didnt even know that a whale isnt a fish

Probably been in court waaay more times than you skipper.

"bullied", MsOlga?

Is his brief going to be that "we are two tiny nations who actually care about whales"?

What would threatening a lawsuit be but "bullying" when there isn't a legal leg to stand on?