3
   

Outrage over Japan's plan to slaughter humpback whales

 
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 07:11 am
Greenpeace on whaling:

http://www.greenpeace.org.au/resources/factsheets/pdfs/Saving_Whales.pdf
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 11:10 am
Whaling
Please don't mix Norway up with Japan, Norway is not party to the ban on whaling, and thus is not bound by it. Norway does not conduct commercial whaling under the guise of scientific research, nor does it allow mysterious whale "bycatches". Norwegian fisheries are well managed, and have not seen collapses in fish stocks since they were subjected to Norwegian management. (The commercial zones of countries were expanded, thanks in part to the efforts of Norway and Iceland, and agreements were made with neighboring countries to jointly manage migratory oceanic resources) Whale quotas are set by the same agency that sets quotas for other marine creatures, and unlike certain countries in south-east Asia, Norwegian quotas enforced and adhered to. I am confident that whale stocks will not collapse due to Norwegian whaling.

Fishing/whaling in international waters needs to be sorted out, (luckily we already did this in the north atlantic) and more hands on management of fisheries is needed in many parts of the world.

Anyway, while I agree that overfishing, wether of whale or of other kinds of marine life, is a problem that needs to be dealt with, I do not agree that whaling should be considered any less ethical than fishing in general.

The muslim third of this worlds population may come to an international agreement that the slaughter of pigs for food is to be outlawed, and the buddhists of India and Nepal, making up about one quarter of the worlds population, may come to the agreement that killing cattle for food is unethical. I hope that if this happens my country will not be party to either agreement, as I do not wish to comply with either demand. I applaud efforts to have fishing/whaling outlawed in international waters, and to secure cooperation on management of fishstocks which migrate between the commercial interest zones of countries. Efforts to ban the consumption of some non-endangered animal species however I do not support, be it is pigs, cattle or whale.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 11:13 am
While i find your attitudes on managed fisheries to be reasonable, the comparison of pigs and cattle to whales is specious. Pigs and cattle are raised for the slaughter, in controlled environments, and are in no danger of either extinction, nor the unbalancing of delicate ecological relationships. Your comparison, in short, is of apples to oranges.
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 11:14 am
msolga wrote:
the link contains a guide to the species of whales that are killed for commercial, scientific and aboriginal subsistence whaling:


Thanks. I see the Japanese are hunting more than Minke, but they appear to be the only nation to hunt other species of whale for other than native subsistence. Are any of the species hunted by the Japanese presently endangered?


Edited to add [/quote].
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 11:33 am
Setanta wrote:
While i find your attitudes on managed fisheries to be reasonable, the comparison of pigs and cattle to whales is specious. Pigs and cattle are raised for the slaughter, in controlled environments, and are in no danger of either extinction, nor the unbalancing of delicate ecological relationships. Your comparison, in short, is of apples to oranges.


I am primarily adressing the faction that consider whaling to be inherently wrong for some reason, not just unwise due to small whale populations. Comparing apples to oranges is legitimate when discussing the properties of fruit.

I am not sure of all the species listed on the site msolga linked, but I understand minke whales, though far below their pre-whaling numbers, are plentiful, and not at all in danger of extinction. As for ecological balances, that is for each nation to evaluate, in cooperation with its neighbors.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 04:19 pm
Re: Whaling
Einherjar wrote:
Please don't mix Norway up with Japan, Norway is not party to the ban on whaling, and thus is not bound by it. Norway does not conduct commercial whaling under the guise of scientific research, nor does it allow mysterious whale "bycatches". Norwegian fisheries are well managed, and have not seen collapses in fish stocks since they were subjected to Norwegian management. (The commercial zones of countries were expanded, thanks in part to the efforts of Norway and Iceland, and agreements were made with neighboring countries to jointly manage migratory oceanic resources) Whale quotas are set by the same agency that sets quotas for other marine creatures, and unlike certain countries in south-east Asia, Norwegian quotas enforced and adhered to. I am confident that whale stocks will not collapse due to Norwegian whaling.


I'm not confusing Norway with Japan. But I do have problems with the Norwegian whaling industry. Whether it's called "scientific" or "commercial" whaling it amounts to the same thing as far I'm concerned. And why should Norway consider itself exempt to the IWC international moratorium on whaling of 1982? :

Norway is the only country in the world still hunting whales commercially despite the international moratorium on whaling that was decreed by members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in 1982. Whale meat is a highly prized traditional Norwegian food. Blubber, on the other hand, is neither consumed nor used in Norway and remains stockpiled in freezers. Hopes of exporting this product to Japanese consumers were quashed in May 2003 when Japan refused to import Norwegian whale blubber due to the high levels of PCBs that it contained.

A large number of environmental groups are opposed to whaling activities. Last March, a report entitled "Troubled Waters"-that was signed by 200 organizations representing 58 countries-criticized present-day whaling methods. Several of these organizations are participating in a campaign to ban whaling, hoping to pressure the IWC into putting an end to all commercial and scientific whaling. < from 13 May 2004>


http://www.baleinesendirect.net/eng/FSC.html?sct=2&pag=2-3-1-1.html
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 05:00 pm
msolga,Warmed up by telling my grandma. She said the Japanese are ruthless and always have been.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 06:23 pm
Amigo wrote:
msolga,Warmed up by telling my grandma. She said the Japanese are ruthless and always have been.


But was she concerned about the whales, Amigo?

(No comment on the "ruthless" nature of the Japanese. Are you trying to get me into trouble here? Shocked )
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 06:51 pm
She's 89.She's more concerned with prune juice then whales. She doesn't count.she'a an extra.I might distribute some information on this.I know what it's like to have a cause
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 06:58 pm
Amigo wrote:
She's 89.She's more concerned with prune juice then whales. She doesn't count.she'a an extra.I might distribute some information on this.I know what it's like to have a cause


I believe it's a very worthy cause, too. I much prefer the idea of making $$$$ out of watching whales (through tourism) rather than killing them to make $$$$. It's a real winner in Oz! We can't see enough of those whales! We just love them!Laughing
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 07:04 pm
... & the way that they're killed can be extremely cruel. Lots of documented evidence on the internet, via sources like Greenpeace, etc. I don't really want to post such information here. Reading the details & seeing what actually happens makes me feel ill & sick at heart, frankly.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 07:09 pm
Einherjar wrote:
I am primarily adressing the faction that consider whaling to be inherently wrong for some reason, not just unwise due to small whale populations. Comparing apples to oranges is legitimate when discussing the properties of fruit.


But you aren't in a discussion about fruit--this is the equivalent of making such an argument while everyone else is speaking of vegetables. Whales are wild, and swine and cattle are domestic. Whales inhabit this planet with us as a consequence of evolution--swine and cattle inhabit our agronomic industrial sites because we have chosen them and bred them for the "honor."

Quote:
I am not sure of all the species listed on the site msolga linked, but I understand minke whales, though far below their pre-whaling numbers, are plentiful, and not at all in danger of extinction. As for ecological balances, that is for each nation to evaluate, in cooperation with its neighbors.


I submit to you that given the ability to feed people comfortably with swine and cattle, there is no need of this wild harvest. Furthermore, i submit that in the specific case of the Japanese, like petulant children, they insist upon their choice to eat whales--not a necessity--and cooperation with their neighbors is not and never has been on their agenda. The wish to cajole, they wish to bully; but above all, they wish to serve an exotic food market to their own profit, and the rest of the world be damned. The Norwegians may be more civil in this regard, but i don't for a moment believe that it is necessary to their domestic economy to hunt whales.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 07:53 pm
einharjr said
Quote:
but I understand minke whales, though far below their pre-whaling numbers, are plentiful, and not at all in danger of extinction. As for ecological balances, that is for each nation to evaluate, in cooperation with its neighbors.


Any species that is removed from the planet at a rate higher than its replacement rate, is going to become extinct. You are kidding us if you believe that the minke whale population, estimated at about 1.2 million worldwide, can stand a critical population reduction, when noone knows its breeding patterns, or what constitutes a minimally viable population (we seem to feel that " right" whales are doomed because they have a minimum population requirement so that "random" breeding hits are accomplished by species density. Its maybe too late for them, because many of the nubile young cows are unmated giving credence to the observation that right whales just "hook up" they really dont have a mating relationship.

For all these recent conclusions about the projected fates of some whale species, I blame all nations that whale. The Norwegians cant mount any moral high ground and place blame on the Japanese, when the Norwegians were still whacking away at right whales until the stock was depleted.

The oceans in general are in a critical state for availability of resources and the only way that commercial stocks of anything can be replenished (Using your delightful parlance) is to quit taking them until you understand the rate that is safe to deplete. You cannot prove to me that the combined taking of whales by Norway, Japan, Russia, and whoever else is engaged in this reckless destruction of entire species, is not marching these animals to extinction. If only your country and the others would communicate the rate of destruction that youre engaged in, perhaps, together you could reach the conclusion that seems self evident to many of us.
If only you could really realize and employ the husbandry skills of commercial meat producers, maybe you could do something to repopulate whales. Ive been plying the waters of the Bay of Fundy looking for whales and we noticed that, this year, its already mid July and we havent seen one Right whale yet.
Excuse me if I dont pat the Norwegians on the back for practicing sustainable whaling. Your just as guilty as the damn Japanese. Itll take another 15 million years or so for a common land dwelling ancestor to develop from manatees or dugong to evolve another whale-like creature from a semi oceanic Sirinea species. I dont have that long and I dont wish the existing whale species to be wiped out while you just point at each other saying "it was his fault"
Whales dont recognize political boundaries, they are creatures that have evolved genetic memories of their worldwide travels and they return to familiar grounds after thousands of trip-miles. Theres where the slaughters occur.
Ya know, at least with the sturgeon population, the Russians, Iranians, and the people of the Ohio River basin have learned how to rear and raise sturgeon for the caviar market. Caviar, like whales comes only at the price of a life that, until recently , was a total mystery . There may be hope for Sturgeon, somehow I dont see the Norwegians or Japanese "hand rearing" or insemnating female whales at a rate that exceeds your plunder.
0 Replies
 
KiwiChic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 08:17 pm
msolga wrote:
Amigo wrote:
She's 89.She's more concerned with prune juice then whales. She doesn't count.she'a an extra.I might distribute some information on this.I know what it's like to have a cause


I believe it's a very worthy cause, too. I much prefer the idea of making $$$$ out of watching whales (through tourism) rather than killing them to make $$$$. It's a real winner in Oz! We can't see enough of those whales! We just love them!Laughing


In total agreement with you! same goes here for whale watching in New Zealand and whats even stranger its mostly the Japanese who pay for the honour! :wink:
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 08:50 pm
I'll place info in strategic spots and report the feedback.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 10:48 pm
Amigo wrote:
I'll place info in strategic spots and report the feedback.


Please do, Amigo!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2005 11:49 pm
KiwiChic wrote:
msolga wrote:
Amigo wrote:
She's 89.She's more concerned with prune juice then whales. She doesn't count.she'a an extra.I might distribute some information on this.I know what it's like to have a cause


I believe it's a very worthy cause, too. I much prefer the idea of making $$$$ out of watching whales (through tourism) rather than killing them to make $$$$. It's a real winner in Oz! We can't see enough of those whales! We just love them!Laughing


In total agreement with you! same goes here for whale watching in New Zealand and whats even stranger its mostly the Japanese who pay for the honour! :wink:


Here's an sample of the whale watching industry in Oz. Makes money from locals & tourists & makes everyone feel good, too! Very Happy :

http://www.whalewatching.com.au/index1.html
0 Replies
 
KiwiChic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2005 12:56 am
yeah thats cool msolga!!
Whales are such majestic creatures....

oops let me check on those pork ribs! Laughing
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2005 02:23 am
Re: Whaling
msolga wrote:
I'm not confusing Norway with Japan. But I do have problems with the Norwegian whaling industry. Whether it's called "scientific" or "commercial" whaling it amounts to the same thing as far I'm concerned. And why should Norway consider itself exempt to the IWC international moratorium on whaling of 1982?


To me not ratifying an agreement, and ratifying it only to float it, or exploit loopholes in it, seem very different.

Anyway, the moratorium on whaling is an international agreement, not an article of international law, and as such only applies to the parties to it. Since Norway is not a party to the moratorium, Norway is exempt. It's like when the US opts out of Kyoto, many people disagree with that decision, but no one questions their right to make it.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2005 03:02 am
The whaling moratorium is an international "agreement" & not international law, so Norway feels no moral obligation (as a member) to uphold IWC policy? Then why participate? I honestly don't get it.

Current membership of the IWC:
http://www.iwcoffice.org/commission/members.htm
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/26/2024 at 12:18:07