Outrage over Japan's plan to slaughter humpback whales

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters.quote]

.. International waters? Which are they? And how do we define "national" waters? There is no boundary between the two.

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters. Provisions should then be made in the WTO, allowing countries to sanction other countries for overexploiting stocs of marine resources in which they share. I'm sure agreements would then be reached.

Einherjar wrote:

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters.

.. International waters? Which are they? And how do we define "national" waters? There is no boundary between the two.

einharjer said

Quote:

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters. Provisions should then be made in the WTO, allowing countries to sanction other countries for overexploiting stocs of marine resources in which they share. I'm sure agreements would then be reached.

Id like to agree with you that this could be a start. However, there is one glaring fact however, while we dont fuly understand the breeding patterns of whales, or what density they must maintain to continue species viability, we do understand when whales venture into waters that border countries.
Like, rightnow in the Bay of Fundy, we have4 and maybe 5 species of whales. They arrive in late spring , and leave around September. They are sitting ducks to the " no whaling in international waters" We know that there are several hotspots across the globe where whales congregate at times of the year. If I wanted grey or pacific blues, Id hangout in The SEa Of Cortez and pick em off like puppies in a cage.

I dont think that , like our own lame excuse for not following Kyoto, we should let that error in judgement stand as a "counterweight" for an equally cynical environmental policy.

As far as there being enough minkes to go around, Im dubious that your whaling advocates have the scientific basis to know the replacement stats for the population since, if its hardly been fished at all, wheres the population pressure data?

Whales have an exceptionally long gestation period, even minkes. They also have a care period for their young that make the young vulnerable for up to 2 years . predation on the young accounts for many losses , (And, from a Discovery channel program about killer whales) , the scientists studying grey whales have seen that killers have "learned" a number of successful predation schemes to remove the young of larger species and these involve team hunting. The grey whale population cannot take further depletion from hunting,

Id hate the various whales to go extinct because some Norwegian, Finn or Japanese wants some exotic flavor.

As an American, I must say that it feels good to ascend to the moral high ground on something and be able to preach to the masses , well maybe the diminimasses.

I dont think that , like our own lame excuse for not following Kyoto, we should let that error in judgement stand as a "counterweight" for an equally cynical environmental policy.

msolga wrote:

Einherjar wrote:

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters.

.. International waters? Which are they? And how do we define "national" waters? There is no boundary between the two.

I think it's 200 miles from the nearest coastline, but it might have been extended to 250. Anyway, there are agreements in place as it stands establishing economic exclusion zones for coastal nations.

I looked up gestation periods. Its 11 months for a minke and then 6 months nursing. Its still a period of almost 1 .5 years that is the replacement period for a minke.

mDNA studies have shown that even minkes have declined in an amount greater than realized. The stocks have been depleted so that remaining DNA lines are "back estimated" to a pre whaling size and , while not endangered and presently stable, at least 3 germ lines had been severely reduced.

BTW Iceland only resumed minke hunting in 2003 in response to an overall depletion of all marine resources including cod and hake etc.Their excuse ws that minkes have been depleting the cod stock so we now hunt minkes.
That sounds like an old military saying rom my youth
"we kill people so that we can save them"

oh yeh, I said

Quote:

I dont think that , like our own lame excuse for not following Kyoto, we should let that error in judgement stand as a "counterweight" for an equally cynical environmental policy.

.
Basically what Im saying is that, just because US is doing something stupid(Kyoto) , you cant use that as an excuse for the rest of the world to do something equally stupid(resume whaling by targeting and depleting yet another species).

Einherjar wrote:

msolga wrote:

Einherjar wrote:

Both whaling and fishing should be banned in international waters.

.. International waters? Which are they? And how do we define "national" waters? There is no boundary between the two.

I think it's 200 miles from the nearest coastline, but it might have been extended to 250. Anyway, there are agreements in place as it stands establishing economic exclusion zones for coastal nations.

The trouble, of course, is that whales do not understand & stay put within these boundaries. There is no such thing as a "Japanese", "Norwegian" or "Australian" whale. They migrate & move about the oceans. One nation's whaling industry could be killing off whales born & bred in protected/sanctuary conditions. Anyway, the purpose of these agreements is not to protect whales, but the commercial interests of the nations concerned.

You asked for teeth, the WTO has teeth, and this is how it would get involved. I think it's the best you can hope for.

Meaning studies have shown that there were more minkes in the oceans centuries ago than we had estimated. It doesn't provide any new information concerning the development of these populations in the last thirty years. How is this data relevant?

With catches of 0.6% of the population anually, I don't see much of a problem though.

einherjars quotes

Quote:

Meaning studies have shown that there were more minkes in the oceans centuries ago than we had estimated. It doesn't provide any new information concerning the development of these populations in the last thirty years. How is this data relevant?

It means that entire populations have been depleted over 90% in the last century. There was obviously some "bottleneck" That removed a large number of minke whales from the overall world count. Resources depletion occurs in a locale by locale basis, its not usually a large "round the world" reduction. Iceland had fished out its cod before Canada and the US. Now we have a Cod shortage. Im sure that all these countries are going to agree to some quota that is sustainable , right

Quote:

With catches of 0.6% of the population annually, I don't see much of a problem though.

How will these quotas be distributed? Will you consider the Atlantic minkes into your numbers or only your "local" stock? If you calculate based upon a worldwide number, your own quota may be unsustainable.

Also the technique of marine mammal population estimates are based on a technique called "Distance sampling" which, if you've read anything about, is frought with assumptions and errors if individuals cannot be identified . I've seen that there may be a significant error in the population size estimates.

Until these things are known with a high degree of accuracy, the whaling countries should learn to eat beef or chicken and quit trying to rationalize this slaughter on a basis of "scientific research" > I think that most of the rest of us can see through this entire sham as nothing more than a novel way to justify exterimination.

Einherjar wrote:

You asked for teeth, the WTO has teeth, and this is how it would get involved. I think it's the best you can hope for.

Some interesting ideas there, Einherjar, but the WTO is a trade organization. And given everything I've said here already it should be clear why I don't think they're the appropriate organization to protect whales.

Having WTO guard the whales is like oil companies coming up with an energy policy.