Is the Japanese whaling fleet overfishing the Antarctic?

From IWC Report of the Scientific Committee 2011

On July 25, 2007 a The Sydney Morning Herald article stated :

Japan's whaling research body, the Institute of Cetacean Research, today said 91.6 per cent - or 262 of the 286 mature female minkes taken during the last hunt - were pregnant.

In June 2011 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE 2011 addressed the issue of declining Minke Whale stocks in the Antarctic:

WHALE STOCKS……..

Two different methods for estimating Antarctic minke whale abundance from these data have been developed in recent years (see below) and although they gave different estimates of abundance, both were consistent in showing an appreciable decline in estimated circumpolar abundance between CPII and CPIII……..

It is clear from Table 5 that while circumpolar Antarctic minke whale abundance estimates have declined during the period from CPII to CPIII, there are substantial differences in relative changes between Areas, with only relatively moderate increases or declines in some Areas, but appreciable declines in others (Table 6). No significant decline is seen in Areas III, IV and VI, whilst estimated abundance is substantially lower in CPIII for Areas I, II and V. Areas II and V encompass the Weddell and Ross Seas

As noted above, large declines in estimates of Antarctic minke whale abundance occurred in Areas I, II and V (there were no statistically significant changes in the other three Areas). The Committee agrees that these declines do indeed reflect genuine changes in abundance in the open-water areas surveyed that need to be explained. Such changes may be due to changes in distribution or reflect a true decline (or some combination of both)……

There are two classes of explanation for possible true declines in abundance. The first, quantitative approach involves the population dynamics statistical catch-at-age analyses (SCAA) from Area III East to VI West, which can potentially account for the changes in overall abundance in terms of variations over time in mortality and recruitment (note that this may explain how but not why changes occurred). The second, less quantitative approach involves attempts to identify mechanisms whereby mortality and recruitment may have changed (e.g. ecosystem effects, interspecies competition, climate changes, etc.).

It may be time to reflect on the fact that one of the management areas identified in the IWC report as experiencing an agreed marked decline in minke whale numbers is also one of those areas in which Japan’s whale fleet has actively hunted these whales, for at least twelve austral summer seasons during its approximately twenty-three year history of Antarctic commercial whaling conducted under the guise of scientific research.

During that time Japanese research documents show that the fleet has consistently taken both lactating and pregnant minke females.

From Polar Biology, Vol 31, Number 12

Click on image to enlarge

The Government of Japan’s whaling fleet is heading towards its Southern Ocean killing grounds as I write.

During the 2011/12 season the inappropriately named Institute of Cetacean Research will sponsor so-called ‘lethal research’ on as many as 930 minke whales and possibly a handful of fin whales and even humpbacks according to Japan Times Online on 11 December 2011. The IWC's own documents clearly indicate that the whaling fleet again intends to operate in one of the management areas showing significant minke whale decline.

One of the reasons why Japan thumbs its nose at Australia and continues to slaughter whales in the Southern Ocean?

A Japanese ship injures a whale with its first harpoon.

 It took three harpoon attempts to kill the mammal.

Photograph: Kate Davidson/EPA/Corbis,

The Guardian UK December 14, 2011

Perhaps this is the answer to the puzzle of why, in the face of ongoing Australian opposition, the Government of Japan (under the guise of research) continues to needlessly kill whales in Antarctica for a dwindling domestic whale meat market – it thinks it owns us.

According to the Australian Parliament’s About the House Magazine in December 2011:

Japan [is] ranked as Australia’s third largest source of merchandise imports in 2010 (after China and the United States), worth $18.2 billion. The automotive sector dominates this trade, with Australia constituting the third-biggest market for new passenger motor vehicles manufactured in Japan.

The economic relationship between Australia and Japan is not only about trade. Japan has been Australia’s third largest foreign investor for many years (after the United States and the United Kingdom). The total stock of Japanese investment in Australia at the end of 2010 was $117.6 billion, almost twice as large as that of China (including Hong Kong). When both trade and investment are included – and taking account of both the depth and breadth of that investment, which has been critical to the development of Australia’s most important industries – Japan could still be considered to be Australia’s most important economic partner overall.

Japanese demand for Australia’s resources – and the accompanying investment – has contributed enormously to the development of Australia’s mining industry. In the area of agriculture, over 40 per cent of ‘Aussie beef’ imported into Japan comes from Japanese-owned farms in Australia. Kirin Holdings now owns Australia’s largest dairy company, as well as some of Australia’s largest beer producers. In the field of manufacturing, Toyota not only exports passenger vehicles to Australia, but – through its in-country production facilities – is also the largest producer of these vehicles in Australia. Furthermore, Japanese investment is increasingly targeted at using Australia as a springboard into the emerging economies of Asia. Japanese investment has been remarkable for its breadth, continuity and steady expansion over time, regardless of fluctuations in the global economic situation.

Australians can noticeably alter this scenario if enough individuals refuse to purchase goods imported from Japan or goods produced by Japanese–owned companies operating in this country, for as long as Japan acts as an inhumane environmental vandal in the Southern Ocean.



Japan the Unspeakable

Whale image from RealPhoto


ABC News 6 December 2011:

Harpoon ships from Japan's whaling fleet have left their home port and could now be heading towards the Antarctic for this year's hunt.

Japan says it is going ahead with the expedition despite falling demand for whale meat.

This Japanese Minister just told Australia to Get Farked!

Japan Broadcasting Corporation:

“Fisheries minister Michihiko Kano says Japan will resume research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean this year with strengthened defenses against anti-whaling campaigners.
Speaking at a news conference after a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Kano said a patrol boat of the Fisheries Agency will this time join the whaling vessels. He said research whaling will be conducted with increased protection against obstructions.
In February, Japan suspended whaling in the Antarctic Ocean after repeated disruptions by the anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd. 4 whalers had been operating in the Antarctic since December 2010 and were due to continue until April this year.
Kano said Japan aims to resume commercial whaling and that it needs to continue research whaling for that purpose.
He said Japan would appeal for a restart of commercial operations at the International Whaling Commission by continuing accurate monitoring of whale stocks through scientific whaling.”

What is a whale worth to Australian coastal communities?

Humpback Whale off Sydney, Australia, in 2011

from The Sydney Morning Herald

Government of Japan subsidised whale hunting in the Antarctic runs at a loss and has done so for years. Even after meat collected on this allegedly scientific hunt is sold on to Japanese retailers for an estimated 6 billion yen ($64.5 million) a year, according to the Asahi Shimbun newspaper on January 23 2010 .

Australian coastal communities have been watching the annual whale migration since people first began to collect on the shoreline. Over the last twenty years this whale migration has begun to play a significant part in many local economies.

As the 2011 IFAW Valuing wales for International Whale Day: Final Report  points out:

What’s a whale worth to Hervey Bay?

Data collected by O'Connor et al (2009) valued direct ticket revenues from whale watching in Hervey Bay at $5.9 million in 20081.

Indirect expenditure associated with whale watching was estimated at $7.0 million, giving a total of $12.9 million.

From these figures and the above population estimates, we calculated present value per whale of AUD $97,000.

What’s a whale worth to Warrnambool?

Data collected by O'Connor et al (2009) found that total expenditure by whale watching tourists was $2.6 million in 20082.

From this total revenue figure and the local population we estimated the following on average present value per whale of AUD $1,259,000.

This value is significantly larger than the values in Hervey Bay and Broome because revenue from whale watching in Warrnambool is high and the population is very small by comparison to the other two regions.

What’s a whale worth to Broome?

O'Connor et al (2009) found direct ticket revenues from whale watching around Broome were $169,000 in 2008.

Indirect expenditure associated with whale watching was estimated at $244,000 giving a total of $413,0003.

From these figures and the above population estimates, we estimated average present value per whale at AUD $32,000.

International Whaling Commission in July 2011: Australia replies to Japan

From Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society members blogging from IWC 63:

Japan notes the importance of the agenda item ‘Safety at Sea’ to them and that this issue will be looked at on Wednesday. He calls on his Commissioner to make a short statement. The Japanese Commissioner is grateful for the many messages of sympathy and offers of help that Japan has received subsequent to the Japanese earthquake. He noted the devastation wrought on coastal communities and that this makes it even more important to promote sustainable use.

The Hon.Tony Burke MP, Australian Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities replies to the Japanese position:

Intervention on safety at sea, International Whaling Commission, Jersey
E&OE Transcript 12 July 2011

TONY BURKE: Thank you very much Mr Chair.
While Australia has intervened previously, this is my first opportunity as Australia's Minister for the Environment to intervene and I wish to congratulate you on the role that you've taken on and the work that you've been doing with the Commission.
Mr Chair, Australia's position on safety at sea is actually shared by the Japanese Government. Nothing less than full compliance with domestic and international laws is acceptable. Safety at sea is important enough to make sure that laws are enforced and also important enough to make sure that appropriate international fora are used.
The International Maritime Organization is the appropriate forum for safety at sea. It had a resolution on the 17th of May of last year, specifically dealing with assuring safety during demonstrations, protests or confrontations on the high seas. It is extremely important to ensure safety at sea. The Australian Federal Police continues to deal with the investigations which have been put to us and deal with them through the appropriate law enforcement agency which we have.
But what is also being asked in the presentation by Japan are two further things.
First, every description of the whaling vessels involved was a reference to research vessels, to Antarctic research activities, to legitimate research activities. Those particular views are views that Australia cannot hold.
Secondly, the presentation from Japan also raised the issue of asking Australia to do more than what are our legal obligations under the International Law of the Sea. We cannot be in a situation where we are providing a higher level of support for a whaling vessel than we would provide to any other vessel within the waters, or within our responsibilities under the International Law of the Sea. That is effectively what is being asked.
So as long as the issue is focused on genuinely ensuring safety at sea, Australia is there and we are there to help provide our international obligations and indeed, Mr Chair, to also make sure that we provide an equal level of protection for all vessels. But to the extent that we are being asked to provide specific protection above and beyond, simply because a vessel is involved in whaling is something which goes beyond the reasonable expectations of safety at sea. And indeed the appropriate forum is not here but is the International Maritime Organization.

WHALE NEWS: Britain to push for IWC anti-corruption measures ahead of Japanese whaling fleet again entering the Antarctic in December 2011

Migaloo photograph from Aquatic Blue Charters

Japan’s whaling fleet is currently hunting in the north-west Pacific Ocean and apparently intends to turn its attention to the Southern Ocean at the end of the year, according to the Kyodo News June 27, 2011:

TOKYO — The fisheries ministry has asked the Japan Coast Guard to dispatch a patrol boat to protect Japanese ships engaged in what they call research whaling from obstructive actions by an anti whaling group this season, sources familiar with the matter said Monday.
The request followed the Japanese whaling fleet’s suspension of operations in the Antarctic Ocean last season due to the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s actions, which forced the fleet’s four vessels to return home in February after catching far fewer whales than planned, the sources said.

Meanwhile in the same paper on June 24 it was reported that in Japanese waters:

Radioactive cesium was detected from two minke whales caught off the coast of Kushiro, Hokkaido, in Japan's so-called research whaling, a whalers' association said Tuesday. While the level of the radioactive material remained below the temporarily set upper limit, the association officials said during a press conference in Kushiro that the contamination must have been caused by the continuing nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant and that they will closely monitor future developments.

The Independent newspaper on July 2, 2011 published the following concerning the International Whaling Commission:

Britain is embarking on a radical attempt to clean up the International Whaling Commission (IWC), which has been increasingly racked by allegations of corruption amongst its member countries.

At the heart of the concerns are repeated accusations that Japan, the leading pro-whaling nation, has been persuading small nations which are members of the IWC to vote in favour of a resumption of commercial whaling, by means of aid packages and the direct bribing of individuals………

A sweeping resolution put forward for the next IWC meeting, beginning in Jersey a week on Monday, would radically revise the commission's procedures, some of which date from its founding in 1946, are regarded as lax and inadequate and "leave it open to accusations of malpractice," in the words of Britain's Fisheries minister, Richard Benyon.

In particular, the UK resolution would end the astonishing situation where the 89 IWC member states are allowed to pay their annual subscriptions by cheque or in cash, instead of by bank transfer, as is the normal case with international organisations. It is thought that some of these subscriptions, which range from £100,000 in the case of Japan to about £4,000 for small states, have been paid in the past with Japanese-provided funds.

The British resolution also seeks to make the IWC's own scientific reports more rigorous, make its record-keeping more timely and accurate, and make its meetings more open to representatives from environmental pressure groups and other non-governmental organisations.

Australia submits case to The Hague citing Japan for alleged breach of international obligations concerning whaling

According to Australia’s Attorney-General Robert McClelland, Minister for Foreign Affairs Kevin Rudd and Minister for Environment Tony Burke on 9 May 2011:

The Government has announced that Australia will file its written submission in the Whaling Case against Japan at the International Court of Justice later today in The Hague.

The filing of the Memorial is the next step in the case to stop Japan’s Southern Ocean whaling program for good.

The Australian Government believes Japan’s whaling activities are contrary to its international obligations, in particular, the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.

Despite Australia repeatedly calling on Japan to cease its illegal whaling activities, Japan has refused to do so. That is why the Australian Government has taken this case in the ICJ.

The decision to commence proceedings in May 2010 was not taken lightly. The Government disagrees with Japan’s decision to continue whaling and this is the proper way to settle legal differences between friends.

Australia will argue that Japan is in breach of the general prohibition under the Convention on commercial whaling as well as a prohibition on such whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, also established under the Convention.

Japan has sought to rely on an exception to the Convention concerning whaling ‘for purposes of scientific research’.

The Government believes the whaling carried out by Japan is commercial, not scientific, and does not fall within that narrow exception.

The decision to take legal action demonstrates the Government’s commitment to do what it takes to end whaling globally.

The Memorial will remain confidential until its public release is ordered by the Court, which is likely to be at the first oral hearing of the case. Japan must file its Counter-Memorial by 9 March 2012.

In March, the ICJ accepted the nomination of Professor Hilary Charlesworth AM as Australia’s ad hoc judge in the Case.

There has been little reaction in the Japanese media to this latest move by Australia. Which is understandable given Japan's necessarily internal focus on recovery after the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.

However, earlier this year, the Daily Yomiuri Online reported that the Government of Japan is considering ending Antarctic whaling:

Asked at a press conference Friday about the possibility of the country ending research whaling entirely, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Minister Michihiko Kano replied: "We can't say anything definite about that."
According to ministry officials, however, discussions have already begun behind the scenes about ending Japan's Antarctic whaling.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, one high-ranking ministry official said five alternative scenarios have so far been studied:
-- Have the whaling fleet escorted by Japan Coast Guard vessels or others.
-- Build new whaling vessels capable of traveling at high speed.
-- Replace research whaling with commercial whaling.
-- Continue with the current whaling arrangements.
-- End whaling in the Antarctic Ocean.
The first option, whaling accompanied by escort vessels, was discussed in the government from around 2007, but was scrapped because there are no escort vessels that could travel all the way to the Antarctic.
The second alternative is "almost impossible," the official said, due to the government's severe fiscal condition.
Concerning the third option, Japan sought to bring about an IWC accord to resume commercial whaling at a meeting of the International Whaling Commission in June 2010. However, the meeting broke down when the gap could not be bridged between whaling and antiwhaling nations........
The ministry official said, "With the suspension of research whaling, there is no possibility of whaling continuing from next season as it has in the past."

'Research' whaling is still being conducted in waters off Japan in 2011.

Photograph The Daily Telegraph

The Bob Barker has a slight mishap

Digital image of the Bob Barker coming across the bar

The Clarence Valley Review 13 April 2011

After returning intact from its anti-whaling duties in the Antarctic the Sea Shepherd Organisation’s ship Bob Barker ran into a little trouble on 20 April:

The 1200-tonne anti-whaling ship the Bob Barker took a tilt for the worse on Wednesday when an attempt to slip the boat ashore at the Harwood Slipway went awry.

Things went wrong for the vessel when one of the main support arms of the slipway cradle broke under the pressure of the vessel. The broken arm jammed the wheels of the cradle, leaving the Bob Barter stranded half-way up the slip, on a 20 degree list.

At this stage there is no indication that any damage has been done to the Bob Barker, and work is being done this morning to remove the broken arm from the cradle to free-up the trolley assembly. It is expected the boat will be refloated in the Clarence River later today.

(The Daily Examiner, 21 April 2011)

Anti-whaling warrior the Bob Barker in the Clarence for maintenance

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s MY Bob Barker quietly slipped into the Clarence River last Saturday so that it can be repainted at the at the Harwood Slipway over the next two weeks.

The Society states:

Our “black ships” have served their purpose. Since 2002, our ships have been painted black with the objective of driving the Japanese whaling fleet from the waters of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

The color black served four purposes for the Sea Shepherd fleet. First, it’s an intimidating color, and up against the superior number of ships in the whaling fleet, I felt we should be as intimidating as possible. The black ships, coupled with our own Jolly Roger, lent an air of intimidation. Secondly, the color black absorbs heat and this helped conserve energy in an environment with 24-hour sunlight, but a close to zero degrees climate.

Added to intimidation and keeping warm, we had a third factor…the black ships have long been a part of Japanese culture signifying change. In Japan, the term “black ships” has a specific meaning. First, with the black fleet of the Portuguese that brought Catholicism and Western trade to Japan, and then with the black fleet led by American Admiral Matthew Perry, that brought Japan out of centuries of isolationism in 1854. Our objective was to stop Japan from whaling, and we succeeded. We drove the Japanese whalers from the Antarctic waters…hopefully for good. If they return, we will return, but the prospect is very good that they will not.

Our fourth factor was to symbolize mourning for the death of so many whales due to Japanese harpoons in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

Meanwhile we have other challenges to deal with including shark finning, tuna poaching, and the slaughter of seals, sea turtles, and small cetaceans. And with campaigns before us in the Mediterranean, Palau, Galapagos, and across the Indian Ocean, Equatorial Africa, and the South Pacific, the color black is not the most comfortable. We now need to reflect heat instead of absorbing it. The Gojira will be painted metallic silver,…….

Photograph from The Daily Examiner

A reminder about one of the important elements of life on Earth

Japanese Earthquake-Tsunami Appeal March 2011

* Tohoku – Pacific Ocean Earthquake Appeal
The Australian and Japanese Red Cross Societies are accepting donations for the earthquake relief. The Embassy is now also accepting donations. All donations received in the account below will be forwarded to the Japanese Red Cross Society.

Account Name:
Embassy of Japan in Australia, Donations for Japan Earthquake/Tsunami
Name of Bank : ANZ
Name of Branch : Canberra City
BSB : 012950
Account No. : 2514 59908

Should you require a receipt of your donation, please send your name, address (not mandatory), date of donation, amount donated to the following email address.
Mail-address: admin@cb.mofa.go.jp

Australian Red Cross Society
http://www.redcross.org.au/japan2011.htm

Japanese Red Cross Society
http://www.redcross.org.au/japan2011.htm

Photographs from Google Images

Quote of the day on scientific whaling

The Institute for Cetacean Research in Japan, despite its unflagging efforts, has never told us a thing about the whale apart from that it tastes good with a dab of wasabi. Undaunted, that venerable institute's research continues.
(Anson Cameron at ABC The Drum)

Japanese response to whaling fleet returning home early

The Asahi Shimbun newspaper editorial of February 22, 2011 indicates that whaling is still being supported by elements within Japanese society, but the focus appears to be turning towards coastal hunts in the vicinity of Japan's territorial waters:

Violent acts of harassment must never be condoned, but the victims should not allow themselves to be pushed around and resort to knee-jerk reactions.

After repeated harassment of Japanese whalers by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, the government last week called off a research whaling mission in the Antarctic Ocean.

Sea Shepherd's harassment tactics included bringing their vessels dangerously close to Japanese whalers and hurling bottles of hazardous chemicals at them. The international community must condemn such activities by this radical anti-whaling group.

That said, however, anti-whaling sentiments run high in the governments and societies of the West. Together with other whaling nations, Japan has for years asserted and defended its right to whaling before the International Whaling Commission (IWC), but there is no solution in sight.

The arguments of the opposing camps are fundamentally irreconcilable. The pro-whaling camp asserts that whales are a "utilizable resource," while the anti-whaling camp sees them as "wild animals that need to be protected."

The Japanese government makes a scientifically valid argument when it points out that there are species of "resource whales," such as Antarctic minkes, that whalers are allowed to hunt. However, the prevalent thinking around the world today is that there is no need to hunt and eat those whales just because of their large population.

So long as the opposing camps hold on to their mutually unacceptable arguments, no resolution to the dispute can be hoped for. Both sides must recognize that no single value system should be forced on the entire world, and try to seek a compromise.

Following last week's decision, the government must think calmly about its future policy. While planning a long-range strategy, we believe the government should ask itself this fundamental question: Is Antarctic whaling truly necessary for Japan?

Japan's position is that it wants to resume commercial whaling in the Antarctic, and that research whaling is a preparatory step. Anti-whaling nations have all sorts of reasons of their own, but they are united in their opposition to commercial whaling in any form, and they are not giving an inch.

Demand for whale meat is not growing at all in Japan, and the nation's ocean-going whaling industry is effectively dead. Given this reality, there is little justification for Japan's stated need to resume commercial whaling in the Antarctic.

The most notable compromise plan so far floated by the IWC is to allow coastal whaling but ban hunting beyond 200 miles of the coast. The basic thinking is that each country should engage in coastal whaling at its discretion. But the international community's majority opinion should be honored for whaling in the Antarctic and other open seas.

We believe this is an appropriate plan. It requires anti-whaling nations to acknowledge whales as a "utilizable resource." But at the same time, Japan should rethink its position and switch course, namely, to downscale and eventually give up Antarctic whaling so long as its right to coastal whaling is guaranteed.

Whether we eat whale meat is our business and nobody else's. And we tend to react with anger when foreign countries tell us we shouldn't eat it. But while refusing to bend to the tactics of Sea Shepherd, we do need to explore a new way of whaling.

Japan's ICR accuses Australia of encouraging "eco-terrorism" as activists force its fleet to leave Antarctica

Minke Wales in Antarctic waters

MEDIA RELEASE

18 February 2011

JARPA II research vessels to return home

Today, after careful consideration to the situation in the Antarctic and consultation with the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR), the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan announced withdrawal of the research activities based on the Second Phase of Japan’s Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic (JARPAII) for this season, in order to avoid any injury or threat to life of the crew members and property of the fleet caused by the continued illegal attacks and sabotage by Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS).

JARPAII is a perfectly legal activity carried out under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW). The ICR strongly condemns the SSCS and its continued dangerous and violent actions against Japan’s whale research vessels in the Antarctic.

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) has condemned SSCS’s tactics against Japan’s whale research vessels. In 2008 the IWC member countries adopted by consensus a statement which calls on Sea Shepherd “to refrain from dangerous actions that jeopardize safety at sea” regardless of different positions of countries on whaling.

This issue is not about whaling, but about the safety and violent activities at Sea.

The Dutch and Australian Governments could not stop violent activities of the SSCS while they register SSCS vessels under their flags.

Also today, the Australian and New Zealand Governments officially welcomed the decision by the Government of Japan to withdraw the JARPAII research vessels for this season without condemning the extremely dangerous activities of the SSCS.

In this regard, the ICR cannot help deeming with regret that these countries are encouraging so-called “eco-terrorism”, by their actions of condoning illegal activities of the SSCS and of welcoming the results of such activities.

Once more again we request that Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands behave earnestly and according to their obligations as members of the international society and fulfill their duties under international law to deal with the SSCS criminal actions in a strict and objective manner.

Update: Antarctic Killing Fields January 2011

Greenpeace/Culley photograph of Japanese whaling vessell
pulling in slaughtered Minke Whale
Location and date unknown, Google Images

After a 26-day pursuit covering over 4,000 miles, the Steve Irwin caught up with the Nisshin Maru at 1800 hours on January 25^th, 2011 AEST.

“We finally have this serial killing death ship where we want them, and from here on in, we intend to ride their ass until the end of the whaling season,” said Captain Paul Watson from onboard the Steve Irwin. “This whaling fleet belongs to us now – lock, stock, and smoking harpoon gun.”

(Sea Shepherd News, January 25 2011)

It is difficult to find an acceptable raison d'être for modern whaling by advanced nations

Minke whale image from Mad Black Cat

Japan is not the only nation which, despite not being protein poor, insists on clinging to annual whale hunts as a national ‘right’.

Iceland which resumed commercial whaling in 2006 also vigorously protects its hunts in the face of world-wide calls to desist.

How far removed this right to hunt is from any societal food need or commercial reality is seen in an extract from a 9 July 2009 U.S. diplomatic cable:

¶2. (SBU) Staff members of Hvalur, hf, which is the only company in Iceland with the capability to hunt large whales, told Emboff on July 3 that whaling is providing jobs for 150 to 200 people. However, they admitted they are keeping their fingers crossed that there is a market for the meat and said, otherwise "this is a doomed operation." Since minke meat is the only whale meat consumed and sold in Iceland, the fin meat must be exported to another market, such as Japan. In May, Greenpeace and a local environmental group held a press conference which featured a recorded conversation with the Japanese importer of the Icelandic whale meat who stated he would not be importing any meat from Iceland this year. In late June, the Japanese Charge d'Affaires told Emboff that he didn't believe there was a market for the fin meat in Japan.
¶3. (SBU) Charge d'Affaires met with the Minister of Fisheries on July 9 and strongly protested the renewed whaling, particularly the large number of fin whales hunted. CDA reiterated that whaling is an impediment to agricultural and fish exports to the U.S, particularly to environmentally conscious outlets like Whole Foods grocery store, and underscored the Japanese CDA's belief that there is no market for Icelandic whale in Japan. The Minister responded that this was a sovereignty issue and that Iceland is a coastal nation that is using all its marine resources sustainably. He noted his political party is generally against whaling and the government is redoing the country's whaling laws, which date from 1947. He
also said the government has tasked the University of Iceland Economic Institute to create a cost and benefits report on whaling, which the Minister expects to use to develop a new whaling policy at the end of this whaling season. Regarding the reported absence of a whale meat market overseas, the Minister said that marketing was a private commercial issue which did not concern the government.

In the 2009-2010 whaling season the Iceland Government was reputed to have allowed a total hunt quota of 200 minke whales and 150 fin whales.

In the same year Japan’s stockpile of unsold whale meat was thought to be more than 6,000 tonnes.

The Wall Street Journal on 14 January 2011:

Read the WikiLeaks cables with Japan mentions in regard to Iceland’s whale hunting policies here:

June 10, 2008 cable from the U.S. embassy in Reykjavik

June 13, 2008 cable from the U.S. embassy in Reykjavik

January 30, 2009 cable from the U.S. embassy in Reykjavik

June 10, 2009 cable from the U.S. embassy in Reykjavik

July 9, 2009 cable from the U.S. embassy in Reykjavik

September 24, 2009 cable from the U.S. Secretary of State

Japan continues to wail about its Antarctic whaling in 2011

The Government of Japan-sponsored Institute of Cetacean Research continues to ramp up its propaganda war against the Sea Shepherd organisation with a long list of video show and tell:

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin activists throw glass projectiles toward the Japanese Research vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 (Part 2）(724KB)

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin activists throw glass projectiles toward the Japanese Research vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 (Part 1）(1.50MB)

• 2011.01.05 The antiwhaling trimaran Gojira deploys a wire rope aimed to disable the Yushin Maru No. 2 rudder and propeller (2.95MB)

• 2011.01.05 Antiwhaling activist readies to fire a high-power launcher against the Yushin Maru No. 2 (2.69MB)

• 2011.01.05 Antiwhaling activist uses a sling shot to launch a projectile toward the Yushin Maru No. 2 (2.45MB)

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists aboard a zodiac boat throwing glass bottle projectiles against the Yushin Maru No. 3 (2.91MB)

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists aboard a zodiac boat prepare to deploy a rope aimed at the Yushin Maru No. 3 propeller and rudder (794KB)

Accompanied by a handful of press releases:

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin attacks Japanese ship Yushin Maru No.2

• 2011.01.05 Japanese ship Yushin Maru No. 2 attacked by antiwhaling trimaran

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists attack Japanese ship Yushin Maru No. 3

Migaloo speaks on behalf of the Whale Nation

Some presentations bear repeating as the Government of Japan is once again active in the Southern Ocean killing fields....

Wikileaks: Japan and U.S. discuss Antarctic whaling and Australia's opposition

Main body of the text of a November 2009 U.S. diplomatic cable indicating that the American Government intended to pressure the Australian Government concerning its continuing opposition to ‘scientific’ commercial whale hunting in the Antarctic, Japan admits that the Netherlands' registration of Sea Shepherd vessels means that country is primarily responsible for addressing complaints and the U.S. is seeking to revoke the not-for-profit/charity status of the Sea Shepherd organization:

¶2. (C/NF) Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and U.S. representative to the International Whaling Commission Monica Medina met with senior Fisheries Agency of Japan officials to discuss the Future of the IWC process November 4 in Tokyo. In a morning meeting with Ms. Medina, Fisheries Agency of Japan Director General Machida said that while he expects difficult negotiations ahead, he wants the Future of the IWC process to succeed. According to Machida, political level consultations on whaling are necessary following the recent change in administration in Japan. However, he cautioned the new Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) administration shares the same fundamental position on whaling as the outgoing Liberal Democratic Party, including support for the resumption of commercial whaling and continued research whaling. He added that the two sides should not rush through the negotiations, which could end up making it more difficult to reach consensus at next June's IWC annual meeting.

¶3. (C/NF) Ms. Medina said the USG understands there is no fundamental change in the GOJ position on whaling, but that the USG is looking for creative solutions to move the IWC forward as opposed to fundamental change. She added that the U.S. is committed to finding a solution over the next two to three months. She said she would advocate for including language on whaling in a summit statement following the meeting between the President and Prime Minister November 13. The statement would express the desire of both countries to work out remaining differences on whaling. Once negotiators have narrowed the issues, both sides could seek a political solution, she added.

¶4. (C/NF) Machida described the progress at the Support Group meeting in Santiago as a major step forward. However, he said there remain two major issues that need to be addressed. First, there is still no consensus on the proposals raised in Santiago even among the Support Group members, let alone the entire IWC. Second, the upper limit on catch quotas, especially a reduction in the limit for Japan's research whaling in the Southern Ocean, have yet to be negotiated. Regarding Japan's catch numbers, Machida said Australia's proposal to phase out research whaling is a non-starter for the GOJ. He added that the baseline for any reduction in Japan's research whaling should be the catch quota figures and not the actual number of whales caught.

TOKYO 00002588 002 OF 002

¶5. (C/NF) Ms. Medina replied that the catch quotas is the most important outstanding issue. She said the Santiago proposal calls for an overall reduction in catch numbers from all whaling nations over a ten year period, which would help in securing approval from Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. She said given the history of Japan's research whaling, and the increase in quota numbers in recent years, there is room for Japan to cut from the actual number of whales taken. A symbolic action by Japan, such as agreeing not to take fin whales this year, would be a good indicator to the rest of the IWC of Japan's commitment to reaching a solution. The USG would then work hard to make sure the EU and Australia do not block a compromise.

¶6. (C/NF) Machida said there are two factors outside the current Future of the IWC negotiations that influence Japan's negotiating position. First, a negative outcome in the vote at next year's IWC intersessional meeting on Greenland's proposal to catch ten humpback whales could derail the work of the Support Group. Greenland's proposal has the backing of the IWC's Scientific Committee and another rejection at the IWC plenary meeting could make the overall compromise being discussed impossible. Second, the violent protests by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS) could limit the GOJ's flexibility in the negotiations. He said the Netherlands should have primary responsibly for taking action against the SSCS, but he appreciates the USG initiative to address the group's tax exempt status. He said action on the SSCS would be a major element for Japan in the success of the overall negotiations. Ms. Medina replied that she hopes to work out differences with the EU on Greenland's proposal on humpback whales prior to the March 2010 IWC intersessional meeting and include the issue in the overall agreement. Regarding the SSCS, she said she believes the USG can demonstrate the group does not deserve tax exempt status based on their aggressive and harmful actions.

¶7. (U) Ms. Medina cleared this cable subsequent to departing

Tokyo.

ROOS

WHALING DEAL IS NO DEAL - February 2010 U.S. diplomatic cable outlining Australian Environment Minister Peter Garret's response.