New Zealand Report Says Japan's Whaling Program Lacks Scientific Credibility

JARPA II, the Japanese whaling program currently taking place in the southern Ocean will more than double for Japan the number of whales killed according to a report released by New Zealands Conservation minister Chris Carter. Mr Carter stated that the whales killed in the program will be inside the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and well away from Japanese territorial waters. The report states that the reasons Japan uses to carry out the Whaling program is without scientific credibility. Japan failed in June to get approval from the International Whaling body when it proposed that the 19 year moratorium on commercial whaling be lifted



The report pretty well states that Japans excuse of research to justify killing thse whales is hogwash. After all how many hundred whales do you need to kill to use for scientific research?

It is disgraceful disrespect to the rest of the world and to carry this out in interantional waters well away from japans own waters is disgusting. Whales have a hard enough time surviving in todays world without being deliberately hunted and killed off, especially in a worldwide "Whale Santuary".

Greenpeace can go a bit overboard at times but this is one issue I am glad they are out there raising world awareness of.

[edit on 22-12-2005 by Mayet]

[edit on 12/22/05 by FredT]

You and I have been over this before, Mayet, and though we agree on some matters concerning this issue, the real issue here is that the IWC [ie: International Whaling Commission] has not yet fixed the loopholes in their whaling moratorium, nor do I forsee them doing so in the near future.

There are also some loopholes in the IWC Moratorium. First, compliance with the moratorium is voluntary: any IWC member country can file a protest of the moratorium, and then need not abide by it: Norway is hunting Minke whales in the North Atlantic under such a protest. Second, there are exceptions for "aboriginal whaling"; the American Eskimos are still allowed to hunt the bowhead whale and the gray whale, and the Russians are allowed to take 100-200 gray whales to serve to their northern aboriginals. Third, whaling "for scientific research" is still allowed.

Biodiversity and Conservation: Whaling and Fishing

Till the IWC loopholes are addressed, Japan will do what it is doing, just as New Zealand will continue to do what it is doing.




seekerof

That being the case Seekerof, it will be only through public awarness and protesting loud and clear that any changes will be made. In this case I feel that silence will only condone the deeds. Hopefully with coverage and awareness that loophole will now be closed and the whales can live out their lives in peace without worry about Moby Dick's Captain Ahab chasing them around the ocean wwith a big mean deadly harpoon gun.

Steve, before you post replies like that please read board questions and business and the pinned topics in ATSNN to see what the board guidelines are for News Articles.


[edit on 22-12-2005 by Mayet]

Originally posted by Mayet
Greenpeace can go a bit overboard at times but this is one issue I am glad they are out there raising world awareness of.

So am I. I've been vehemently opposed to whaling since I first found out what it was.

I disagree that they can go overboard on this particular issue. In fact, this is what they are doing at the moment:

rtv.rtrlondon.co.uk...

In the 70s the RN and Icelandic fisheries patrol were facing off in the North Sea over fishing rights. I've seen footage of RN frigates shouldering Icelandic fishery patrol vessels in confrontations. In the end the UK lost the argument.

I've always advocated the use of force against whaling ships. Luckily I'm not in a position of political power. But I still have no problem with putting a Mk 48 into the side of a whaler. Anybody know how much an ex-Russian Akula (they were deisel, weren't they?) goes for?

edit:bloody link!

[edit on 22-12-2005 by HowlrunnerIV]

Sorry Howlrunner I may have written that a bit wrong. To clarify. In some past separate issues I have felt that Greenpeace has gone overboard. But on the whaling issue and quite a few others I think they are smack on target. Good on them for doing this...

Ah the Eco Terrorists strike again.

Can anyone name one year where Japan or any Native nation nation has even come close to their alloted quoted or stated goal?

As I recall the Makah nation was given a quota of 6 (it might have been 8) and ended up taking only one and that took them three years.

Enough said!




[edit on 12/22/2005 by shots]

Japanese public
rejects whale hunting!
1 April 2002
An independent poll released on Saturday by the Japanese national newspaper, the Asahi Shimbun shows Japanese attitudes toward whales to be significantly different than that reflected in the government commissioned poll released two weeks ago.In that poll, the government claimed that 75 percent of the Japanese people favour a return to commercial whaling under controlled conditions. The Asahi Shimbun poll in contrast shows that only 47 percent of the Japanese public agree with whale hunting, down by seven percent from Asahi Shimbun's 1993 poll figure.

According to the current poll over one third of the Japanese public opposed whaling.

More here: www.earwig.co.nz...

I got curious to see if Japan hunted whales during WW2.

The answer is, "perhaps."

If they did it must have been in Antarctican waters.
Although the tripl home must have a touch spooky with American submarines and the like patrolling the Pacific.

Originally posted by shots
Ah the Eco Terrorists strike again.

Can anyone name one year where Japan or any Native nation nation has even come close to their alloted quoted?

What alloted quota?

There are no quotas because whaling is illegal. As in, there is a moratiorium on whaling. That is why the Japanese have to call their hunt "scientific", to squeeze it through th eloophole.

And as for the "traditional" culture argument. That was done by coastal villagers using wooden boats.

What about sailing industrial factory/freezer boats into the Southern Ocean, thousands of kilometres from Japan's territorial coastal waters, is "traditional"?

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV


What alloted quota?

There are no quotas because whaling is illegal.

Wrong all whaling is not illegal. There are quotas for aboriginals.

See Day Three

Sink the Jap bastards and use their bloated bodies for research.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
What alloted quota?

There are no quotas because whaling is illegal.

Wrong all whaling is not illegal. There are quotas for aboriginals.

Sorry, missed the point you were making there. Yes, there are quotas for indiginous groups whose "traditional" culture included whaling. Which, given my support of traditional cultures and indigenous groups, I find myself having to support.

However, the Japanese don't have any such "quota", they are announcing the numbers they will take unilaterally and hunting inside the Southern Ocean Marine Sactuary.

What are the penalites for hunting inside national parks in your country? How about if a bunch of foreigners came in with Humvees and machine guns and started hunting in your natinal park? How would you feel then?

Although I may disagree with your wording below I totally agree with your sentiment.

Do people know that they only began eating Whales AFTER WW2 because of food shortages. So "traditional hunting hardly applies. Also people generally hate the meat and the have been giving it away to get people to eat it again.

Corrupt and contemptable.

Originally posted by AtlantisAgain
Sink the Jap bastards and use their bloated bodies for research.