In this issue of INWR Digest we report on the refusal of IWC to allow Iceland to rejoin the commission. The closeness of the vote determining this result reflects the continuing polarization and impasse existing at IWC, a problem earlier reported on in this newsletter (see "IUCN expresses concern about IWC" INWR Digest 19; "IWC woes continue" and "IWC receives more warnings" INWR Digest 20; "Editorial" INWR Digest 21). Looking ahead, it will be interesting to hear or read the report given by the IWC Chairman at the November 2002 CITES meeting, as he tries to reassure CITES members, once again, that IWC is making progress in its management of commercial whaling. But how will the IWC Chairman explain the rationale for excluding, from an international WHALING commission, a nation like Iceland with a demonstrated capacity to conduct high quality whale research and having the intention of resuming sustainable whaling from abundant stocks of non-endangered species? Given CITES past warnings to IWC about its lack of progress in resolving its internal difficulties, some CITES delegates will likely ask themselves: just how responsible, or credible, is IWC, when it excludes Iceland (whose request for membership was perfectly legal under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) but allows in Austria and Italy, whose stated purpose for joining IWC was to flout international law by subverting the IWC's underlying legal convention? Indeed, there is no precedent within IWC for rejecting Iceland's application, and in the past, both Chile and Peru were allowed to join IWC with reservations.
An interesting, if not important, research question might be to ask: how relevant is IWC in relation to its legal responsibilities to insure whales make a sustainable contribution to future global food supplies? This is a relevant question, as the human population increases toward 8 billion people in the next generation, as is the observation that IWC regulates the taking of about 375 whales each year -- a number that it does its best to reduce, rather than expand, as whale numbers and human needs continue to increase.
The U.S. government is taking steps to reinstate the Makah gray whale quota of five whales per year granted by the IWC. This quota was temporarily suspended by the U.S. government following a June 2000 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals that the U.S. government had violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This violation was held to have occurred when an environmental assessment (EA) of the impact of the hunt was carried out after (rather than before, as required under NEPA) the Makah and the U.S. government had concluded a whaling management agreement.
As required by the court decision, a new EA was published in January 2001 and public hearings held in Seattle on February 1 2001. A final EA was issued on July 12 2001, and a new whaling management agreement between the U.S. government and the Makah Nation was signed in November 2001.
This new management agreement is far less restrictive than the original whaling agreement. Under the new rules, restrictions on the time the hunt may be carried out are removed, and there are few restrictions on areas where the hunt can be carried out. Thus the Makah may now hunt at any time of the year in safe inshore waters off of tribal lands and within the sheltered waters in the Straits of Juan de Fuca.
According to a report in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (November 29 2001), the Makah Tribal Vice Chairman stated that the tribe was satisfied with the revised whaling agreement, noting that the hunt will be much safer now that no time restrictions apply.
The 2001 whaling season resulted in the quota of 549 minke whales being landed, despite a slow start to the season in May due to poor weather conditions. The quota was distributed among five whaling areas in the North Sea, the Barents Sea and the Greenland Sea. Minke whales in these areas derive from the Central and the Northeast Atlantic minke whale stocks having estimated populations of 72,000 and 112,000 minkes respectively. About 30 boats took part in the hunt, and whalers reported high demand for the meat.
A veterinarian serves as whaling inspector on board each boat during the hunt. According to their inspection, 78 percent of whales died instantly, the remainder being rendered unconscious when the penthrite grenade detonated. The unconscious whales died in little over one minute without regaining consciousness. Norwegian harpooners attend mandatory whaling courses and are required to pass stringent shooting tests.
A new system for distributing pilot whale meat in Torshavn, the capital city of the Faroe Islands, was introduced in July 2001. City residents wanting a free share of meat and blubber place their names on a list administered by the city council. When meat becomes available, from a catch in Torshavn or another bay where shares are plentiful, those on the list are allocated their share in alphabetical order. The system commenced in July when 53 whales became available from a catch of 120 whales in the village of Sandur on the island of Sandoy. A further 20 whales from the same catch were redistributed to the municipality of Skála.
At the end of August 2001 there were 7,487 individual names, in 805 households, on the list. The total population of greater Torshavn (which includes three nearby villages) is 17,915. A total of 860 pilot whales has been taken so far (August 24) this season in the Faroe Islands. All whale drives were conducted in accordance with Faroe Islands government regulations.
In 2001 a new knife (grindakniv) was introduced into the Faroe Islanders' whaling kit. This knife, designed and made in the Faroe Islands by Kristian Glerfoss is currently undergoing tests by the government Veterinary Service. The knife is 33 cm long with an 8 cm blade shaped like a large arrow. The handle is intended to be gripped by both hands and is designed to provide more control during the killing of the beached whales. The knife is also intended to be safer to use by the whalers in particular situations. Tests indicate the new knife significantly reduces killing time, to approximately 2 seconds, compared to the approximately 30 seconds using the traditional pilot whaling knife. Whalers using the knife have praised its innovative design and look forward to its widespread introduction into the hunt.
The Japanese whale research program (JARPAN) commenced on May 14, and the vessels returned to port on August 3 2001. One hundred minke whales, 50 Bryde's whales and eight sperm whales were taken. This is the second year of JARPAN, which is conducted pursuant Article VIII of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.
On November 6 2001, the five Japanese ships participating in the Antarctic whale research program (JARPA) sailed from Shimonoseki in western Japan. The research mothership (Nisshin Maru) is accompanied by three whale catchers (Yushin Maru, No. 1 Kyo Maru and No. 25 Toshi Maru) as well as a sighting survey boat (No. 2 Kyoshin Maru). This program was initiated in 1987, and is aimed to respond to the scientific uncertainties that contributed to a majority of IWC members voting to establish a pause in commercial whaling in 1982. The research involves sighting surveys and collection of biopsy samples, as well as a sampling program involving collecting up to 440 minke whales. Scientists collect about 100 sets of data or samples for laboratory analysis from each whale taken; all JARPA research results are submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee. The vessels will return to Japan in April 2002.
Iceland's application to rejoin the IWC was rejected at the 53rd IWC Meeting held in London in July 2001. This refusal to allow a former member to rejoin, resulted from Iceland wishing to become a member with a reservation exempting it from the 1982 IWC ban on commercial whaling. Australia and the U.S. proposed that IWC vote on Iceland's membership application, and in the ensuing ballot, 22 votes were cast against Iceland's application, 19 were in favour, and three abstained. Two of the three countries that abstained (France and Switzerland) prior to the vote being taken had expressed the view that Iceland was within its legal right to join IWC with a reservation.
No progress was made on completing the Revised Management Scheme (RMS), nor on Japan's request for an interim relief allocation of 50 minke whales for the four Japanese small-type whaling communities, pending ending the pause in commercial whaling that came into effect at the end of the 1987 season.
The West Nordic Council is a joint parliamentary organisation of Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. The Council's theme for 2001 is "The West Nordic Hunting Culture"; a conference on the subject was held in Akureyri, Iceland, June 11-14, 2001 with the purpose of contributing knowledge and understanding of the region's traditions of sustainable utilisation of natural resources. These traditions remain alive today and will hopefully continue for generations to come. In conjunction with the year 2001 proclamation, the Council issued the following statement:
"How can anyone kill a seal? How can anyone possibly kill a whale? These are natural questions from people who have spent their lives in populous western cities. To the peoples from northern regions, these questions provoke no more concern than the question, "How can anyone ever kill a pig or a cow?" Eating meat from whales or seals is as natural to us as eating pork, beef or poultry is to others. Wearing a beautiful coat made of seal pelt comes as naturally as wearing clothes made from cow hide.
Hunting is part of our cultural heritage. It has contributed to forming our traditional diet, our history and our identity. Through the ages, hunting has been part of the very basis of our existence... To many of us, even today, hunting constitutes a vital proportion of our livelihood and well-being. Hunting is a special event for us, connecting our past with the present... At the same time, hunting ties together the inhabitants of the small west Nordic communities into a unique cultural fellowship... To the peoples of the west Nordic and arctic areas, hunting is a question of survival as well as an ancient cultural heritage. We want to keep and preserve this tradition. However, a number of dangers are threatening the west Nordic hunting traditions.
We acknowledge that hunting must be conducted in a sustainable manner... The west Nordic hunting tradition is identified with a collective, solemn respect for nature. [We] have always depended on nature. Short-sighted exploitation remains a temptation that the west Nordic peoples simply cannot afford... stocks are closely monitored by west Nordic and international scientists. Hunting quotas and seasonal protection schemes, etc., are implemented on the basis of expert advice in order to ensure sustainable utilisation of the stocks.
Without doubt, pollution poses the greatest danger to the west Nordic hunting culture. Heavy metals and other toxic substances accumulate in the animals, threatening their fitness for human consumption [and] the animal's fertility and survivability... Pollution knows no borders. We can but appeal to the industrialised nations to act in a conscientious and responsible manner and work continuously towards reducing the emissions of environmentally hazardous substances into nature.
General misconceptions and insufficient knowledge of [our living] conditions... have often posed a threat to [our hunting] culture... Examples of this can be observed in campaigns against seal hunting in Greenland, the sinking of Icelandic whaling ships and actions against the Faroese killing of the pilot whale. These examples emphasise the importance of a constructive dialogue between environmental and animal protection organisations and the west Nordic peoples. We must ensure that discussion will not be premised on myths and erroneous presumptions.
The protection of our stocks and the protection of our marine environment are positive goals for us all... On this point, we regard the environmental organisations as our allies. It is in our common interest [to produce] the necessary knowledge and information about our stocks and the real dangers involved."
[Edited text; see The West Nordic Council ]
The International Coalition of Fisheries Associations (ICFA), an international association of the world's major fishing nations, held its 2001 annual meeting from July 17-20 in Tokyo. ICFA adopted the following statement during the meeting: ICFA notes that: Maintaining the sustainable utilization of marine resources is increasingly recognized as critical to meeting the human food needs of the world's growing populations; While recognizing the need to share the world's fisheries resources with increasing populations of cetaceans, there is concern about the impact to human food security worldwide; The comprehensive assessment by the IWC Scientific Committee has already shown that some whale species are sufficiently abundant to allow a quota under the Revised Management Procedure. Therefore ICFA:
Reconfirms its position in support of the utilization of marine resources including cetaceans as food for human beings, if those resources are found to be sufficiently abundant to support sustainable use based on scientific data,
Can find no reason to set or continue to keep zero catch limits for sustainable marine resources,
Strongly supports the decision of the 24th Session of FAO's Committee on Fisheries to study and review the interaction between marine mammals and fisheries,
Opposes the establishment of any marine protected areas including any whale sanctuaries that are not based on science and
Urges the expeditious completion of the IWC's Revised Management Scheme as the CITES Secretariat requested at it's Conference of the Parties [COP] 11.
Allen, Robert C. and Ian Keay 2001. The first great whale extinction: the end of the bowhead whale in the Eastern Arctic. Explorations in Economic History 38(4):448-477.
Becker, Alfred 2000. Franks casket revisited. 29 pp. Bremen: author. [on Northumbrian runic whale bone casket from ca. 650 CE]
Cassell, Mark S. 2000. Iñupiat labor and commercial shore whaling in northern Alaska. Pacific Northwest Quarterly 91:115-123.
Dickenson, Anthony B. and Chesley W. Sanger 2001. Norwegian Whaling in Newfoundland: the Aquaforte Station and the Effeffsen Family, 1902-1908. 114 pp., illus. Research in Maritime History 20, International Maritime Economic History Association, St. John's, Newfoundland & Labrador.
Findlay, K.J. 2001. Natural history and conservation of the Greenland whale, or bowhead, in the Northwest Atlantic. Arctic 54(1):55-76.
Frank, Stuart 2001. Fakeshaw: a checklist of plastic "scrimshaw" (machine-manufactured polymer scrimshaw fakes). Third edition, 32 pp. illus. Kendall Whaling Museum Monograph Series, 1B. Sharon, Massachusetts.
Freeman, M.M.R. 2001. Small-scale whaling in North America. In: J.R. McGoodwin Understanding the Cultures of Fishing Communities: A Key to Fisheries Management and Food Security,pp. 169-94. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, No. 401. FAO, Rome
Hamazaki, T. & Tanno, D. 2001. Approval of whaling and whaling- related beliefs: public opinion in whaling and non-whaling countries. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 6:131-144.
Hansen, Svend Einar 1999. Hvalfangserkirken. Fangst, tro og dristighet på Syd Georgia. 123 pp., illus. Oslo: Genesis forlag. [Parish work at the whaling stations of South Georgia].
Kristiansen, Eivind H. 2000. Fra fembøring til stortråler. Fangst, fiske or forlis, menn or skuter. 206 pp. illus. Alta: author [ship biographies, including small whale catchers]
Literaturhaus Köln (ed) 2001. Erster europäischer Moby-Dick-Marathon. 2-4 November 2001, Literaturhaus Köln. 16 pp., illus. Köln: Literaturhaus
Lund, Judith Navas 2001. Whaling Masters and Whaling Voyages Sailing from American Ports: A Compilation of Sources. 740 pp, frontispiece, endpaper illus. Kendall Whaling Museum (P.O. Box 297, Sharon, MA 02067). ISBN 1-57898-312-6. US$125 (plus $5 shipping).
Mitchell, R.B. 1998. Forms of discussion/norms of sovereignty: interest, science, and morality in the regulation of whaling. In: Litfin, K.T. (ed) The Greening of Sovereignty in World Politics. Cambridge, MA: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT] Press.
Reeves, Randall R., Jeffrey M. Breiwick and Edward D. Mitchell 1999. History of whaling and estimated kill of right whales... in the northwestern United States, 1620-1924. Marine Fisheries Review 61(3):1-36.
Rüppel, Uwe 2001. Kapitän Wilhelm Bades Touristikfahrten nach Norwegen, Stitsbergen und ins europäische Nordmeer in polarphilatelistischer Hinsicht. 212 pp. Bielefeld: Polarpost-Sammlerverein Bielefeld. [Bades was involved with the first modern German whaling company].
Sandbakken, Enok 1998. En hvalfangers beretning -- fra en førstereis' dagbok. 127 pp., illus. Larvik: Krohn Johansen Forlag. {about the floating whale factory ship "Southern Harvester"]
Schoell, Mark 1999. The Marine Mammal Protection Act and its role in the decline of San Diego's tuna fishing industry. Journal of San Diego History 45 (Winter 1999):33-52.
Visit the INWR website at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~inwr/
| Editor: | Associate Editors: | |||
|
Milton Freeman Canadian Circumpolar Institute University of Alberta Edmonton, AB T6G 0H1 Tel: 1-780-492-4682 Fax: 1-403-492-5273 milton.freeman@ualberta.ca |
Klaus Barthelmess Whaling Research Project PO Box 620255 50695 Cologne, GERMANY Tel: 49-221-7408396 Fax: 49-221-747342 barthval@gmx.de |
Louwrens Hacqueboard Arctic Centre University of Groningen PO Box 716 9700 AS Groningen, THE NETHERLANDS Tel: 31-50-363-6834 Fax: 31-50-363-490 hacqubr@let.rug.nl |
||