Eco Issue 5

Commission Again Slams Japan's "Scientific" Whaling Proposals

By overwhelming margins, the commission approved resolutions yesterday strongly urging the government of Japan to refrain from issuing special permits for whaling in both the Northern Pacific and Southern Ocean Sanctuary.

Commissioners from New Zealand, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom make some of the most scathing interventions in IWC history outlining their grave concerns with "research" whaling.

Japan's plan to expand the killing to sperm and Bryde's whales was roundly condemned as adding nothing necessary for management, and providing a ruse for killing species of higher commercial value.

Other Voices from Japan

This letter to the government of Japan was signed by 73 organizations and prominent individuals in Japan, including the Japan Wildlife Conservation Society, the Japan Consumers' Union, the Elsa Nature Conservancy, the Hokkaido Animal Conservation Society, and the Japan Animal Welfare Society.

An Open Letter to Government of Japan

We are citizen groups active in Japan. Our stance is that the consumption of whale meat is not an indispensable part of the Japanese diet.

It is true that in a certain period after World War II, whale meat was an important source of protein for Japanese people. However, as the war-shattered society recovered, the number of people who continued eating whale meat declined sharply. Nowadays, whale meat is typically consumed as a luxury food, a gourmet specialty item served along with drinks, or presented as a gift.

The Japanese government has insisted to the international community that whale meat is one of Japan's traditional foods that is indispensable for the nation. Despite this claim, the industry and government have had to run various campaigns domestically to encourage whale meat consumption. These campaigns include providing distorted information on people overseas who are opposing whaling as well as routinely attempting to manipulate public opinion by announcing misleading reports on the IWC. The situation, however, has not changed and the majority of Japanese still do not eat whale.

When the contamination of whale meat became an issue, the government contended that it would pose no health concern pointing out that the average amount of whale meat consumed annually per person in Japan is less than 1g. Despite these circumstances, the Japanese government has pushed ahead with an enlarged scale of "scientific" whaling and has attempted to resume commercial whaling, ignoring the international rules. These actions benefit only a minority of people and businesses, and do not represent the general consensus of the Japanese people.

As groups and individuals acting in Japan, we demand the following of the Japanese government:

1. Stop the scientific whaling of sperm whales and Bryde's whales in the Northwest Pacific that is scheduled to start this summer.

2. Abandon lethal methods of research and pursue instead non-lethal research. Stop killing whales under the name of science.

3. Stop any activities aiming for the resumption of commercial whaling such as fisheries aid to buy the pro-whaling votes of other countries;

4. Exercise strict control over smuggled and/or illegally caught whale meat.

5. Immediately alert consumers regarding the health risk of consuming whale meat contaminated with chemical substances.

6. Stop using taxpayer's money to propagate biased reports designed to promote whaling.

Island Coup,
Vote Flew

Did Japan back the wrong side in the civil war bubbling away in the Solomon Islands?

Last week a "commissioner" for the Solomon Islands suddenly appeared in Adelaide. With a pocketful of yen, he allied himself with Japan. But a new provisional government, appointed in the Solomons last weekend, sent a cable to George Lilo-Bubule Monday informing him that he no longer represents that nation.

The would-be commissioner flew home Tuesday, just before the Sanctuary vote. Japan's scheming has gone awry.

RMS Juggernaut?

Despite clear indications that IWC member nations are far apart on many aspects of a new Revised Management Scheme, the commission passed a resolution putting the plan on the fast track.

After some debate and the rejection of a Japanese RMS schedule amendment, the Resolution IWC 52/34 Rev was approved by consensus, calling for the secretary to prepare draft text of a schedule amendment by 30 November, 2000, and to convene an intersessional working group by February 2001 for the purposes of making further progress on the draft text.

It remains to be seen whether this turns into a juggernaut racing toward an end to the commercial whaling moratorium or an honest deliberation to include the necessary precautions and controls.

Six Key Actions on the RMS

1. The Watering Down Process Must Be Stopped

The chairman's draft which was distributed prior to this year's Working Group meeting was wholly inadequate. The new draft presented to the commission this week, after several days of compromises in the RMS working group, was an even further departure from any kind of scheme that could possibly control and regulate commercial whaling.

There was nothing in the chair's draft that even reached the standards of other international agreements. Its proposed observation and inspection scheme is far behind that of most international fisheries agreements. But whalers refuse to accept even the most benign regulations.

2. Commissioners Should Object To The Intersessional Meeting

Intersessional meetings restrict participation. How many countries will trundle off the Japan in the middle of winter to confront the phalanx of Japanese and Norwegian representatives dead-set on producing a weak, unenforceable scheme? The RMS Working Group Chair, Dutch Commissioner van der Assen, recognized that the RMS includes disputed matters that require action by commission as a whole.

3. The Compliance System Must Be Binding And Include Penalties Provisions

There must be a binding mechanism to adjudicate disputes. When there are violations of the agreement, decisions rendered by a dispute panel against a party must be binding. The only way to ensure compliance is by enacting a system of penalties that are severe enough to stop infractions. Warnings and small fines will be viewed as the cost of doing business rather than a method of deterrence.

Supervision, control, inspection and enforcement must be under international control. National observers and domestic legislation and controls enhance an international program but cannot supplant it. The international regime must be the final arbiter of whether national enforcement is sufficient to accomplish the goal of the international regime. Any system less than this results in an international regime that is little more than a voluntary code of conduct.

The draft RMS envisions a "Review Committee" which will review alleged infractions and make recommendations. One needs only to look at the complete dysfunctionality of the IWC infractions committee, and past IWC resolutions regarding scientific whaling, to understand that unless the RMS is binding and includes penalties, it must be rejected.

The IWC should emulate the numerous international conservation treaties that include strong enforcement provisions.

4. The Current Observer And Tracking Provisions Are Unworkable

The international observer section of the draft RMS is woefully inadequate. The international observers are little more than data collectors. They are neither given authority to enforce the convention nor to intervene in whaling operations. They just make a report and forward it to the Review Committee for discussion. These reports, if Norway has its way, will only be forwarded to the committee at the end of the inspector's "tenure".

5. DNA Tracking Must Be Conducted From Catch To Market

There must be an international tracking and verification system which tracks whales from capture to market. To do this comprehensively, a DNA diagnostic register comprised of samples not only from commercially killed whales but also whales from strandings and by-catch needs to be implemented. DNA analyses must also be routinely conducted in the marketplace.

6. The Scope Of The RMS Debate Must Remains Broad

The RMS Resolution was wisely amended to ensure that discussion is not limited to the elements identified thus far. Total catches over time, humane killing methods, environmental contaminants, and other aspects of environmental threats must be included.

Commissioners from New Zealand and the United Kingdom deserve special credit for solid arguments for a more effective RMS. But too many countries appear far too willing to appease the whalers and ram through a quick-fix RMS. This in unacceptable.

Without a strong, effective and deterrence-oriented RMS, the commission risks being left with a system relying on whaling countries' "good faith" adherence. History demonstrates that good faith alone, does not prevent cheating or its disastrous effects.

Norway's Whale Meat Toxic, Too

WWF reports that whale meat and blubber sampled in Norway recently were found to contain heavy metals, PCBs and pesticides.

The toxic whale meat crisis now faces Norwegian consumers as well as Japanese. Will the Norwegian government, like Japan, shirk its responsibility to protect its citizens? Will Norway put the financial health of a handful of whalers (who already make a fine living fishing most of the year) ahead of people who are consuming contaminants that cause cancer, sterility and other woes?

Twenty samples of whale meat and blubber collected in Norwegian markets in recent weeks were analyzed by scientists hired by WWF. Preliminary results show that more than 50 PCB congeners were identified, some of which are dioxin-like PCB's. Also, 25 metals were identified in whale blubber samples, including organic mercury. In addition, several organochlorine pesticides were detected, including aldrin, dieldrin, heptachlor, and DDE and DDD (which are breakdown products of DDT).

Norway should not be surprised that its minke whales are contaminated. The marine mammals are subjected each summer to the chemical and radioactive soup pouring into the Barents Sea from Russia's polluted rivers and military bases. Similar toxic exposure is faced by the whales when they winter in the North Sea and Irish Sea.

Ironically, the children, men and women of Norway may be saved from this tainted food by Gro Brundtland, the pro-whaling former Norwegian prime minister who now heads the World Health Organization. WHO is aggressively attacking tainted food.

Conservation groups will continue to closely monitor the chemical pollutants threatening cetaceans—and the humans who consume them.

Time for Makah Answers?

It's not surprising that the U.S. delegation has kept quiet on the Makah issue. It's still reeling from a recent U.S. Federal Court ruling suspending government support for the Makah gray whale hunt. Unfortunately, the hush has spread throughout the IWC. Eco has learned that several delegations feel that the new developments warrant another look at the Makah whaling quota. After all, court records show that the US misled the IWC by illegally committing to advocate the Makah position to the IWC before engaging in any of the required National Environmental Policy Act analyses. They'd like to bring it up, but the US has exacted a promise from the like-minded nations not to say a word.

The US is also keeping its fingers crossed that delegates don't watch the shocking video being circulated. Clips of Makah whalers mugging for photos while diving off the back of a freshly killed gray whale—and then leaving some of the meat overnight to rot—don't exactly portray the kind of tribal cultural and nutritional need that the US promised the IWC.

Is it not time that some countries break the silence and ask the US for some answers?

Farewell Ray, Welcome Nicola

ECO salutes Dr. Ray Gambell for his 24 years of dedicated service as Secretary of the IWC, and welcomes the new Secretary, Dr. Nicola Grandy.

The new secretary is a British citizen with a BS in marine biology from Liverpool University, a MS in applied hydrobiology from the University of London, and a PhD in marine oil pollution from Liverpool University.

Dr. Grandy, 42, has worked for the past ten years on chemicals management issues at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris, where she managed the Pesticide and Risk Assessment Program. Prior to joining OECD, she worked a the Water Research Centre in the UK, where she managed the environmental toxicology group.

She reports a strong interest in the IWC's growing focus on environmental threats to cetaceans.

On to London
Word is out that the 53rd Annual IWC meeting will be held on July 23-27, 2001 at the Novotel Hotel in the Hammersmersmith neighborhood of West London.
Eco will look forward to seeing you there.