national

60% of Japanese support whale hunt; 14% eat whalemeat, survey shows

69 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

69 Comments
Login to comment

I'm sorry but 1,756 voters in a country of 127.6 MILLION hardly represents the countries opinion.

0 ( +13 / -13 )

No, but it's a pretty disappointing set of responses and shows that the Japanese are clearly in their own headspace when it comes to whaling and definitely out of step with many other countries in the world. There is possibly a little knee jerk bruised ego response in this set of answers as well.

Even still, the UN ruling was overwhelmingly against the program, and in this case Japan really has a responsibility to comply with the spirit of the ruling and not quibble over technicalities to weasel a way around it.

9 ( +19 / -10 )

I don't know any Japanese that seek out whale meat as a culinary experience. How many tons of whale meat are being stored here that will be turned into pet food?

7 ( +14 / -7 )

"only 4% said they eat “sometimes” and another 10 percent said they eat it “fairly infrequently”.

Headline is "14% eat whale meat" but sounds like it should read more like "14% have eaten whale meat and probably won't eat again".

7 ( +13 / -6 )

And how gullible do they think we are. I find it hard to believe that 60% of Japanese people are for whaling.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

Anyhow, Japan still wins. They eat whales, Europe and USA generates wars. Wonder what's worse...

2 ( +12 / -10 )

I agree with you, kurisupisu.

I don't know anyone who eats whale meat. It was the same when I was living in Hokkaido. I saw whale "bacon" in supermarkets there, but never knew anyone who ate the stuff.

I actually tried it, out of curiosity, daikon oroshi. The most positive thing I could say about it was that it was uninteresting.

I can't see where they get these figures from.

Maybe there are Clandestine Cetacea Clubs where they hide away and stuff themselves with whale meat.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Nationalism causes belligerency and irrationality.

4 ( +11 / -7 )

Hardly a scientific poll. No more scientific than the polls we see on Japan Today at times.

-4 ( +4 / -7 )

Japan said it would redesign its Antarctic whaling mission in a bid to make it more scientific

Tantamount to an express admission that the 'research' is for the purpose of continuing the whaling; the whaling is not for the purpose of research.

8 ( +14 / -6 )

Headline: A new survey shows that 60% of Japanese don't like being told what to do by people in other countries.

19 ( +23 / -4 )

" Practice of human consumption (of whale meat) continues today in Japan, Norway, Iceland, Faroe Islands, by Basques, the Inuit and other indigenous peoples of the United States (including the Makah people of the Pacific Northwest), Canada, Greenland; the Chukchi people of Siberia, and Bequia in the Caribbean Sea."

It's important to note that " has historically been eaten in many parts of the world, including across Western Europe and Colonial America, and not necessarily restricted to coastal communities, since flesh and blubber can be salt-cured."

I've tried various dishes, but not been too impressed by it myself.

This is just environmental activists forcing their collectivist mores on everybody else.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Who did they survey? How were the questions worded? How many of the 14% eat it more than once/ year? What are the breakdowns by age? There are lies ... and statistics.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

60% of (a small, non-random sample of 1700) Japanese (readers of Asahi Shimbun who had views strong enough to act out on the urge to fill out an online poll) support whaling, while 14% of (a small, non-random sample of 1700) Japanese (readers of Asahi Shimbun who had views strong enough to act out on the urge to fill out an online poll) eat whale.

Sounds scientific!

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

OK...I overlooked the "How often" part when I skimmed it ...but it doesn't look like very often. If I had to guess, I'd say only 3% of people eat whale meat more than a few times/ year.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

What a load of BS, who did they ask all fishermen and families in Japan? You can make numbers look anyway you want.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

It seems that 60% of Japanese support whale hunt if whales are not endangered and 14% used to eat.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Do those voters drive Black vans? :P

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Can never take polls like this seriously. What type of people read newspapers nowadays and how many would respond to this poll if they didn't have an interest in whaling already?

That being said, there are definitely a lot of people that support whaling for reasons like "The Australians kill kangaroos, so why do they complain about us killing whales?".

2 ( +7 / -5 )

why do westerners find it so hard to believe that japanese people are in favor of the hunt, although they don't eat it themselves? they polled "voters," which usually mean "older" and "male." i teach a group like this, and they all said they supported the whale hunt even though they never eat the stuff. it boils down to defending themselves against cultural imperialism from the West. puh-lease.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

And if you survey 20,000 people nationally who are under the age of 40, and do so randomly, I wonder if the results might lean toward apathy rather than pro-whaling. Asahi may be a liberal-leaning paper, but whaling is not actually an issue that is so near and dear to people's hearts in Japan either pro or con, and especially not for younger people, few of whom rely on Asahi for their news in the first place.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

I've spoken to a lot of Japanese people about this and these statistics are pretty much inline with the response I got from people. The older generation said they had eaten it at school many years ago and the 30's generation said theyhad eaten it once or twice, but the teens to twenties said they had never eaten it and don't want to. The majority also stated that it is Japanese culture and they should be allowed to hunt whales. However, when I say, "but, nobody eats it, so why should they waste so much money on catching them?" I always get the same blank response and the conversation usually ends with the Japanese just claiming its different cultures. These statistics only come from a small group of people and it doesn't state which demograph they have surveyed. In a way, these statistics are positive. If only 10% of the population are eating whale meat fairly regularly there is no need for japan to continue its southern ocean hunt. There are ample stocks of whales in the oceans around Japan to feed the few that do eat it.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Disillusioned:

I've spoken to a lot of Japanese people about this and these statistics are pretty much inline with the response I got

All that shows is that most japanese people know better than to start talking about whaling with their Australian English teacher.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Japan is pursuing a policy of unrestricted rapacity, not only toward whales but towards dolphins and other marine creatures. Japan should end its ruthless destruction of the great whales.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

The survey was probably also conducted by telephone when the majority of Japanese barely touch a house phone anymore. Therefore, the survey probably only reflected an older age demographic as well.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

@John Galt,

I think youve missed the point. I know that the Inuit arent eating whales and seals for scientific purposes unlike Japan who say they are but in fact it`s for consumption. They should just stop being so stupid and directly say what they use the meat for. So you do raise a good point but specifically what are the scientific reasons?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Its probably a pretty fair statistic.

It's very simple. Most Japanese don't like whale meat. Most don't eat it, and some have never eaten it. They don't think about it.

But they don't want other countries saying they can't do it.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I wonder if the 60% of this small survey even understand the purpose of the 'research'

Tokyo has always maintained that it was intending to prove the whale population was large enough to sustain commercial hunting.

If a large number of these people so not even want to eat the meat, what purpose is it to kill animals (any) just to prove that killing them will not endanger them? Seems like a waste of time, money and life. If you have a need for that animal, then I will say it is fair to argue your case and go from there

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Yeah, the whale population may be big enough to support commercial whaling, but they is no market to sell the meat, so it will never be viable. It's just a case of killing them because they are there.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

There was something on TV the other night discussing this, and it was just pure comedy. It had plenty of skits showing westerners as big angry men overpowering the hapless nice Japanese lawyers. Showing how evil Americans whaled for their oil alone, and then suddenly turned around to the poor japanese and said "stop!" The punchline was when three older celebrities (who have probably not eaten whale since they were forced to at school), started defending the scientific nature of the whaling, clearly clueless as to what they were defending ("but of course its all scientific! and delicious!")

1 ( +6 / -5 )

I now understand why basic statistics is not popular in the West.

P=60%

sigma=(0.6*(1-0.6)/1756)^0.5=1.17%

99% confidence level coefficient 2.58

2.58*1.17%=3.0%

The 99% confidence interval: 57% to 63%

I would say the confidence interval is tight enough to say that about 60% support whaling.

This is just high school level statistics, you know.

Whale meat is delicious. I think it tastes better than beef. But the supply is limited and if people eat whale meat too frequently, the Westerners would criticize it is commercial whaling. To avoid that trap, I refrain from eating the delicious meat. When the moratorium of commercial whaling is lifted, I would regularly eat whale. I know they LOVE whales and they would never let us utilize the pet marine resource for consumption.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Well, it has always been suggested the East Asian countries have better math standards than the West :-)

Anyway, I see this as a "I don't agree with what you eat, but I shall defend to the death your right to eat it" thing. Almost Jeffersonish. Ironically, the country in which Jefferson lived is getting away from that principle.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Disillusioned

Yeah, the whale population may be big enough to support commercial whaling, but they is no market to sell the meat, so it will never be viable.

If you believe in what you preach then let the market be the one to decide if it is not viable or not.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I just look at that picture of that huge, poor, whale on the deck of that ship and I just have to ask, 'Are you really proud of that?'.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

@CH3CHO's statistics above.

My initial reaction was the same as yours. 1700 people is certainly a large enough sample to generate a meaningful confidence interval assuming the sample is truly random.

I am not sure how this survey was conducted, but if it was over the phone (which is the standard method that still seems to be in use for political opinion polls) then their will be a huge bias towards older people and other people who are in a position to answer a residential landline during the day.

Many young people don't even have a landline.

I have know idea which way this would skew the results, but Japanese newspapers should soon find a better method of sampling than simply ringing people in the phone book (assuming that is what was done in this case).

If the poll was a voluntary online poll, then the sample skew would surely be even greater.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

This result whether scientific or not(obviously like the J-whale-research is clearly NOT), anyway............

This result is simply a reaction, which many Japanese tend to do often with little or no thought, just react.

Heck I have had Japanese react like this when talking about whales, politics, yasukuni, 4 seasons, what EVER, they just react IF you criticize Japan. Heck a LOT of the times they are in 100% AGREEMENT they just DONT like if you criticize Japan, its a trait of many Japanese I have found.

Which is why when some topics come up at home I KNOW BETTER than to comment, I just mumble something & then go to another room for a couple minutes because its not worth the trouble to say what you believe as the Mrs will go off her rocker, even if she agrees with been, been down this road far too many times, with people you know its usually best to just beg off

2 ( +5 / -3 )

" ... Like the United States, Japan extensively hunted whales in the 19th century, when they were a source of fuel and food. "

This sentence is ambigous. This part is accurate: "Like the United States, Japan extensively hunted whales in the 19th century". However, in the US and Europe only the blubber of the whale was harvested and the rest thrown away. The blubber was boiled down to make whale oil, and the whale oil was widely used in oil lamps and to make soap and margarine. So to disambiguate, unlike the United States and European countries, Japan used (and continues to use) the meat of the whale as a food source.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@Abhorsenaube

If done correctly, it can.

Anyway, like I've always said about the whaling in Japan: allow them to do it but only to meet demand. And I mean real demand--not forcing it on retirement homes or schools.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

How about an honest question for the random sample of Japanese citizens?

Like:

"Do you support spending millions of taxpayer dollars annually to support a virtually extinct industry to research whether full-scale, commercial whaling can be resumed some time in the future, providing a product that only 14% of the population has ever eaten in their lives?"

1 ( +7 / -6 )

"Powerful lobbyists continue to support whaling, subsidized by taxpayers". Just another scam by the gangster state to keep a dead industry afloat under the guise of nationalism...sorry, 'culture'. Drop it already.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Please stop treating whales the same as domesticated animals because

Japan doesn't has any means to breed whales in captivity

2 reasons why

1.large amount of space is needed just to keep one

Whales consume large amounts of food, looking at their big size
2 ( +5 / -3 )

This just shows that, unlike certain nationalities ahemaustraliansahem the people asked don't consider banning an entire industry just because they' personally have no interest in it, a reasonable course of action.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I guess to some, it's more nostalgia than a continuing culture. Some people I know tell me that whale meat was something they had to eat because other sources were scarce, or they had them at school lunches, but the taste... well... not very good. If they had a choice, as they do now, they would prefer other fish or meat.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

A weekend opinion poll conducted by the liberal Asahi Shimbun newspaper showed that 60% of 1,756 voters supported the “research” whaling program, against 23% who opposed it.

Seems simple enough. 60% of Japanese are in favor of the research whaling program and 23% oppose it. Internet posters are free to create their own interpretation(s) of what the poll means but the numbers suggest a 2 to 1 division in favor.

The vast majority of the other people in the world don't give a rats behind about whaling, whales, whalers, or animal-rights activists.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

This is Insane!!

They can't justify their whale destruction by these polls and results. Perhaps, many may want to go on a war with China and South Korea for disputed islands but would that be realistic?

Leave the Whales Alone!

3 ( +7 / -4 )

I'm not surprised. I'm not Japanese and I don't have a problem with whaling to the extent that it's not driving whales to extinction. If anything I'm surprised that only 60% of Japanese people feel the same, given that Japan has a history of eating whales whereas my country of birth does not. (For those do not realize, Asahi usually panders to foreign points of view, and polls by other news organizations would probably show higher results in favour, I imagine.)

As for the market, it's like iPhones. No one knew they wanted iPhones until iPhones were available.

Until the commercial whaling moratorium is abolished it's all just speculation as to how much people would actually eat. People can say on JT that there is no market, but seriously, what do they really know? Same with comments about in the old days whale tasting bad. I'm sure it did, since lots of food in the old days probably didn't taste as it does these days, due to better food production technology.

Look, the IWC should just lift this outdated moratorium and let Japan catch a sustainable amount of minke whales, and then we let market forces decide the actual supply and demand within those constraints. If there is no demand, as some wish to believe, there would be no whaling as a result. If there is demand, there will be whaling to the extent that quotas are sustainable. I know of nobody who would be rightfully put out under such circumstances, except for selfish people who it doesn't effect either way, but want to have things as they desire nonetheless.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

borax: Headline: A new survey shows that 60% of Japanese don't like being told what to do by people in other countries.

You raise a fair point but on the other hand the decision was handed down by the International Court of Justice which is the principal judicial organ of the the United Nations, of which Japan is a member. Surely they have handed down decisions favoring Japan over another country or countries, in which case Japan must've been quite alright with "telling another country what to do". So, now the shoe is on the other foot. If Japan doesn't like it they could always withdraw from the UN.

CraigHicks: However, in the US and Europe only the blubber of the whale was harvested and the rest thrown away.

That may have been true in the early days of whale hunting but was not true once the hunts became more industrialized. Ambergris was used in perfume, baleen was used in hoop skirts and decorative items such as combs, sperm oil was used in lights, and other parts of the whale were used for candles and lubricants. To learn more about the whaling industry in the early part of America's history, I highly recommend Leviathan: The History of Whaling in America by Eric Jay Dolin. Besides being very informative, it's also just a great read.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I have yet to meet anyone who has ever eaten whale meat in the Kanto area other than remembering post WWII lunches when whale meat was served at schools. Where are the housewives fighting over the whale meat at the markets for dinner!? Going to keep asking, but there is a story about a young fisherman from Kochi prefecture during the Edo period who was shipwrecked with others and rescued by a USA whaling ship. They could not return to Japan so they went to Hawaii. The others stayed in Hawaii. He went on to Massachusetts with the captain of the whaling ship. He studied and later learned to run a whaling ship and became a captain. He later returned to Japan and was an important part of the opening up of Japan. But, he was surprised that the only part of the whale used was the blubber. He is an important figure in history. He was likely out looking for bonito or katsuo when stranded and not whales. His name is John Manjiro and there is a place for him in the whaling museum in New Bedford, Massachusetts. http://www.whalingmuseum.org/ Fishermen from the same town may catch a smaller whale in the net but family member said they release them. Eating it wasn't the main purpose. I think the data is faulty. Would an article stating otherwise that the majority do not care or want to eat whale or dolphin meat make it to a newspaper?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

As for the market, it's like iPhones. No one knew they wanted iPhones until iPhones were available. Until the commercial whaling moratorium is abolished it's all just speculation as to how much people would actually eat.

Mmm, no. I've been in Japan from long before the moratorium went into effect, and even back then there was no market for whale meat. When I first arrived, the locals delighted in feeding me all kinds of local delicacies, especially seafood, that they thought I would love/be grossed out by. Not once - not once - did anyone ever offer me whale meat among all the squid, octopus, eel, sea urchin, shellfish and other stuff I found disgusting even when I was a meat-eater.

Being at the time a young curious meat-eater eager to get to grips with this new culture, I did at one point during my travels find a very small tin of sliced whale meat cooked in soy and sugar, what they call yamato-ni. It had the approximate texture of beef that has been boiled to death, and the taste was overwhelmingly soy and sugar - from which I took it that even the locals who did eat whale could take it in only very small quantities (it was a tiny tin) and with the taste heavily disguised. And they did not consider it enough a part of their traditional food culture to put it in front of a young furriner with all the other food culture stuff I was being offered.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Why not start a whale farm if it's commercially viable?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I put a link a week ago referring to another poll with similar results... and people went CRAZY!!

Even some one said, that "...don't know if you are trolling, or what" (I am paraphrasing, I don't go memorizing stuff)

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Will be interesting to see how many negative votes i get, but i have eaten whale here several times, and i quite liked it. I am not against whaling, but i think the methods used to kill the whales are cruel,and i believe that just like every other whaling country (there are a few), the Japanese need to stay in their waters when they do it.

The Japanese "victim card" that 60% of Japanese citizens are holding up right now is pathetic though. This court case was about whether the "scientific whaling" in the Antarctic was legit or not. It found, like everybody already knew, that it is not.... It was set up from the start as a way to allow whaling to continue, through a loophole.

The Scientific whaling program was started because Japan was tricked into joining the IWC, and because the IWC is not upholding their side of the bargain (to allow a small quota of commercial whaling if it could be shown that whales are increasing - which Japan did several times).

The ruse was discovered, and you lost the court case. Tough titties.

Just go back to your own waters, do "science" there, eat the whales, and keep pushing to get a legal quota allotted for the future. Oh and find a way to do it humanely, you probably can get that right?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

To some extent, both pro and anti-whaling groups can be benefitted by the heated arguments. Japanese mass media broadcast how SSCS's activities in a way that they look fanatic quite often during the time when most people are watching TV. I don't know how the story is in Australia but, basically, I think it works similarly to war propaganda.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

has hunted whales under a loophole in a 1986 moratorium that allowed it to conduct lethal research on the mammals

It is NOT a loophole. It is Article VIII of the ICRW which was first ratified in 1948 over 30 years before the moratorium.

but has openly admitted that their meat made its way onto menus.

Because the same Article VIII from 1948 REQUIRES the meat to be processed as far as practicable.

Even still, the UN ruling was overwhelmingly against the program, and in this case Japan really has a responsibility to comply with the spirit of the ruling and not quibble over technicalities to weasel a way around it.

The ruling was against the JARPA II program not against research whaling. The ruling even contemplates that Japan or other countries will have research programs under Article VIII in the future. No quibbling over technicalities, just correcting the deficiencies identified by the court to implement a new research program that meets the requires the court set forth.

but sounds like it should read more like "14% have eaten whale meat and probably won't eat again".

Doesn't appear to be any reason to believe that the headline is wrong or that the poll responses should be read any other way.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

the same Article VIII from 1948 REQUIRES the meat to be processed

No, it doesn't. It requires any whales taken under these special permits to be processed. Not just the meat. The whole animal. The way pro-whalers always focus on the meat and nothing but the meat is a dead giveaway.

The ruling was against the JARPA II program not against research whaling.

The ruling was against whaling not carried out for the purpose of research. It doesn't matter how many 'deficiencies' the icr tries to 'correct', it doesn't change the fact that the 'research' is being done for the sake of the whaling, not the whaling being done for the sake of research.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Who cares what whales and dolphin taste like? They are massively social, aware, sentient mammals that should be left alone to grace the seas and our planet. Killing them is a crime, especially as Japan does not need to do this. Have you seen the film where they actually harpoon them? They shriek out in pain and die horribly.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

In related news, 46% of Japanese support whaling just for the heck of it.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It requires any whales taken under these special permits to be processed.

Is the meat part of the whale? Yes. So does Article VIII REQUIRE the meat to be processed? Yes.

The ruling was against whaling not carried out for the purpose of research.

The ruling was specific to JARPA II.

It doesn't matter how many 'deficiencies' the icr tries to 'correct'

Well the ICJ ruling anticipates just such a correction of deficiencies and a new research program being implemented.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I cannot understand all the fuss about whales.

Not all whales are endangered.

I agree with John Galt, it really isn't good meat.

This is not just my opinion, my older friends and relatives in Hokkaido have no enthusiasm for it. Apparently, they used to bung it in curries because the spice masks the flavour.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Is the meat part of the whale? Yes. So does Article VIII REQUIRE the meat to be processed? Yes.

The meat is only part of the whale. Processing only the meat is not processing the animal as far as is practicable. It's just taking what the whalers set out to take in the first place, for the table (well, for the deep freeze). Commercial whaling.

The ruling was specific to JARPA II.

and the ruling was that the programme was not being planned and carried out for the purpose of research. Any tweaks they make to come up with JARPA III will do nothing to change the fact that the 'research' is for the purpose of taking whales, not the other way round.
2 ( +6 / -4 )

The meat is only part of the whale.

And meat is the only part the article mentioned, and that mention in the article is what I was responding to, so I confined my comment to the meat.

Processing only the meat is not processing the animal as far as is practicable.

Actually it is possible that in this situation processing only the meat is processing the animal as far as is practicable. Obviously by putting that qualifier in Article VIII they were acknowledging that it is not always practicable to process all of the whale.

Any tweaks they make to come up with JARPA III will do nothing to change the fact that the 'research' is for the purpose of taking whales, not the other way round.

The ruling specifically addresses items that should be taken into account for any new research proposal. Obviously the ICJ believes that tweaks can produce a research plan that will change the fact.

The IWC should do the job that they set themselves when they approved the moratorium in 1982.

and by 1990 at the latest the Commission will undertake a comprehensive assessment of the effects of this decision on whale stocks and consider modification of this provision and the establishment of other catch limits.

Here it is 24 years later and still no assessment by the IWC. If they would conduct this assessment then either they could tell the world based on science whether Minke whales could or could not be hunted sustainably. If the answer is that they can be, then using the IWC's own RMP they could establish a quota for Minke whales and any interested party could apply for a portion of that quota. And either way their assessment goes it would remove the Japanese claim of collecting data to show that Minke whales can be sustainably hunted since the answer would be known.

Seems like a win for the IWC either way. So why won't they conduct the assessment that they agreed to in 1982? Could it be that they know what the outcome would be? Could it be that despite their claims and the plain language of the moratorium, they wanted a permanent ban on whaling, so they just decided to be dishonest and ignore their legal obligations?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

It does not mater whether people support or eat whale. Have to abide verdict. Just do not hunt whale in places they are prohibited. Maybe copy Cowboy culture?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Somebody at the Asahi Shimbun should be fired since they should have tried to conduct at the very least a scientific poll. From the results it seems they polled only in supportive locations. Shame, Asahi Shimbun, shame.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Well this just shows how selfish a nation Japan really is… So hang on 14% eat whale meat and 60% want them dead. This just sounds like a country getting there nickers in a knot. It’s simple Japan stop acting lick little babies, when someone tells you that you can’t do something in another part of the world that you don’t own you should listen. This is a good way for you to just stop and save face. It is only going to get harder and more embarrassing for your country now the whole world is watching. Shame on you Japan!!!!

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Mamoo - Well this just shows how selfish a nation Japan really is…

The "whole world" isn't watching. The majority of the worlds population doesn't care about whaling.

And no one country owns international water. International water is just what it's described as - international water.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I wonder if those polled support: 1) Fukushima compensation/ relief money being diverted to the whaling interests... 2) Billlions more of taxpayers dollars being used for this pushing Japan even closer to default (not there yet, but it does push the countries finances more that way as the Japanese national debt is over 200% of GDP) 3) The slaughter of fin whales as well (fin whales are an Endangered species).

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The slaughter of fin whales as well (fin whales are an Endangered species).

How many fin whales has Japan 'slaughtered' in the last 25 years? How many fin whales has St. Vincent & the Grenadines 'slaughtered' in the past 25 years? How many fin whales has Iceland 'slaughtered' in the past 25 years? Is the fin whale population increasing?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Japan will never change. Give up your hopes.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

specifically what are the scientific reasons?

It's a large scale survey over the psychology of anti-whaling NGO.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites