national

Japan blames sabotage for record low whaling haul

80 Comments

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

© 2013 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

80 Comments
Login to comment

Harassing whalers is part of our culture. It cannot be helped.

52 ( +60 / -10 )

Diplomatic measures, rather than terrorism are the way to get Japan to change it's ways. It's going to take the US getting behind the effort for it to matter.

-8 ( +8 / -16 )

The words "hunt" and "research" used in this article describing the same action is a little disturbing to say the least. I think we are long past the charade of research so just call it what it is: a hunt. Not even the whalers try to disguise it anymore. They kill the whales to keep the freezers full and that's it.

22 ( +31 / -9 )

They went playing around in the southern ocean (using money as resources that not only could be but should be used else where) and came home empty handed... awww

Cry me a river... or better yet an ocean, you can go breed some whales there.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

“unforgivable sabotage” by activists.

I forgive them.

The hunt netted just 103 Antarctic minke whales

103 too many. That is unforgivable.

the Japanese ships spent 21 days avoiding their vessels

Aww, diddums. Next time just stay home.

23 ( +36 / -13 )

Suck it up Hayashi. Try using your brain and invest in whale-watching as an industry - it rakes in millions in many nations, and even the Okinawans have started it - rather than killing the things.

9 ( +18 / -9 )

congratulations to Sea Shepherd!!!!

13 ( +25 / -12 )

@Moonraker

Harassing whalers is part of our culture. It cannot be helped.

Ha! Quote of the week....

19 ( +26 / -7 )

"...adding it was the lowest total since “research whaling” began in 1987."

Well, I guess that in itself -- counting the number caught -- could be called 'research'. Nothing else they do is.

“We will seek more support from other countries to conduct research whaling in a stable manner,”

Yeah... thick envelopes to land-locked African nations. Nobody's crying for your, Hayashi. I'd ask you to drown your sorrows in a plate of blubber, but likely you don't even eat the stuff yourself.

10 ( +19 / -9 )

Oh, and good on Sea Shepherd!!!

9 ( +19 / -10 )

Captured whales, later sold as food, are studied as part of a bid by Japan’s whaling research institute to prove the mammals’ populations can sustain commercial whaling but activists charge Tokyo uses a loophole to get around an international ban on hunting.

AFP just copy and paste this into all of their biased whaling articles.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Is there some reason to why Japan doesn't hunt whales in open defiance to the whaling moratorium like Iceland and Norway? It seems that Japan is setting itself up for criticism by using a loophole in the moratorium to hunt whales rather than openly defy it.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

dcog: Is there some reason to why Japan doesn't hunt whales in open defiance to the whaling moratorium like Iceland and Norway?

Iceland and Norway aren't whaling in defiance of the moratorium - they are whaling under objection. They both carried out their own scientific research, decided that the stocks had recovered enough, lodged an official objection to the moratorium and got on with the hunting. All legal and above board.

They'll be happy that Japan had such a lousy haul again this year - they both export to Japan.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

dcog9065: "Is there some reason to why Japan doesn't hunt whales in open defiance to the whaling moratorium like Iceland and Norway?"

There are at least two reasons. One is that the latter two nations you mention hunt more or less in their own waters while Japan's 'tradition' is to go down to the Southern Ocean. More importantly, though, the big reason is they can't cry 'victim' if they more openly defy the rest of the world, can't use a loop-hole to claim it's for science, and would have to snivel and look like the bad guy in the world. By only using the loop-hole they can still hold on to this idea that they are the victims in all this... and when that falls apart, there's always the "Japanese culture" argument they contradict themselves with.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

i love that the japanese don't bow down. they are usually timid and malleable on so many issues, but one this one, they are ganko beyone belief!. good on ya, japan!! keep on giving those western countries a one-finger wave.

-20 ( +7 / -27 )

dcog9065

Is there some reason to why Japan doesn't hunt whales in open defiance to the whaling moratorium like Iceland and Norway?

The 1982 moratirium agreement was as follows.

Notwithstanding the other provisions of the paragraph10, catch limits for the killing for commercial purpose of whales from all stocks for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter shall be zero. This provision will be kept under review, base upon the best scientific advice, and by 1990 at the latest the Commission will undertake a comprehansive assessment of the effects of this decision on whale stocks and consider modification of this provision and the establishment of other catch limits.

http://iwc.int/cache/downloads/c0aaiovzm9kwk0sw0ws440088/IWC_1983_Thirty-Third%20Report%20of%20the%20Commission.pdf page21

It is 2013 and IWC still cannot finish the work it promised to finish by 1990. Every member country of IWC knows there are enough whales for sustainable whaling. But anti whaling countries like Australia are doing their desperate effort to prolong the procedure for scientific assessment forever.

Japan remains in IWC because it knows commercial whaling will be resumed when the scientific assessment is over, and that the survey results of its scientific whaling is required to estimate the age distribution of whales to finish the scientific assessment.

The argument by Australia against whaling has no scientific bases. Their only reason is that Australians love whales and everyone in the world should love whales. Japanese love whales in a quite different manner.

-11 ( +8 / -19 )

I like how they claim whale meat is part of Japan's culinary culture....funny as I have only seen it ONCE in a grocery store while living here and if I ask any of the Japanese I know they all say they have never eaten whale and probably wouldn't. Doesn't sound very popular so why continue doing it.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

rickyvee: "i love that the japanese don't bow down. they are usually timid and malleable on so many issues, but one this one, they are ganko beyone belief!. good on ya, japan!! keep on giving those western countries a one-finger wave."

If you think they're less malleable on this issue, you're kidding yourself. Why do they say they are doing what they are doing? For 'science' -- even the article has it in quotations because it's so obvious a joke: "...adding it was the lowest total since “research whaling” began in 1987." What's more, if their cause is so correct and so righteous, why are they going around begging for support? Yeah, not malleable at all. The funniest part of course is when you point that out they fall back on the "you're attacking our culture" crap. That's not a 'one-finger wave', it's a one hand in front of the eyes as they back away, ashamed.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

@CH3CHO

The argument by Australia against whaling has no scientific bases

My argument against human cannibalism has no scientific basis either but thankfully there are other arguments. Here in Byron Bay on the east coast of Australia the "whaling" season, end of May until October, is eagerly anticipated for the sheer excitement of seeing these creatures and for the extra revenue it will bring in from people who come here expressly for that purpose. No lethality involved. They are all our whales then and not just those of the killers who kill them.

Some Japanese who live around here also love whales too, in just the same manner as I and others who don't wanna slaughter them do. But their voices are rarely heard in Japan, funnily enough, where the debate is controlled by the killers and their parasitic entourage. You are putting forward very stereotypical views to imply that Japanese love whales Only dead and ready to eat. In fact, you may find that Japanese are actually appalled by the slaughter (of whales and dolphins especially) but know very little about it.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

"We will seek more support from other countries to conduct research whaling in a stable manner,” the minister said."or"Tokyo defends the practice saying eating whale is part of the country’s culinary traditions." one contradicts the other. The marine scientific comunity has proved the same research can be done by tagging, without killing a single whale.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Boo hoo. But a serious question: is there anyone who wants to eat whale meat that is having trouble finding it?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Horrah! What a stellar result. I applaud the Sea Shepherd.

Incedentally, it's also 'Whale Season' on the West Coast of Australia now as they head north up the coast to calve off the Kimberley Coast. The often get so close to the coast you can quite literally nearly touch them - I came within about 5 meters of a mother and calf whilst surfing a few years back.

The Japanese 'Scientists' are welcome to come and watch them, count them, observe what they eat, where the travel, how long it takes etc etc.

Actually, no, they probably aren't welcome anymore....

9 ( +12 / -3 )

A difficult issue indeed. I guess as smithinjapan points out, what sets apart this issue is that Japanese whalers come down to the Southern Ocean for their hunts, possibly inside the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary as well as possibly disrupting whale watching industries in Australia and New Zealand.

Is whale meat even that highly consumed in Japan? I hardly ever see it around except for fairly expensive sushi shops and most people I know have never or only a few times eaten it before. It would seem that market forces would drive the whaling industry underground considering the relatively heavy costs involved in the hunts.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Moonraker

Here in Byron Bay on the east coast of Australia the "whaling" season, end of May until October, is eagerly anticipated for the sheer excitement of seeing these creatures and for the extra revenue it will bring in from people who come here expressly for that purpose. No lethality involved. They are all our whales then and not just those of the killers who kill them.

Also has nothing to do with Minke whales either so what is the point?

The whales at Byron Bay subject to Whale watching is Southern Humpback Whales which are not target of Japan's whale research.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Tamarama: "The Japanese 'Scientists' are welcome to come and watch them, count them, observe what they eat, where the travel, how long it takes etc etc."

Squeeze a Kikkoman bottle all you want it'll never hit five meters, though it's possible some Cupie mayonnaise might with a good hit. Hence, no, you're right, 'research' would probably never be conducted there.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

lol..best news ever. Hope its even lower next season.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

dcog9065, look at the world map. Southern Ocean does not belong to Australia or New Zealand. People do not travel a couple of days from Australia to Southern Ocean to watch whales, when whales can be seen near their coast.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

The whales at Byron Bay subject to Whale watching is Southern Humpback Whales which are not target of Japan's whale research.

Humpbacks and southern right whales.

But give them an inch....

Already fin whales have been part of their quarry. An endangered species.

The point, SamuraiBlue, in case you missed it, is that it is not just about some bogus science dreamed up by the Institute of Cetacean Research that hardly seems to see th light of day in peer-reviewed journals, it is that there are benefits to living whales over and above dead ones, and that not all Japanese wanna see dead ones either, as the debate is mostly polarized as in Japan.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

CH3CHO: "dcog9065, look at the world map. Southern Ocean does not belong to Australia or New Zealand. People do not travel a couple of days from Australia to Southern Ocean to watch whales, when whales can be seen near their coast."

It most certainly isn't a place where Japan has for centuries carried out the cultural tradition of whaling in diesel ships, either, but don't tell them that.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

@UsagitoSaru You should probably stop doing all your groceries at FamilyMart. I had whale last monday and thursday before that, it's not an exceptionally common dish by any means, but that's partially because there isn't all that much caught of it and you know Australians are ramming their boats? I'm sure you've never had horse meat either, or deer? If you and your ten friends don't like it, to hell with everyone else right?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Whales: 1 Japan: 0

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Moonraker, you should learn the meaning of "research whaling". Research whaling is whaling to estimate the population and age distribution of whale stock in a scientific manner. You should not be fooled by "peer-review" thing, which is irrelevant red herring thrown by whale fetish.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Must be costing 500k a whale now. Makes the last of the blue tuna look decidedly cheap.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Ah, I see, CH3CHO, Japanese whaling research is uniquely different from what the rest of the world knows as research. Now I get it.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

CH3CHO 'Peer-review' is an essential to science. No reasonable scientific evidence or theory should ever gain currency without rigorous attempts to prove its data, methodology, findings and conclusions wrong by peers. Thankfully, serious science is generally not a cover for a hunt.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Moonraker: Ah, I see, CH3CHO, Japanese whaling research is uniquely different from what the rest of the world knows as research. Now I get it.

It's only unique if you have no experience in the sciences.

It's basic data collection. The Australians use the same methods and theories to measure scallop stocks - and yes, they call it scientific research.

Most people without experience in the sciences see the words "scientific research whaling" and expect a cancer cure or publications in Nature for some reason I've never been able to fathom. Do you demand the same from farmers growing research crops? How about your own government, do you demand to see peer-review of their data-sets on the resources they manage?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Sea Shepard is only carrying out whaling research, it's not their fault...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

CH3CHO: "You should not be fooled by "peer-review" thing, which is irrelevant red herring thrown by whale fetish."

That doesn't even make any sense. If there's a 'whale fetish', whose is it under the guise of science? What people should not be fooled by is the idea that any science is actually occurring that could not occur under non-lethal research, and then if it's lethal called 'research' and covered with soy-sauce. The 'fetish', as you call it, is simply getting government money to do something no one wants.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

hokkaidoguy: "It's basic data collection."

That can be done without killing the whales and greedily selling them up to izakayas where regular customers have ten times the mercury level in their blood that is considered acceptable, and then forcing the rest on children in school lunches.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

So will we see people marching in the streets demanding their whale meat? I think not.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Sea Shepherd committed “unforgivable sabotage”, Hayashi said, according to Kyodo News, including a collision with a whaling vessel as it was being refueled.

I think most people outside of Japan would use the word "unforgivable" to decribe Japan for conducting their slaughter in the first place, not Sea Shepherd in trying to stop it. Especially since it costs what it does, and over 300,000 folks are still homeless in Tohoku.

“We will seek more support from other countries to conduct research whaling in a stable manner,” the minister said.

Yo, good luck with that.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

That can be done without killing the whales

It can't. Most all of marine resources population estimates are based on catch at age. Did you actually think the population estimates of numbers ranging from hundred of thousands to millions were done only by a guy with binoculars with a counter in his right hand? Oh wait... you do.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Japan is worse that Norway and Iceland because the Scandinavian nations are at least being honest with what they are doing.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@smithinjapan

the quotation marks were added by AFP, not the japanese. also, it is not the japanese who are considered "terrorists" or "pirates." what the sea Shepard does is considered both.

there is simply no good reason to stop the whale hunt besides people's anthropomorphism of whales.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Pirates fighting poachers. The thief judges by his condition.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

In line with setsuden guidelines: no need to waste energy to keep frozen useless whale meat for years!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Go Sea Shepherd GO!!!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Honestly, if - as some people/agencies state - these whales are not endangered species I have no issue with whaling if reasonable. Otherwise not obviously!

But what I do not understand is why Japan needs to spend so much money to make such deep study on so-called non-endangered species so far away for its own shore.

Something is definitely wrong!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Moonraker

The point, SamuraiBlue, in case you missed it, is that it is not just about some bogus science dreamed up by the Institute of Cetacean Research that hardly seems to see th light of day in peer-reviewed journals, it is that there are benefits to living whales over and above dead ones, and that not all Japanese wanna see dead ones either, as the debate is mostly polarized as in Japan.

One of the reason is because the western researchers are hell bent on banning whaling altogether that many researcher doesn't show interest in the subject which is actually sad since the research done by Japan actually give substantial insight on the health of the minke whales population as a whole including their age distribution, diet, the route for migration,etc. which can only be obtained through lethal research. The IWC committee pointed these data were missing to make assessment in resuming commercial whaling which is why Japan is collected them in the first place.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Open Minded

Something is definitely wrong!

The only thing wrong is the hell bent attitude some people take on anti whaling when ICUN had designated the Minke whales as least concern meaning they are no endangered.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

SamuraiBlue: As I said before if this species is not endangered, why scientific studies about it is so important for Japan? And if this is a trick for whaling, why doing it while nobody eat it?

This is what I find wrong.

If there would be a real demand for this meat I would have no problem with whaling within reasonable scale.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I still think Captain Watson is a megalomaniacal blowhard, and I still think Sea Shepherd's tactics are dangerous, but it's hard to argue with results. They're saving whales.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

if this species is not endangered, why scientific studies about it is so important for Japan?

Because Japan has to "prove" there are enough whales for sustainable commercial whaling so as to restart commercial whaling. Read this never ending bureaucratic procedure for proving. http://iwc.int/rmp

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Boo hoo, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi. I'll start feeling sorry for you and your whaler friends when someone starts hunting you with explosive tipped harpoons in the name of bogus scientific research.

How many tuna farms could you have set up in Japanese waters with the money that's been wasted on supporting this anachronistic industry?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@SamuraiBlue.

Here are estimates of population numbers for various whales from the IWC itself.

http://iwc.int/estimate

As you will see, most of the whales are not on Japan's whalers' shopping list. IWC also recognizes non-lethal methods. And, oddly enough, the confidence limits are no better for minke whales than for others that have not been targeted for slaughter.

@Hokkaidoguy.

Yes, when there is incentive for the researchers themselves to overestimate the numbers of whales - because they want to resume killing them in greater numbers - I do expect peer review of their data sets. In fact, because the rest of the world can see this vested interest in research outcomes, it would even be in the whale-killers' interest to get their research published. Are we to just trust in what they say? Now, it may be that the IWC has used Japanese estimates in their own website, but as can be seen, you don't have to kill them to count them.

And, since you ask, I do not trust any government to estimate the extent of any resource when they work on behalf of people with vested interests.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

This means there will be less hungaku sushi - half price sushi at the super.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

From the article:

Their fourth ship, the Brigitte Bardot, was at an undisclosed location with Watson, wanted by Interpol after skipping bail last July in Germany, thought to be on board.

Actually, turns out Germany couldn't care less anymore: http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/germany-drops-sea-shepherd-warrant-5363854

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Japan’s whaling research institute to prove their populations can sustain commercial whaling.

What is wrong with these selfish twits! Commercial whaling was banned because the whale populations cannot sustain commercial hunting. What makes Japan so special that they think they can plunder a resource created by the conservation of other countries? Hopefully, the international court will rule their activities illegal and kick them out of the IWC. Then, if they continue whaling they will be the pirates.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

nigelboy: "It can't."

Only to the uneducated and the unwilling.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rickyvee: "the quotation marks were added by AFP, not the japanese."

Where did I say otherwise? My point was it's considered a joke everywhere.

"also, it is not the japanese who are considered "terrorists" or "pirates."

Depends on how you apply the definition. It can clearly apply to both parties.

"there is simply no good reason to stop the whale hunt besides people's anthropomorphism of whales."

Yeah, no good reason at all -- save no one wants to eat it, the 'research' is a joke, the Japanese don't do it in their own waters, they ram smaller ships, they don't allow help when their whalers go overboard, they force it on kids despite the mercury levels when they can't sell the rotting stockpile, the constant contradiction that it's for science but that it's culture, they spend millions of disaster relief funds to protect the whaling ships... need I go on?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Here are estimates of population numbers for various whales from the IWC itself.

http://iwc.int/estimate

As you will see, most of the whales are not on Japan's whalers' shopping list. IWC also recognizes non-lethal methods. And, oddly enough, the confidence limits are no better for minke whales than for others that have not been targeted for slaughter.

Which again does not show the age distribution which IWC anti-whaling nations demands in furthering negotiation for lifting the moratorium. Those numbers can only be obtained through Lethal research. In a way it's these nations that is prolonging this research since they continue to refuse to return to the table.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Oh, the poor researchers! I trust the world`s whale research will be severely hampered if there is only half the amount of meat in the supermarket freezers?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Just goes to show how clueless and ignorant the Jgov is. Their little tantrum is a boost to the activists and proof that their tactics are working!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

yep that money donated to SS was worth every penny, just goes to prove that SS tactics work in reducing the number of whales killed. you whaling lovers can go and have a nice big blubbery mercury laden whale steak to drown your sorrows. I ll go and donate some more cash to SS for next years campaign, "BRING ON THE PAIN SS" LOL

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Disillusioned

What is wrong with these selfish twits! Commercial whaling was banned because the whale populations cannot sustain commercial hunting.

Have you ever read the IWC documents? It has never been established that whale populations cannot sustain commercial whaling. Actually, Norway is conducting commercial whaling with much smaller whale stock. Commercial whaling went into moratorium because IWC was not sure whether there were enough whales for sustainable whaling or not. The research whaling to estimate the whale stock was supposed to be finished by 1990, but in spite of a lot of contribution of Japanese whalers, the estimate was never completed because anti whaling countries just delayed the procedure.

hoserfella,

Just goes to show how clueless and ignorant the Jgov is.

Same to you. The whaling issue is being heard by International Court of Justice. Japan will win the case, making Australia look like what it is.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

wtfjapan

yep that money donated to SS was worth every penny, just goes to prove that SS tactics work in reducing the number of whales killed.

The money is spent to bail out Watson but the money is confiscated because he skipped bail. SS is irrelevant. International Court of Justice will decide the legitimacy of research whaling by Japan. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=1&code=aj&case=148&k=64

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

@chicho still SS will be back bigger and better next year, SS is much bigger than watson, he wasnt even seen much this year but the SS house of pain is still rolling the high seas. LOL

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Why is it that Iceland and Norway whale without being censured?

In the treaty which Japan and non whaling nations signed together, it was agreed "up to N whales killed for research". But it is obvious that no whales need to be killed for research. Zero. Would the Japanese have signed it if it said "for consumption" instead of "for research"? Yes, of course. So who put the ambiguity in the treaty?

Exactly what are the rules and or conventions of international fishing? Whaling is one particular issue; is it wise to upset the rules and conventions for this one issue?

I have never eaten whale, never will. I would like to see whales jumping out of the water, or as stuffed animals loved by kids. I was appalled when money was taken from Fukushima relief fund to subsidize whaling in another area.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

In the treaty which Japan and non whaling nations signed together, it was agreed "up to N whales killed for research".

Nope. Article 8 of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling states that any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit. So Japan sets its own quotas for how many whales it wants to kill for 'research', not some non-existant 'treaty' that you just made up. Funny how the pro-whalers like to think it's the IWC that decides numbers and that Japan is merely complying with what others have decided. Japan decides its own numbers, and Sea Shepherd, bless their little cotton socks, do what they can to stop them killing their self-determined quota.

it is obvious that no whales need to be killed for research. Zero.

Absolutely.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Ch3CHO: "Same to you. The whaling issue is being heard by International Court of Justice. Japan will win the case, making Australia look like what it is."

Actually, when they lose the case, Japan will just snivel and claim the world is attacking Japanese culture. Then they'll quickly back-step and talk about science. Then they'll claim it's a cultural tradition again. And all you're talking about SS money spent and you conveniently fail to talk about the March 11th 2011 funds losing $28 million dollars to put the Japanese COAST GUARD on ships in the Southern Ocean.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

CraigHicks: "Why is it that Iceland and Norway whale without being censured?"

Why is it they don't pretend it's science? and where exactly do they carry it out? Those would be better questions. Rhetorical questions, but better.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

It is disturbing when modern day criminals and self-appointed "pirates" can engage in illegal and dangerous activities to "disrupt" a legitimate and legal activity. They are no different than terrorists who will do anything to advance their agenda. What is even more disturbing is that so many people would agree with them and their criminal activities, Whales are animals, not people or Gods.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

cleo | nope ... So according to your quote, the IWC "convention" (not treaty) allows a country to kill whales for purposes of scientific research. The treaty has that written into it even though, as you admit, it is not necessary to kill a single whale for the purposes of scientific research. So the "convention" (not treaty) is already a contradiction in logic. This is bad politics. The non-whaling nations write a nonsense treaty worded with nonsense so that Japan will agree to it. The result is Japan agrees to be a participant and believes it can continue whaling, and whale lovers get to continue bashing the whalers, and more generally anybody who dares to test the foundations of, e.g. cleo's logic. You contradict yourself. However you are full of righteousness so ain't nobody gonna tell you nothing,

1 ( +2 / -1 )

smithinjapan | Why is it they don't pretend it's science?

I don't think anyone of the whalers consider it science. The IWC worded the treaty "authorizing nations to kill whales for the purpose of research", even though it is absurd to say that whales must be killed for research. It's not Japan that is pretending; it's the IWC. Japan has repeatedly asked the IWC to remove the restriction on commercial whaling, and has threatened to withdraw otherwise. The US asked Japan not to withdraw. It is therefore negotiations in progress. Japan definitely does not consider it scientific.

and where do they carry it out?

International fishing waters in the North Atlantic. Not limited to 200 miles from those countries own shores, if that is what you mean. So please answer my question: why is Japan subject to a level of censure which Norway and Iceland are not?

I had assumed that Whales were a kind of sacred animal to you. However, since you don't feel pain about whales being killed in the North Atlantic, I must be wrong. What is the fundamental reason for your objection?

I believe what you are saying is that you believe it is justified to modify the conventions of international fishing waters for the special case of Japan+whales. You open a can of worms when you start making special case modifications.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

cleo | nope ...

Thank you for the correction about "treaty" versus "convention". According to your quote, the IWC "convention" (not treaty) allows a country to kill whales for purposes of scientific research. The treaty has that written into it even though, as you admit, it is not necessary to kill a single whale for the purposes of scientific research. So the "convention" (not treaty) is already a contradiction in logic. Japan has repeatedly asked the IWC to remove the restriction on commercial whaling, and has threatened to withdraw otherwise. However, the US requested Japan not to withdraw.

May I ask you why you think that Sea Shepard does not take action against Norway or Iceland?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Craig - You quoted a non-existant 'treaty' to justify what Japan does in the Southern Ocean. Fess up, you were wrong. Never mind whining that other people are 'full of righteousness'. There is no treaty, and your quote came out of your head.

Article 8 was written way back in 1946, when commercial whaling was well under way and no one ever reckoned 'scientific research' would be (mis)used as a means of continuing commercial whaling under a moratorium that would be implemented in the 1980s. If Japan 'signed' this non-existant treaty (in fact what did happen is that Japan first objected to the moratorium, then withdrew its objection when the US asked them to choose whales or their fishing quota in US waters - Japan chose the fishing quota) with the intent of carrying on commercial whaling under the guise of 'research' (which is what it has done), then it is acting in bad faith.

If you're going to argue about who did what, when and why, at least first check who did what, when and why.

it is not necessary to kill a single whale for the purposes of scientific research.

If it were a single whale, or even two or three, I think an argument could be made. But hundreds, year after year? No. There are stricter rules covering the treatment of lab rats.

May I ask you why you think that Sea Shepard does not take action against Norway or Iceland?

http://www.seashepherd.org/whales/

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@smithinjapan

Where did I say otherwise? My point was it's considered a joke everywhere.

This is not considered a "joke everywhere. first of all, the semi-jounalist is biased for inserting quotes into the article. secondly, most countries couldn't give a rat's ar** about whaling. there is little, if any, reporting about japan's whaling, except for JT and a few aussie newspapers.

Depends on how you apply the definition. It can clearly apply to both parties.

it has never been applied to japan in any forum regarding whaling, so this is obviously just your personal opinion. other countries have labled the sea shepard "terrorists" and "pirates" for their tactics.

Yeah, no good reason at all -- save no... Ah, so you actually don't care about whales. you care that japan is being hypocritical. of that's your only reason then it's illogical. you're arguing with emotion and not logic.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Cleo:

Signing a convention legally is the same thing as signing a treaty. Both have the same legal effect which is why the national governments that have signed the international whaling convention do not act against Japan and why it has been left to private organizations like Green Peace to advocate against the whaling missions.

From a practical standpoint I think Japan should stop because whaling has little to no macro economic benefit to Japan. From an ethical standpoint, the tradition of whaling may be something to value from a historical and cultural perspective and could be something to support were the activity a part of a non-developed and primitive living tradition but in terms of a modern developed nation like Japan, it is anachronistic and it is time to move on.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Signing a convention legally is the same thing as signing a treaty. Both have the same legal effect

Doesn't change the fact that CraigHicks produced a non-existant quote from a non-existant treaty.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It is true that CraigHicks got the specific terms of Article 8 of the Convention wrong. But in some ways, his misunderstanding of Article 8 was a better way of controlling the hunting than the reality since, were the IWC to have an "N" number involved that would be the limit and Japan could not take more than "N." As it stands, since Japan can define N for itself, "N" can be any number ... although I am sure if it is too big a number the other signatory nations would have a better basis to object.

But I agree with CraigHicks in the sense of the observation that Japan has been the lightning rod of action by most of the conservation groups and militants while not being the only whale hunting nation.

Norway's 2013 Minke whale hunt quota is for 1286 animals and is a contracting member of the IWC. By government license, Norwegian whale products are exported to the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Japan. Iceland issued a moratorium on Fin whale hunting but still maintains Minke whale hunting. I cannot find what Iceland's quota for 2013 happens to be.

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