COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
national

Japanese vessels leave for minke whale hunt off northeastern coast

21 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

21 Comments
Login to comment

zichiJuly 19 12:13 pm

What are sustainable commercial figures, 100 minke whales per country? 10,000 per year?

That's what the IWC is there to establish. In order to do so data from Scientific Whaling programs is required. If the figures permit then there is no rational reason to continue the Moratorium on all species. But the anti-whaling faction has been and continues to block any effort to reach the goal of the IWC Scientific Committee reaching an advisory conclusion.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

There are 96 countries in the IWC

There are 88 member countries, not 96.

What are sustainable commercial figures, 100 minke whales per country? 10,000 per year?

Determining the sustainable quota is the IWC's job. They have even spent millions of dollars to develop the RMS which is a system to derive the sustainable quota. They just refuse to use it.

Shame where is the research or is it for Dog food and Fertilizer

It is in many journals all over the place. It is also reported to the IWC every year.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Shame where is the research or is it for Dog food and Fertilizer

0 ( +2 / -2 )

There are 96 countries in the IWC and there are a few major ones like Canada which are not. In a quota system they could all apply for their share. Countries like Albania and North Korea can apply for IWC membership and also expect a share of the quota. Any country can join the IWC.

What are sustainable commercial figures, 100 minke whales per country? 10,000 per year?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So those countries could sell their quota shares to Japan?

Yes, once a total sustainable quota is determined, and individual quotas are agreed amongst the parties, then those quotas could be traded if that was the desire.

Getting to that initial agreement is not trivial. For example, it would make a mockery of the process if Albania or North Korea turned up and were awarded a quota, only for the purpose of immediately turning around and seeking to sell it to others. 

That is, those party to the agreement would presumably only agree with those who similarly have a genuine desire to use their agreed slice of the overall sustainable quota. Reaching such international agreements is what we pay these bereaucrats for though.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If 50 countries kill 1,000 each then it becomes 50,000.

But as you stated, there aren't 50 countries hunting them and Japan itself doesn't plan on killing 1,000. In fact there are 3, with no indication that any others want to with the possible exception of South Korea. But if the IWC would do their job and review the status as required by the moratorium, then they could set a quota.

How long then before the Minke became endangered?

A very long time, probably longer than homo sapiens will survive.

My point is that Japan is a single country but if other countries also wanted to hunt whales for profit, what then.

There isn't a legal whaling ban only an agreement.

So there wasn't a point as it now seems that there is nothing to stop all 200+ countries from each killing 1,000 Minke. Heck there is nothing stopping them from trying to kill 100,000 a year.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

zichiJuly 18 10:33 pm JSTMy point is that Japan is a single country but if other countries also wanted to hunt whales for profit, what then.

They would have to abide by the take numbers established as "sustainable". Which is really what the IWC was created for. All marine resources should be regulated through agreements so as to avoid "overfishing".

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

'Research', yeah, right.

It's a colossal waste of taxpayers money. I'd rather see my taxes go on social care and nurseries, not this example of childish pigheadedness.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

all that is required is an international agreement to split a sustainable catch quota amongst those countries who are catching them.

So those countries could sell their quota shares to Japan?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

My point is that Japan is a single country but if other countries also wanted to hunt whales for profit, what then.

There isn't a legal whaling ban only an agreement.

The Japanese whaling industry receives about ¥8 billion of taxpayer money every year.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

The Japanese government should set a road map for eliminating publicly funded subsidies for whaling though.

whaling should be left to the free market, to the extent that it is sustainable. The commercial market will help producers make the appropriate production decisions.

However this assumes that government will stop spinning its wheels on the issue and allow for sustainable whaling. That moratorium thing is a total farce.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Haha, I don't think 50 countries will start catching whales tomorrow but this isn't cetacean research even if they did - all that is required is an international agreement to split a sustainable catch quota amongst those countries who are catching them.

just like proposed for Saury recently.

obiviously no international agreement today is going to let 50 countries catch 1,000 whales a year.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

What 50 countries are going to hunt Minkes if hypothetically they were excluded from the commercial whaing ban? All the anti-whaling nations are going to start hunting them?

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Nothing to get bent out of shape about one way or the other. Yet some people manage.

As a Japanese taxpayer I find the wasting of taxes on turning whales into frozen meat to be very much something to 'get bent out of shape' over, especially when the amakudari oyaji doing it hide behind their BS "science" claims.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Minke whales are not endangered because few countries are hunting them. The IWC estimates a world population of 500,000. If Japan kills 1,000 the numbers seem few. If 50 countries kill 1,000 each then it becomes 50,000. How long then before the Minke became endangered?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

So they're hunting non-endangered Minkes for research. In their waters. They're going to submit the data to the IWC Scientific Committee as usual and the meat will end up on the market available to eat. Big deal. Nothing to get bent out of shape about one way or the other. Yet some people manage.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

"We will catch 170 minke whales to ensure there are enough stocks for us to hunt more" is basically what they're saying. What a pile of mince. At least have the guts to admit you're commercially whaling and take the consequences - hiding behind semantics... research whaling my arse. No one believes a word of it.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Industrial freezer manufacturer's stocks on the rise.

Time to invest.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

But it has expanded the research area from the current fiscal year to conduct detailed research.

Research into restaurants and catering, that is.

The outlets that sell the meat should be named, shamed and picketed.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Time to prepare my grill for some delicious minke steak.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

"We aim to collect scientific data to be able to begin commercial whaling again," 

Nothing like these morons' oxymorons. There's no "science" in this and more than measuring how much you can sell and for how much is 'science'.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

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