national

Japan whaling fleet obstructed by Sea Shepherd

110 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

110 Comments
Login to comment

So they obstructed a whalig ship that wasn't whaling. Anything to stay in the news.

8 ( +14 / -8 )

why don't they go do a season of their attention mongering in the north atlantic and bother the icelandic and norwegian whaling fleets?

oh wait thats because those a white countries that have governments that might actually arrest them.

-9 ( +10 / -18 )

Japan whaling fleet obstructed by Sea Shepherd...Eco-terrorist activists interrupted the Japanese Antarctic hunt...Two small boats from the U.S.-based eco-terrorist group Sea Shepherd interfered with the movement of the harpoon ship Yushin Maru 3

No no it's the other way round. It is the Japanese fleet who are dangerous and out of control.

The boats, lowered from the Sea Shepherd vessel Bob Barker, cut across the Yushin Marus path trailing ropes and wires, an an official at the governmental agencys international affairs division said.

The eco-terrorist official later revised his comments to read: "The Yushin Maru just went right over the top of our ropes and wires, cutting them in two. I couldn't believe my eyes, but believe my words be true."

-11 ( +4 / -13 )

The all problem can be solved by just two things. 1) They should not use the term “scientific research,” but use the term "meat eating purpose" 2) If they use the term “scientific research,” then after the research the whale meat should be returned to the sea...

Then you will see the end of this saga... JT can save space to put more NEWS about Japan.

-2 ( +5 / -6 )

The below is taken from the FAQ on Whaling on the Embassy of Japan in Australia website.

What is the view of the Japanese Government on the conservation of whales?

There are more than 80 species of whales or cetaceans in the world. While some species are endangered, others are overabundant. The Japanese Government strongly supports the protection of endangered species such as Blue Whales and Bowhead Whales.

On the other hand, we consider that sustainable use of some whale species should be allowed like other living marine resources that are useful for humans such as fish and shellfish, if best scientific evidence shows that those species are not endangered.*

Although we understand many Australian people do not want to consider whales as marine resources or food, we believe each society should respect the cultures of others, keeping in mind the fact that different eating habits and food cultures have developed throughout history in the divergent environments among different countries.

The link for FAQ on Whaling can be found in Key Topics on the right side of their homepage.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

While some species are endangered, others are overabundant.

It's the people plundering the oceans who are overabundant.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

It's the people plundering the oceans who are overabundant.

Maybe so, both are certainly not endangered species.

Or is it eye for an eye then cleo? We're all mammals.

2 ( +6 / -5 )

People who believe that no animals should ever be eaten under any circumstances as a prima facia condition are hardly in a position to express any opinions of value on whaling or any other industry where animals are involved.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan whaling fleet obstructed by Sea Shepherd

It'll be all fun and games for the Sea Shepherd crews til someone gets seriously injured or killed. It's just a matter of time.

But then again, it makes for good TV and makes big $ for some.

The minke is abundant and its numbers are easily sufficient for some hunting.

It doesn't seem like a good idea to take endangered fin whales, though.

If Japan, Norway, Iceland and some small indigenous groups do limited hunting, I generally don't see the problem as long as the types taken are found in large enough numbers to support their populations.

One thing is certain: No amount of "gaiatsu," let alone attacks by eco-terrorists, will stop the Japanese.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

So they obstructed a whaling ship that wasn't whaling. Anything to stay in the news.

news released by the Japanese govt.

Japan’s fisheries agency said Thursday.

Why is the GOJ helping these terrorists, they must be aiding and abetting the enemy, "seppuku at dawn" Banzai!

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

I like how the icr's 'ILLEGAL HARASSMENT AND TERRORISM AGAINST ICR RESEARCH' media releases always include the phrase *perfectly* legal. Someone should point out to them that the use of superfluous superlatives only gives the impression that they are aware that their actions are not perfectly** legal at all. Whoever writes their releases doth protest too much.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

The whalers should blow those terrorists out of the sea.

-2 ( +12 / -14 )

The whalers should blow those terrorists out of the sea. and call it ballistic research.

That would be illegal Mr MabodofulSpicy. It's a fine line.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

One thing is certain: No amount of "gaiatsu," let alone attacks by eco-terrorists, will stop the Japanese

Acttually gaiatsu works very well in Japan. Ever take a public holiday in July? Thank you GHWB. He comp@lained that the Japanese were working too hard so "Umi no Hi" was created to appease him and implemented in 1995. Anti whaling pressure has severely cut the numbers the Japanese are taking. Pressure against Japan works but it's more about money than pride. A boycott of Japanese goods is the most effective way of forcing change but it's not merely as much fun.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@cleo:

I like how the icr's 'ILLEGAL HARASSMENT AND TERRORISM AGAINST ICR RESEARCH' media releases always include the phrase perfectly legal. Someone should point out to them that the use of superfluous superlatives only gives the impression that they are aware that their actions are not perfectly legal at all. Whoever writes their releases doth protest too much.

I guess "perfectly legal" is the most unique way of saying it.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

So the SSCS is now obstructing a whaling ship whose harpoon is still oiled and covered.

Now this press release has 2 sides: 1) to inform the Japanese people this early that the catch may not be as many as planned. 2) to force SSCS to give out details to the press about their side of the story.

I'm very much convinced the YM3 is just a decoy, being there all in it's lonesome ... where are the security ships? Where are the rest of the whaling fleet? But it seems that YM3 is playing out it's role pretty well, with the warnings and water cannon.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The ocean isn't the place for playing games. Harassing the Japanese whaling ships serves no purpose but to increase Sea Shepard's publicity and fund raising. Eventually, someone is going to be killed.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Give em hell boys! Send them packing!

2 ( +11 / -9 )

It's all in the grand plan this year... Let the eco-nutters chase around 1 harpoon ship ( decoy ship ) while the rest of the fleet gets on about their business...

Well played and all just fine with the SSS as their prime concern is generating sound bites and footage that gets them funded again and again - so long as they have enough controversy to fuel the anti-whaler sentiment they could care less about how many whales are harvested... This is why this is a Jgov press release - give the nutters the sound bites they need to keep them happy and they will feel fulfilled...

Watson is a nutjob - I met him 25 years ago when he was chasing the "controversy du jour" culling of overpopulated wolves in Canada... He was a narcissistic nut-job then and certainly has done nothing but gotten worse - he is one of those guys that we look back on in history and say "Wow, I guess we were wrong to encourage him"...

0 ( +8 / -8 )

@spudman:

Acttually gaiatsu works very well in Japan. Ever take a public holiday in July? Thank you GHWB. He comp@lained that the Japanese were working too hard so "Umi no Hi" was created to appease him and implemented in 1995. Anti whaling pressure has severely cut the numbers the Japanese are taking.

The operative word in my earlier post is "stop."

As far as your "Umi no Hi" comment is concerned, try studying a little more about it before posting next time.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

A more appropriate name for Bob Barker is Bob Baka!

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

Eventually, someone is going to be killed. Two Japanese whalers killed by their own hand or in industrial accidents. Whaling is dangerous work but the man overboard suicide may well have been induced by depression, The Govt of Japan declined an offer of help from SSCS to help recover the man lost overboard, too much pride? Whales are more important than lives after all. The only human killer here in this kabuki dance is the Japanese Government, no big press release about that in Japan though. Ignorant public thinks SSCS is dangerous.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

As far as your "Umi no Hi" comment is concerned, try studying a little more about it before posting next time

You disagree with a well known fact? If so I would appreciate the correction but GHWB actually touted this commitment from Japanese Prime minister Miyazawa as a successful result of his trade mission.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Well,,,since no amount of endless diplomatic requests & pressure has worked over the years and the powers in Jgovt connected to the whaling industry continue to not give a toss about the majority of the world,s opinion - Sea Shepherd is the only organization left that is able to mount an effective campaign against them...Since the whalers effectively say " screw you " to everyone else , I say screw the whalers...go get them SS...

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Now this press release has 2 sides: 1) to inform the Japanese people this early that the catch may not be as many as planned.

Doesn't matter. They already have too much whale meat to sell. It's not popular in Japan at all. It's just the pride thing.

-2 ( +5 / -6 )

Good stuff, keep it up SS

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Well it seems like SS is doing a good job. But what about the tens of millions Japan took away from its own suffering people to protect their whalers. Money well spent? Doesnt look that way.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Cletus: hear hear

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

What happened to all that extra security the whalers claimed they getting from the government?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When the moratorium was introduced in 1986, they stipulated they would undergo a comprehensive review in 1990 to determine if numbers were increasing and whether controlled limits could be introduced. The result of that review was that there were sufficient numbers to resume limited whaling, however they never lifted the moratorium (going back on their promises). Japan would not need to continue this charade if the IWC allowed them a set quota that didnt harm stocks. Of course that doesnt mean eco-terrorists would leave them alone

2 ( +7 / -5 )

This season Japan would achieve the target of the amount. The two boats could not disturb them enough.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Its no more Whale to hunt if they don't stop. "No eat Whale..No Die."

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

cleo - It's the people plundering the oceans who are overabundant.

What do you suggest should be done with these "overabundant" people?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

paulinusa - What happened to all that extra security the whalers claimed they getting from the government?

The YM3 "is" the extra security. The eco-terrorist SS isn't "obstructing" the Japanese whaling FLEET, is it?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

cleo - I like how the icr's 'ILLEGAL HARASSMENT AND TERRORISM AGAINST ICR RESEARCH' media releases always include the phrase perfectly legal. Someone should point out to them that the use of superfluous superlatives only gives the impression that they are aware that their actions are not perfectly legal at all.

I like it too. The ICR is only responding to the zealotry of the pro-violence supporters of the eco-terrorist SS who continue to "claim", but can't prove, that taking non-endangered minke whales in international waters is illegal.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Speaking of quotes, this is my favourite:

'We believe that throwing butryic acid at the whalers, dropping cables to foul their props, and threatening to ram them in the freezing waters of the Antarctic constitutes violence because of the potential consequences. The fact that the consequences have not been realized is irrelevant.'

2 ( +4 / -2 )

What 'actual' research do they claim to perform on 900 painfully slaughtered mammals?

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

The research is important. Plus people do eat the meat here. I love the bacon actually. Sashimi whale though is a bit strong. Has the texture of raw beef liver.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

The research is important.

That is my question. What is the research? What are they actually researching?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

What are they actually researching?

How many they can kill before SS stops them.

Then they take 'samples' home, most of them to go into deep freeze and eventually on the table. Other bits get used to research - I kid you not - what happens when you inject whale sperm into cow's and pig's eggs. There are also attempts to produce test-tube whale babies, presumably using really large test-tubes.http://www.newser.com/story/21056/japanese-frankenwhale-experiments-slammed.html

Japanese researchers took 18 years and 7,000 dead whales to produce just 43 research papers, most of them 'mostly useless—and very weird'. In an ordinary university lab, any professor planning to use 7,000 lab rats in a similar way would have his tenure taken away.

2 ( +10 / -8 )

Perhaps the thumbs-downers would like to show that the research has produced more than 43 papers, or has not sacrificed (that's the fluffy term 'researchers' like to use) over 7,000 animals, that the research is not mostly useless and very weird, and does not involve trying to cross-breed whales with land mammals?

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

What do you suggest should be done with these "overabundant" people?

Stop plundering the oceans.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

As Cleo is well aware, the Japanese posted a report that there is a correlation between a reduction in whale blubber and global warming that was published in the international magazine Polar Biology. Cleo failed to mention this as it would destroy her argument that the reports are mostly useless and mostly weird.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Well there's no doubt it had an effect last year. I mean, the whaling season was cut short and see how little scientific research findings were released in 2011.

Oh wait, no research is ever released apart from how good it tastes in whaleburgers.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

And cleo, you are very good at finding information on the ICR website, why is it that you're unable to find the amount of papers they've published? Is it because it further disproves your argument?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

I have no objections against whaling in Japanese waters; it is for Japan as a nation to decide its course and policy regarding these practises--hopefully there is enough transparancy regarding the whaling sector so that the general public can form their own opinion on these delicate matters.

However, the whaling fleet operating in the Antarctic does so on the notion of "Research". THIS is a disgrace to all Japanese scientists (and there are extremely many excellent researchers in Japan), because even a layman realizes that the Institute of Cetacean Research's meager publication record does not justify killing hundreds of whales in the Antarctic under the banner of research. In fact, looking at their track-record, even one whale might have been enough to do most of the research. For more details on their publication history, in below average scientific journals, please check -- http://www.icrwhale.org/NewPublication.html.

Therefore, I believe that the Japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic in the name of Science. Unless more concrete correlation, between the research they perform and the amount of whales they cull, is presented - and because commercial whaling is not allowed in the international Antarctic waters - the international community needs to stand up for their rights and bar further whaling in these waters by the Japanese fleet. However, few governments actually have the backbone to take such an incentive -- people just don't seem to care enough and governments worry about the diplomatic (and in turn economic) consequences.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

the Japanese posted a report that there is a correlation between a reduction in whale blubber and global warming that was published in the international magazine Polar Biology.

It takes 7,000 dead whales to find a correlation between warmer temperatures and less body fat?

you are very good at finding information on the ICR website, why is it that you're unable to find the amount of papers they've published?

I can find the papers; I'm unable to find any papers that justify (1) the killing of whales in their thousands and (2) the injection of large amounts of my tax money.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

So just to confirm you found

"research has produced more than 43 papers"

0 ( +5 / -5 )

It takes 7,000 dead whales to find a correlation between warmer temperatures and less body fat?

No, that's just one report that they've published. But it's a report that highlights again that you grossly exaggerate facts in order to try and prove your point.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Heda_Madness, please indicate which publication and scientific finding justify whaling in the Antarctic, a International Whaling Commission assigned whale sanctuary.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Is this the same IWC that allows Japan to conduct research whaling in the 'whale sanctuary'? The same IWC that was established to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Therefore, I believe

Interesting conclusion. My conclusion is that there is no scientific reason to justify why a limited amount of commercial whaling can not be carried out. Which would allow the international community to focus on far more pressing environmental issues and species in far greater detail.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

It takes 7,000 dead whales to find a correlation between warmer temperatures and less body fat?

No, that's just one report that they've published.

Then why bring up that particular one? Where are the peer-reviewed research papers that justify the deaths of 7,000 whales?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Because you falsely claimed that their reports were mostly weird. I thought it would make sense to highlight a report that you were familiar with. Or was there any particular reason in which you intentionally omitted it from your false accusations.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

There is no scientific reason to justify why a limited amount of commercial whaling can not be carried out Great we agree. But keep in mind that commercial whaling in Japanese waters is OK, but it is not allowed in the Antarctic. The japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic under false pretences e.g. Research. If you think they are doing great science, we have very different standards of quality and our discussion end here.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

There is no scientific reason to justify why a limited amount of commercial whaling can not be carried out

Great we agree, i too believe that a limited amount of commercial whaling is OK if they choose to do so. But keep in mind that commercial whaling in Japanese waters is OK, but it is not allowed in the Antarctic. The japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic under false pretences e.g. Research. If you think they are doing great science, we have very different standards of quality and our discussion end here.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Quality argument there... we have different standards so argument ends there.

How about we have a different understanding of the subject, one is based on science and education and the other is based on emotion. So yes, the argument should end there unless you feel the need to read up on the subject and then we could discuss it further? Up to you...

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

you falsely claimed that their reports were mostly weird

1 slightly scientific paper the conclusions from which surely did not require the deaths of 7,000 animals.

42 useless and/or weird papers that do not justify the death of a single animal.

You do understand that one possible※ valid result does not negate the research in its entirety being 'mostly' weird? I do not make false claims.

(※I'm not saying it is valid, merely recognising that you want it to be. If you have any more 'valid' research that justifies the killing of 7,000 animals and the waste of billions of tax yen at a time when the country's finances are in dire straits, by all means tell us about it.)

1 ( +6 / -5 )

So you didn't look on the ICR website and find all of the papers that they'd published.

You do make false claime. You've claimed 43 papers. You've claimed you've seen them on the ICR website. Yet you still maintain there are 43 papers. Something in all of that is false. Because there are a lot more than 43 papers. So that is a false claim.

I can't be bothered to go through all of the data... I don't need to. There are many, many reasons why whaling could be banned. Tax payers money is a huge reason... and that's why the only way to stop the Japanese whaling is from internal pressure. And something that the SS supporters will not only never understand but should realise that the more they support the SS the stronger the position that the Japanese whalers have.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

“In response, the Yushin Maru 3 discharged water and gave out verbal warnings to the boats,”

'Verbal warnings'? Like what? "This is regrettable! Please understand our situation! This is for research! You are blocking our cultural traditions of eating whale! We will play AKB48 on souped up ship loudspeakers if you do not desist in stopping our whaling--err, RESEARCH!"

Seriously, though... cleo is bang on. The fact that it takes more than 7000 whales in 18 years to produce a mere 43 or so papers (how many more, Heda, if not that number?), with the rationale currenlty, "We need to kill them to prove there are still more" is ludicrous and an insult to science and scientists everywhere. Good on SS for already starting to block and frustrate the whalers (ie. eco-terrorists).

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

True, the icr page does list more than 43 'papers published in peer-reviewed papers'. A quick glance shows that they include such titles as 'The Case for Scientific Whaling' (nice unbiased report, I'm sure), 'A sighting of a large school of the pygmy right whale' (requiring the deaths of how many minke and fin whales?), 'First record of movement of a southern right whale (Eubalaena australis) between warm water breeding grounds and the Antarctic ocean' (ditto), 'A note on East Australia Group V Stock humpback whale movement between feeding and breeding areas based on photo-identification' (ditto),'Distribution of seabirds in the Ross Sea, Antarctica' (ditto), 'Factors affecting in vitro maturation of minke whale' (those very large test-tubes, again), 'Fertilizability of ovine, bovine or minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) spermatozoa intracytoplasmically injected into bovine oocytes' (in collaboration with Dr. Moreau, no doubt), 'Interspecies Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer for In Vitro Production of Antarctic Minke Whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) Embryos' (ditto).

Lots of the papers listed bear no relation to the killing of minke or fin whales. Of those that do, (leaving aside the crazy-scientist interspecies breeding programmes) there is a world of difference between 'we needed to do this research, and had to kill 7000 whales to do it' (what the icr want you to believe) and 'we needed to justify the killing of 7,000 tasty whales and coincidentally happened to have lots of specimens to hand from the hunt, and so came up with these make-do/make-beleive research programmes' (what the icr are really doing). Surely only those who are desperate to believe would be taken in by this blatant example of sutra-copying.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

We will play AKB48 on souped up ship loudspeakers

Careful Smitty, you might give them ideas - not even Watson could withstand that!

Then again, it would also scare all the whales away.....

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Where is captain Nemo when you need him!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm really wondering why the involved japanese people don't have the guts to say that their whale-catching has nothing to do with scientific research. Yes, other countries do it, too, but they don't lie about the fact what they catch them for. I don't care if it is tradition or not, just don't tell any dumb stories about it and the world will merely accept what you do...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I was strongly opposed to whaling before I came to Japan, opposed still after seeing the meat on restaurant menus from time to time, neutral on the matter after years of hearing Japanese arguments for it (and yes, some foreign criticism of the whaling industry does have racist overtones) but finally abandoned all opposition to what the J-gov does on the matter in part because as with the ecological movement, which I was once fairly deeply interested in, many of the people in the 'anti' crowd are hypocrites and angry losers just looking for a cause.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Sea Shepherd has found only one ship...that isn't whaling. Unfortunately, the other ships are probably firing harpoons at will. This lone ship is likely a decoy.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Go SS. Research, my arse,

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@SUNHAWK.... i 100% agree with you... the eco-terrorists are only "tough" with polite nations like Japan.... they don't want to tangle with the countries you mentioned... i wish Japan had MEN in the country and they would not take this abuse from the eco-terrorists SS!

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Rolf Schlumpf: "I'm really wondering why the involved japanese people don't have the guts to say that their whale-catching has nothing to do with scientific research."

They do, actually, though indirectly, and it's one of the things that makes the whole 'science' facade amusing. Ask your average Joe Tanaka if they like whale and some 90% or so will say they don't favour it (probably more), with a big group of young people who won't have even tried it before. Ask the same people about the whaling issue and more than 50% will say they are pro-whaling, simply as a reaction to foreign criticism, claiming "it is part of our culture to catch and eat whale", thus dismissing any notion it is related to science. The government, whalers, and even the person on the street that are pro-whaling usually end up in this kind of contradictory conundrum, but point that fact out and pro-whalers say you are simply 'Japan-bashing' or some equally silly 'retort'.

unreconstructed: "...but finally abandoned all opposition to what the J-gov does on the matter in part because as with the ecological movement, which I was once fairly deeply interested in, many of the people in the 'anti' crowd are hypocrites and angry losers just looking for a cause."

As opposed to a guy who abandons his moral apprehensions towards something simply because he doesn't like the people who share the same opinion (ie. you changed your 'view' due to political reaction, not because the issue has changed). Nice one!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Japan will never stop whaling no matter. Whale meat is one ojf Japan staple food and so with octopus. The best solution for this whaling , is to put an international season law on whaling if there is none. And imposed harsh penalties and huge fines since most of this whaling companies are raking big profits in this type of business. Sea Shepherd is just a group of people with self interest and propagandas.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Charles M Burns - Go SS. Research, my arse,

WHAT?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

cleo - Japanese researchers took 18 years and 7,000 dead whales to produce just 43 research papers, most of them 'mostly useless-and very weird'. In an ordinary university lab, any professor planning to use 7,000 lab rats in a similar way would have his tenure taken away.

Then you agree that research is being done.

Isn't that what the ICR is claiming is being done? The pro-violence, eco-terrorist supporters are claiming that no research is being done or that the research isn't research.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

What should be obvious to anyone is that eco-terrorist SS are currently attacking and trying to disable a vessel that WASN'T even whaling.

The eco-terrorists aren't trying to stop the YM3 from whaling. The eco-terrorists are simply attacking the YM3.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

bajihista: "Whale meat is one ojf Japan staple food and so with octopus."

So you admit it's not about the 'science', then? Anyway, where on earth did you get the idea that whale is a 'staple' in Japan? Rice is a staple. Soy sauce is a staple. Miso is a staple. Very few people (population-wise) eat whale, and fewer still on a regular basis. I agree the whaling won't stop, but the main reason is because the whalers get huge subsidies and make big money from the government.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Then you agree that research is being done.

Not at all. At least not any kind of research that is meaningful, or necessary, or justifies the deaths of thousands of whales and the wasting of billions of tax yen.

I could spend an afternoon pulling the legs off spiders then write papers about how many legs a spider needs to get around, what happens when you mix spider legs with hot coffee, stick them into marshmallows, freeze them, mince them up and feed them to the cat, and my 'research' would be no less deserving of recognition and public funding than the whaling 'research'. And about on a level in terms of meaningless cruelty and bloody-mindedness.

The whales are not being killed for research (the icr claim); the faux 'research' is being done as an excuse to kill whales. It fools no one except those who want to be fooled.

Whale meat is one ojf Japan staple food

Absolute rubbish. I've lived in Japan for over 35 years and not once has this so-called 'staple food' ever appeared on any dining table I have shared with Japanese people eating their daily fare. It's about as 'staple' here as grilled sheep's eyeballs.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

cleo - Not at all. At least not any kind of research that is meaningful, or necessary, or justifies the deaths of thousands of whales and the wasting of billions of tax yen.

So you're saying you don't accept the research that is being done. Isn't that one of the options I mentioned? That the pro-violence, eco-terrorist supporters are claiming that the research isn't research.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The whalers research resembles the nonsense served up by the smoking lobbyists for years. Its designed to provide just enough argument to cause delay and doubt. The vested interests love this veneer of respectability.

No one accepts the research as definitive and the majority of IWC members wont agree to a resumption of whaling because there is no strong evidence whale numbers have recovered sufficiently to resume hunting. All that can be guestimated is that Japan could hunt small numbers. No thought to the others that want to hunt and no thought to thef ear and pain caused to the animals.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Well... well... everyone is getting "emotional" again.

This article's main issue is the "unwarranted attack on high seas" be it international waters or not, be it for whale conservation or not, be it Japanese or not. It is putting people in "danger".

Now that what some may consider a very "foolish" attempt has been made by an organization funded by "donations" which appear to be "misappropriated" for what appears to be a "misguided" activity that comes very close to "terrorism" or "criminal attack", what is the International Community going to do about it?

Couldn't your discussion be more directed to resolve that issue?

Please?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Now... having said what the "issue" was....

I have question for all that have been participating.

Have any of you researched and have read or seen exactly what kind of research results were gotten by these ships? There are apparently tons of them now being used by the scientific community. Did you ever wander why the Discovery Channel or the Nature Channel have not taken sides on the issue of whaling? Wouldn't you think that such information if provided can be very meaningful for our discussion?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

JSDF should go out there and wack them eco-nuts for attacking Japanese Nationals in international waters. sink their ship, rescue them, throw them in a foriegn prison, not one in Japan or the US.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

SeaShepherd we support you! The japanese government will fail! It's already weakening!

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

SwissToni - No one accepts the research as definitive and the majority of IWC members wont agree to a resumption of whaling because there is no strong evidence whale numbers have recovered sufficiently to resume hunting. All that can be guestimated is that Japan could hunt small numbers. No thought to the others that want to hunt and no thought to thef ear and pain caused to the animals.

"Definitive" of what? There either is research being done or there isn't. It appears to me that research IS being done.

You don't agree with the research. You don't accept the research. That's your choice. After all, no one is throwing glass bottles of acid or red phosphorous flares at you to force you to accept their version of reality.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

tokyokawasakiJan. 06, 2012 - 12:14PM JST What 'actual' research do they claim to perform on 900 painfully slaughtered mammals?

Your questions are answered here by the IWC:

http://iwcoffice.org/conservation/permits.htm

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I'm with S.S on this. If you believe in something enough you have to go all out. Eventually it will reach the moment we are all waiting for. When the guns come out. Someone is going to cross the line.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Some quotes from your link, Ossan -

(JARPA1)

there was some disagreement over the necessity for the use of lethal research methods

JARPA results were not required for management under the Revised Management Procedure

For humpback whales the abundance estimates provided useful steps towards acceptable estimates of abundance (without killing a single whale)

The estimation of natural mortality was the main initial objective of JARPA. However, the confidence limits around the current estimate spanned such a wide range that the parameter is still effectively unknown (=thousands of dead whales, and no results)

the nature of the analyses presented at the JARPA review meant that relatively little progress had been made in addressing the role of Antarctic minke whales in the ecosystem.

If a Sanctuary is in place, it can be argued that information on improving management of whaling in that region is unnecessary. On many occasions, the Commission has (by majority vote) passed a Resolution urging Japan not to issue a permit for these catches.

(JARPA2)

At the 2007 Annual meeting there was considerable disagreement over the value of this research

In 2005 a Resolution was passed (30 votes to 27 votes with 1 abstention) that strongly urged the Government of Japan to withdraw its JARPA II proposal or to revise it so that any information needed to meet the stated objectives of the proposal is obtained using non-lethal means

In 2007 the Commission passed a Resolution asking Japan to refrain from issuing a permit for JARPA II

Looks like the IWC isn't terribly impressed with the lethal 'research' programme.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Good on YM3 acting as perfect decoy!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What is it with Japanese whaling? Other countries do it, so why not Japan? Or is it the lying hypocrisy of the J-Gov - Japanese consulates worldwide must love writing replies to the volumes of anti-whaling letters they receive. What would the concerned citizens of the world write about? SCIENTIFIC WHALING Even Japanese people sometimes have difficulty trying not to gloat over this one. My Japanese professor once said '... for science...' with a smile as he shovelled down a piece of whale (...or was it dolphin). CULTURE & HISTORY A logical argument when you consider many indigenous populations in the world carry out same or similar practices. But has the link between COASTAL whaling, with a recorded history, and PELAGIC whaling, imported from Norway and further augmented by industrialists, become a little thin, and laboured to say the least. I consider myself fairly ambivalent toward the issue, I have never seriously voiced or written a complaint although I have helped others. What I have found a little unpalatable is the use of disaster relief money, collected worldwide and donated to Japan, toward whaling expeditions. It seems the J-Gov has lost its backbone again, or are trying to invent a new way to define "disgraceful".

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Makes me wanna have kujira sashimi tonight.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Arrestpaul, ""Definitive" of what? There either is research being done or there isn't. It appears to me that research IS being done."

Definitive of anything. Yours and the whalers argument is there is research, regardless of its quality, therefore we must be right. It's the most cynical use of research possible. What little is done has been designed to provide nothing more than a veneer of legality and to buy time. If you believe the research is legitimate, the only one whose been fooled is you.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

What I have found a little unpalatable is the use of disaster relief money, collected worldwide and donated to Japan, toward whaling expeditions

You ought to be careful what you swallow. Maybe read the label again, or at least once properly.

Translation: donations have not and will not be used to fund the increased security against eco-terrorists. Anyone who has actually made a donation would know that their money went to the Japanese Red Cross Society etc. and not the federal government.

Funny (well not really) how people continue to make the link between the two. Let's make another link then - Paul Watson and his misguided crew call off their cultural and illegal attacks, and money for said security can then be reduced and used in other areas.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This is what the IWC Scientific Committee workshop had to say in it's 2007 review.

"When it last considered this issue in 1997, the Committee agreed to the statement below.

The results from the JARPA programme, while not required for management under the RMP, have the potential to improve management of minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere in the following ways: (1) reductions in the current set of plausible scenarios considered in Implementation Simulation Trials; and (2) identification of new scenarios to which future Implementation Simulation Trials will have to be developed (e.g. the temporal component of stock structure). The results of analyses of JARPA data could be used in this way perhaps to increase the allowed catch of minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere, without increasing depletion risk above the level indicated by the existing Implementation Simulation Trials of the RMP for these minke whales. The present Workshop concurred with that view."

"As noted above, issues of stock structure are directly relevant to the question of biological parameter estimation. The 1997 review had noted that the information from JARPA had set the stage for answering many questions about long term changes in minke whales in the JARPA research area and had recommended that biological parameters be analysed by stocks." " The Workshop agreed that every effort should be made to try to resolve the issue of the commercial age data as this has important implications as to how well the objectives of the programme can be met."

"At the 1997 Workshop, it had been noted that the data on body condition and biological parameters should result in a better understanding of the status of Antarctic minke whales in the research area and be useful to test hypotheses related to aspects of the ‘krill surplus’ model. The importance of understanding the feeding ecology of Antarctic minke whales has been recognised by the Committee and formed an important part of its SOWER 2000 programme (IWC, 2000b). The importance of but the inherent difficulties in ecosystem modelling are also recognised by the Committee (IWC, 2004a;2007b). The Committee has long been unable to reach agreement on interspecific competition among baleen whales in the Antarctic, particularly with respect to the so-called ‘krill surplus’ model. The Committee welcomed the oceanographic and krill-related work undertaken since the 1997 Workshop. The Workshop also agreed that considerable relevant data had been collected by the JARPA programme on matters related to body condition and feeding."

http://iwcoffice.org/conservation/jarpa.htm

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Until the IWC Scientific Committe, which gives Japan the authority to conduct research whaling declares that the data Japan is submitting to the IWC Scientific Committee is rejected as false or invalid, anyone who declares that Japan's research whaling is a sham is simply incorrect. That they are conducting research whaling in a "sancutary" and consuming the whales is right there in Article VIII as sometig they can do, and in the latter case, MUST do. Perpetually arguing that it's commercial whaling in disguise or that Japan doesn't have a whale eating culture is both a waste of time and nonsense, The very term "loophole" constantly used by the anti-whaling faction means, bluntily that it's legal. The vast majority of anti-whalers don't seem to understand that the IWC is an international organization existing to regulate and support the Whaling Industry. The preservation and maintenance of whale stocks is so that eventually commercial whaling can resume, not a perpetual blanket ban on all whaling for emotional reasons. And in this respect, Research whaling provides the necessary data to the IWC Scientific Committee to accomplish it's goals. Those who are against Japan's research whaling, as well as criminal organizations like SSCS are barking up the wrong tree. If the IWC did not authorize it, Japan wouldn't be doing it. This is why Australia's ICJ bid is destined to fall flat on it's face. Any changes will have to be made at the IWC level. Not by throwing stuff at the ships.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

SwissToni - Definitive of anything. Yours and the whalers argument is there is research, regardless of its quality, therefore we must be right. It's the most cynical use of research possible. What little is done has been designed to provide nothing more than a veneer of legality and to buy time. If you believe the research is legitimate, the only one whose been fooled is you.

When you say, "What little is done has been designed to provide......", you're admitting that research IS BEING DONE aren't you.

The IWC accepts the data. Non-IWC scientists have used the provided data to enhance their own work about whales. You have provided no evidence that the research is not legitimate. There are only the "claims" of the eco-terrorist Watson and those of his pro-violence supporters that suggest that the research isn't legitimate.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Are the eco-terrorist SS still attacking a Japanese vessel that wasn't actively whaling? If their STATED goal is to stop whaling - why are the eco-terrorist attacking a vessel that wasn't whaling?

Is it because the eco-terrorist SS actual goal is to injure crew members and ram and sink ships?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

cleoJan. 07, 2012 - 11:01AM JST Looks like the IWC isn't terribly impressed with the lethal 'research' programme.

The IWC charter calls for decisions to be based on the recommendations of the Scientific Committee. The Southern Ocean Sanctuary was created by the anti-whaling faction in violation of this requirement and the head of the IWC Scientific Committee resigned in disgust. The resolutions attempting to stop the research whaling are the result of again, the anti-whaling faction within the IWC. It is NOT the recommendation of the Scientific Committee which needs the data to do it' job. Even gthe 1982 Moratorium was suposed to be temporary and up for reconbsidratuion has never been reconsiderd becxause of gthe effort of the anti-whaling faction. This begs trhe question of why are the anti-whaling nations continuing to be members of an organization tasked to regulate the Whaling Industry and attempting to destroy it's purpose and authority, rather than simply leave and form an International Anti-Whaling Organization.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Developments.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/three-activists-prisoners-after-slipping-aboard-japanese-ship/story-e6frg6nf-1226239220637

THREE Australian activists have been detained by authorities accompanying the Japanese whaling fleet after slipping aboard their vessel.

The activists took the action to board the ship because the Japanese were operating in contempt of Australian courts and in defiance of the will of Australian people, they said.

"We are onboard this ship because our government has failed to uphold its pre-election promise to end whaling in the Southern Ocean," Mr Peterffy said.

They hope the action will remind the government of what they say is its obligation to prohibit whaling vessels in Australian waters.

They are "insulted and disappointed" in the government for allowing the transit of whale poaching vessels in Australian waters, Mr Peterffy said.

So far the icr doesn't seem to be saying anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

More

"No decision has been made yet on the fate of the men who boarded the vessel," ICR spokesman Glenn Inwood said.

"But they risk being taken back to Japan to face charges and possible imprisonment.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/japanese-whalers-issue-jail-threat-to-activists-20120108-1ppuz.html

(The boarding happened inside the 200-mile Aussie exclusive economic zone, from which whaling ships are supposedly excluded....)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bwhahahaha-cleo your posting that word'pre-election promise' like it means something. Obviously you havent been following Australian politics. I hope they drop the 3 of them off at the nearest stop-over, that is the Antartic-consider it avoiding confrontation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

your posting that word'pre-election promise' like it means something. Obviously you havent been following Australian politics.

Whether I've been following Aussie politics or not is neither here nor there. They're Mr. Petterfy's words, not mine. You need to take it up with him and his mates. After they've finished talking with the whalers, I imagine.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

No cleo Im taking it up with you as you quoted it as if it is some development that the Australian government has gone against the votes of the Australian public when you quote Mr Petterfy's words as going against an election promise-again I say you have no idea about Australian politics. Which by the way are relevant here to this discussion

0 ( +1 / -1 )

illsayit, I make no claim to know anything of Aussie politics. The quote is obviously a quote (in italics an' all) and clearly attributed to the person who said it. I'm sure the activists' expressed reasons for their actions are relevant to the story, whether or not anyone else understands or agrees with them.

Anyway, this topic has shifted to its own thread. You saw it here first.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Arrestpaul, "When you say, "What little is done has been designed to provide......", you're admitting that research IS BEING DONE aren't you."

I'm saying what I'm saying, that the research is a cynical exercise to muddy the waters and string out the issue in legal technicality. Much the same way the manufactured doubt lobbyists did in defence of the tobacco industry.

I also say that none of the research is conducted toward finding a humane method of killing whales. And beyond that the ICR even fails to join working groups towards that goal.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

cleo - The boarding happened inside the 200-mile Aussie exclusive economic zone, from which whaling ships are supposedly excluded....

These 3 eco-terrorists didn't board a "whaling" vessel.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

SwissToni - I'm saying what I'm saying, that the RESEARCH .......

OK. You don't agree with the "research" that's being done. That's fine.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"Scientific Research", I imaging using the whale, with sensors in the body, to control de undersea earthquakes..right!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Arrestpaul, if you're going to copy and paste my posts I'll thank you to make no changes. I didn't write research in capitals. You entitled to have your opinions, your not entitled to rewrite mine.

Even the IWC says that while the info provided by Japans research has some small value, it is not required to manage whales stocks and was accordingly asked on multiple occasions not to do it. I'd say that pretty much puts the 'research' in it's place don't you?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

SwissToni - if you're going to copy and paste my posts I'll thank you to make no changes. I didn't write research in capitals. You entitled to have your opinions, your not entitled to rewrite mine.

Even the IWC says that while the info provided by Japans research has some small value......

I don't believe it's necessary to quote everything that you wrote because the original post is there for all to read. I captialized the word "research" because that is the part of your post that I'm emphasizing. You say there IS research being done and you say that it HAS some value. Isn't that what the ICR is saying? That research is being done and that the research has value?

Doesn't that refute the "claims" of the eco-terrorist supporters who say no research is being done or that the research is just a scam?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

arrestpaul, " I captialized the word "research" because that is the part of your post that I'm emphasizing"

Then change your post, not mine.

"Doesn't that refute the "claims" of the eco-terrorist supporters who say no research is being done or that the research is just a scam?"

Not at all. The protesters say the research is a cover for commercial whaling. If the research has little value, is not required by the IWC for maintaining whale stocks and the whalers have been asked not to do it by the very people they purport to be wanting to help, the IWC, it destroys the whalers claims that the research is legitimate.

On top of bought and paid for scientists doing unwanted research, Japan has been caught bribing delegates to the IWC in order to manipulate voting in its favour. There's plenty of evidence to support the protesters and the Australian governments claims. Japans whalers have simply ignored all protests over the years. This is why the situation is where it is. It's incurable while whaling goes on the way it does and it's political suicide for either Japan's, or the anti whaling countries politicians to change their stance. The difference of course is that there is no cost to the anti whaling countries politicians to maintain their stance, the cost to Japan's is many millions every year. That's money borrowed from Japans shrinking pool of savers.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

SwissToniJan. 11, 2012 - 01:33AM JST

arrestpaul, " I captialized the word "research" because that is the part of your post that I'm emphasizing"

Then change your post, not mine.

I didn't change your post. It's right there where you left it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Readers, please stop bickering. Focus your comments on what is in the story, not at each other, and do not be repetitive.

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