national

Japanese whalers, activists clash off Antarctica

142 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

142 Comments
Login to comment

Let the 2011 action begin!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They were just celebrating the New Year, other people around the globe shot fireworks, they decided to shoot water cannons. Shooting fireworks from a ship can quickly cause misunderstandings and prompt for rescue which would cost millions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why use water-cannons, just launch some glass-bottles with "Rancid Butter" against the anti-whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They use the water cannons to protect their ancient cultural scientific missions that have been going on in Antarctica for hundreds of years! :)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow has it been around a yr already, seems like this was going on just a few days ago!

Well lets see what all these fools get into this year!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I hope the Sea Shepherds shut down the whalers. They are poisoning their own people with mercury and destroying the eco system. I know Most Japanese people are intelligent and should stand up and say ENOUGH.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shooting water cannons is not that big a deal. Will every little piece of action by both sides end up in the news? In other news: "Sea Shepherd launched their helicopter", "Japanese whalers use their anti-piracy sound pulse device", "Sea Shepherd activists throw paint bombs at the Shonan Maru hull"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once again Japan the eyes of the world are upon You for the deplorable treatment of Dolphins. One loan Dolphin locked in a Stagnite pool of algae filled water, swimming in it's on feces with dead Fish On the bottom of the pool...idviously in need of medical attention Why do you let a handful of Greedy Fisherman shame your People and Your country in this way. Please People of Japan, take a stand And end the senseless slaughter and miss treatment of All Dolphins N Whales..... SHAME ON ALL OF YOU! HELP SAVE MISTY THE DOLPHIN !!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seriously, after all these years, do they actually publish any peer review research reports on which species of whale taste better ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shooting water cannons is not that big a deal.....................

not if it's cold like in the Antarctica. LOL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I for one am tired of hearing about self-promotion divas like the Sea Shepherd gang.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ahh, happy new year

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Game on! And in truly international waters, anything goes! I'm cheering for the Sea Shepherd, if only to Japan becoming the whaling pariah of the world again!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once Japanese whalers 'research' all the whales into extinction, will Sea Shepard stop harassing them?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once Japanese whalers 'research' all the whales into extinction, will Sea Shepard stop harassing them?

No.

Because,

1) the research they are doing will not bring any whales to extinction, and

2) if Sea shepherd stop harassing people, the attention-whoring manchild Paul Watson won't get in the news.

So, The answer to your question is "no".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If only the Emperor Akihito - a published marine biologist and self-proclaimed environmentalist - would make His position known and publicly denounce this so-called "research", perhaps sentiment here in Japan would turn against the whalers. I am curious as to why the Japanese have not asked the Emperor for His position on this subject, as He is expected to convey the feelings of His nation regarding cultural (non-political) matters. I admire the Emperor and this would be a perfect opportunity for Him to make a real difference for change in this country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ahh, another round of Whale Wars that Watson's group will sell for millions to Animal Planet and Discovery Channel. He makes millions off the deal and does not have to produce results (he hasn't actually stopped the Japanese from whaling). I've even heard from various posters (last year I think) that Watson stages his dust-ups like a director for what makes the best shots for the camera crew. He could stop the whalers much closer to Japan,but if he did, he wouldn't have anything to sell, thus be out of money and attention. So in a way, I'd wager Paul Watson supports the whalers in order to nurse his addiction for money and attention. Without an enemy, he is nothing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USAkuma; They do not sell it. The whalers have been appraoched to have filming done from their ships and to show they point of view, but declined. Get your fact right, pro whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have watched Whale Wars steve and I tell you it is a melodramatic production. And on it I saw everything that the anti-whalers were denying over and over. Some facts: Pete Bethune was shown brandishing a Bow and Arrow at the beginning of one of the shows just before the Ady Gil collision episode so claims that SS didn't know he had that are total BS. One Sea Shepherd activist wearing his SS hat that was also embroidered with the words "Prepare to Ram" so they actually advertise that is their objective so the Ady Gil incident is just another "show" for them. I think they did it to get on Whale Wars and some "world attention" to their cause. The ship that contains that ball of lard Watson had flags of vessels it had rammed and/or sunk painted on it's side proving that they are proud of the crimes they commit.

Ever wonder why Whale Wars is not filmed in Norway, Iceland etc? Because they'd be arrested. That is also why they don't go too close to Japan. In the Southern Ocean there is no one to stop their crimes. And no before the pro crowd says so, catching whales in the Southern Ocean is not a crime. It's been said many a time and proven that the ICW allows countries to conduct Research whaling and to sell the meat as food and not waste any of the product. This is to gain information on sustaining whaling. The "to extinction" argument is bogus. No one hunts themselves out of business and a couple ships can't possibly kill all the world's whaling. So letting these guys continue this way is actually conserving whales more than if they lift the moratorium and more countries take it back up. But I don't expect any vegans to grasp that concept. A radical is a radical.

Happy 2011 everyone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

People who actually believe the nonsense and fabrications that Sea Shepherd spews out are the same folks who think professional wrestling is"real".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is not much love for SSCS here and that includes many Anti-Whaling supporters.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The ones who are delusional are those who choose to ignore the facts and buy into the ICR propaganda that they are doing legitimate research. In what other scientific study do you see researchers killing over a thousand of their studied species for research about the conservation of that species? Get real. This is one of the biggest farces I have ever witnessed.

as to Sea Shepherd, if you ignore their press and just watch the videos, anyone can draw their own conclusions. Having surfed with dolphins and seen them from my boat off California and Mexico, I find it appalling that these creatures are treated to such cruel deaths. And keeping any marine mammal in a small pool is just cruel. I have seen dolphins run with my boat for over 30 minutes. There is no way their tiny pools are adequate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese whale hunts have no legitimate research purpose. They are breaking international law. The only countries that take their side are a couple of pro whale hunting countries and third world countries the Japanese bribe. It is time to stop the farce.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In what other scientific study do you see researchers killing over a thousand of their studied species for research about the conservation of that species?

Most marine species, actually. It's called a research catch. Google it.

For extra fun, google it with whatever country you're from added to the search terms.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 02:13 AM JST - 2nd January The ones who are delusional are those who choose to ignore the facts and >buy into the ICR propaganda that they are doing legitimate research. In >what other scientific study do you see researchers killing over a >thousand of their studied species for research about the conservation of >that species? Get real.

Every marine species of fisheries intererst whether fish, invertebrate or cetacean that falls under conservation efforts are indeed collected in numbers in excess of a thousand. This is because you can't get a represenative analysis from a small sampling size. Rather than telling to get "real" perhaps you ought to get "educated" in actual conservation methods and programs. The Japanese are indeed conducting Research Whaling. They submit their findings to the IWC Scientific committee and have done so for decades. The IWC permits Research Whaling, excludes them from recognizing any moratoriums or sanctuaries, and requires that the whales caught be utilized, ie; consumed since we don't run anything on whale oil anymore. Australia is eventually going to be facing these facts at the ICJ, but at least they are taking a legal and lawful action to try achieve their goals. In contrast, Sea Shepherd are an eco-terrorist group taking the law into their own hands, with no authority or jurisdiction issued from any government in the world, to create a cash income flow from the Whale Wars TV show and gullible contributors. If you don't believe me google Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd as Greenpeace have a whole page dedicated to how they want nothing to do with Sea Shepherd and consider their actions a liability to the anti-whaling cause.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The vast majority of industrialized counties have outlawed the killing of sea mammals. Japan is one of the few that refuses to face the reality of it's impact and cruelty.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

whalers and anti-whalers are at it again!!! Reminds me of.... 2010!!!

Seriously, all both sides are doing is further solidifying their positions. The whalers and anti-whalers are both refining their techniques, and generally improving their games... IMHO it now looks more than ever like the only real solution to this issue will be a political one.

On a personal note, I hope to see another ship/boat get wrecked soon! (to clarify, I don't care if it is a whaler or anti-whaler - I just like to see the impact, and I love how both sides always look indignantly at the actions of their opposition)

Let the games begin!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MikeHuntez statement that no one hunts themselves out of business is not born out historically. The buffalo were nearly hunted to extinction. The Sea Otter hunters off California hunted themselves out of business. The abalone fishermen of Southern California hunted and poached their way out of business. It is only government regulation that has prevented the total eradication of these species. Mike needs to do his homework before he bashes others.

I think it's you than needs to do his homework. Someone above told you about the waste western countries did with whaling. The Japanese are using it for food and gathering facts on the species as to be able to maintain a healthy population. 1000 whales is not one tenth the entire world population of whales. If you think that 2 or 3 ships that go down to Antarctic and take 1000 animals that then the world will implode with an extinct whale population then it's you that is drinking some kind of kool aid laced with mind altering substances all fed to you by Watson the self declared savior of the worlds oceans. Another Jim Jones type. You are just one of those believers who sign up here only to post your 4 or 5 posts on the whaling issue article to save Misty and such. More proof that you are drinking something funny.

The Japanese whale hunts have no legitimate research purpose. They are breaking international law. The only countries that take their side are a couple of pro whale hunting countries and third world countries the Japanese bribe. It is time to stop the farce.

It has all been said before to you types so I'm not going to try to change your mind but really this tripe is getting old.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica seems to forget the last resolution out of the IWC did not recognize the value of Japanese whaling research and called for Japan to stop whaling in the Southern Sanctuary.

All the world sees Japan see whaling research for what it reallyis, a smoke screen to hide commercial whaling in a whale sanctuary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The IWC resolution against Japanese Arctic whaling was supported by 40 votes, opposed by just 2 votes with 1 abstention. 27 countries did not vote. Even if you add the abstention and 27 countries that did not vote as "opposing" the resolution, the resolution had an overwhelming majority support ... The majority of participating countries voted against the current Japanese "research" killings in the Arctic.

Japan just chose to ignore the resolution. Shame on them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mikehuntez Refers to old US whaling practices that have since been outlawed. Research (non-lethal, legitimate research that is) has defined individual populations of whales based on regions. To compare the taking of a particular regional population to worldwide population does not recognize the viability and sustainability limitations and sensitivities of regional breeding populations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Love the illogiocal statements from someone who is proclaiming to come from a non-third world country. And statements like these, and attitudes like that, how can they do anything good for the whales? Poor!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 06:40 AM JST - 2nd January OssanAmerica seems to forget the last resolution out of the IWC did not >recognize the value of Japanese whaling research and called for Japan to >stop whaling in the Southern Sanctuary.

That was the result of the anti-whaling nations vote block within the IWC. Furthermore that resolutiuon is irrelevant for the pupose of proving or disproving whether actual "research" is being conducted. It will be the IWC SCientific Committee whjo have been receiving the Japanese Research Data and have declared their scientific value that will be used as testimony as to whether the Reserch Whaling qualifies as such.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 06:50 AM JST - 2nd January The IWC resolution against Japanese Arctic whaling was supported by 40 >votes, opposed by just 2 votes with 1 abstention. 27 countries did not >vote. Even if you add the abstention and 27 countries that did not vote >as "opposing" the resolution, the resolution had an overwhelming >majority support ... The majority of participating countries voted >against the current Japanese "research" killings in the Arctic. Japan just chose to ignore the resolution. Shame on them.

Australia had a chance to eliminate Research Whaling altogether in June 2010 at Agadir but they refused to let it happen. Shame on Australia. Wonder why neither the U.S. nor New Zealand was willing to join Australia as a plaintiff to the ICJ case?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 04:31 AM JST - 2nd January The vast majority of industrialized counties have outlawed the killing >of sea mammals. Japan is one of the few that refuses to face the reality >of it's impact and cruelty.

What impact? Cruelty is subjective. Killing any animals for any reason whatsoever is "cruelty".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 07:26 AM JST - 2nd January Research (non-lethal, legitimate research that is) has defined >individual populations of whales based on regions. To compare the taking >of a particular regional population to worldwide population does not >recognize the viability and sustainability limitations and sensitivities >of regional breeding populations.

If the above were true, Article 8 of the IWC regulations which authorizes Research Whaling under Scientific Permits which contains the requirement that the data be submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee would not exist. If the above were true, Australia would have done anything to eliminate Research Whaling at Agadir but they didn't. I have to conclude it isn't true.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica

Your logic is faulty. The IWC has a standing Article on whale research, but they specifically passed a resolution that called for Japan to halt all whaling in the Southern Sanctuary. They rejected JARPA II as legitimate research. Japan ignores the resolution passed by a vote of 40 to 2.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also IWC specifically rejected JARPA II and urged Japan to resubmit with nonlethal methods of research. Again, Japan ignores IWC and its resolution requiring Japan to halt all whaling in the Southern Sanctuary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The IWC Research Committee did not endorse the lethal kill aspect of JARPA II .... There was insufficient data to demonstrate the value of the data obtained by lethal kill. Te Committee recommended refinement so that a value determination could be made. The Japanese ignored the findings and request for more details.

The Japanese government has ignored the IWC resoltuion to withdraw JARPA II. They ignored the IWC resolution to halt all lethal research in the Southern Oceans. They ignored the IWC Research Committee request for resubmission with clearer definition of the lethal kill research, samples and values. One does not need to be a rocket scientist or a Sea Shepherd supporter to draw their own conclusion on Japan's lethal "research" on whales. It is Intuitively obvious to the casual observer. If all Japan wants is the "research", then use the whale meat of lethal kills to feed the fishes. I would bet they would not fund the "research" if they could not sell the meat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The hypocrisy of ICR and the Japanese Government claims that they kill over 1000 whales for "research" and then just happen to sell the meat commercially is obvious to reasonable people. The number of whale kills allowed for "research" by the ICR and Japanese government in a single year, exceeds the total of all Japanese "research" kills in all the years prior to closure of the Southern Sanctuary to whaling. This was cited by the IWC.

If the Japanese want to to disregard IMO and IWC, they should just tell the truth. The ruse is transparent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think the "outrage" over this whaling comes from two different perspectives. The first one is the environmentalist perspective. They don't want to hurt the "big lovable whales". The second perspective is the thinking intelligent perspective. This perspective is mine and it means that we see the whole "research" thing as a something so outrageous that we can't believe you expect us to believe it!

If they were hunting whales without lying about why they did it it would have most definitely sailed beneath my radar. I just wanted to put forth that perspective so the pro whalers would understand it. To me they are just fishermen making a living and I can respect that. I don't respect the "research" ruse though.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As an expat Kiwi I am utterly appalled that New Zealand has anything to do with this slaughter year after year. New Zealand advertises itself as a green country yet allows and supports the Japanese Whaling Fleet. Such lies from both countries. I support Sea Shepherd they are the only ones who care about these magnificent creatures and are there to stop the so-called research of whales.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is show time! Will provide some good material for "whale wars". It is not like I can do anything about this!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

****It is hideous to murder whales. They are slow to reproduce and if 1000 a year are killed, soon there will be no whales. What a disgraceful act.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These so-called environmentalist are a bunch of showboaters, once a year they run out chase a few Japanese whaling ships and the rest of the year they use that little chase to sucker people into donating millions and travel the world for free, great job if you can get it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 09:44 AM JST - 2nd January Your logic is faulty. The IWC has a standing Article on whale research, >but they specifically passed a resolution that called for Japan to halt >all whaling in the Southern Sanctuary. They rejected JARPA II as >legitimate research. Japan ignores the resolution passed by a vote of 40 >to 2.

No it is your logic that is faulty. An IWC reslution is not mandatory and whether Japan or any country's Research Whaling meets the parameters of the IWC Scientific Permit is determined by the IWC Scientific Committee itself, not any non-enforcable resolutions which contradict the IWC's own regulations. For the last time, that resolution is irreleant to "proving" whether Japan's Research Whaling meets the IWC Scientific Permit requirements or if it is failing to c0mply with them and is therefore conducting "commercial whaling" as you allege. Don't believe me? Just watch what happens at the ICJ. And now that you've brought it up, are you aware that the "Southern Sanctuary" was created in violation of the IWC rules which required that any creation of sanctuaries must be based upon the findings and recommendations of the IWC Scientific Committee? The Head of of the IWC Scientific Committee resigned in disgust when the anti-whaling faction created the "Southern Sanctuary" in violation of the IWC's own rules.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

You are citing what is convenient for your argument and ignoring the rest. The IWC has passed a resolution asking Japan to withdraw JARPA II, their "justification" for killing whales for "research". They then passed a resolution condemning any Japanese whale kills in the Southern Sanctuary. The Scientific Committee then stated the research outlined in JPARPA II was unnecessary and that the whale killing "research" was not adequately justified and was questionable. They asked Japan to resubmit.

You choose to ignore all three of these events and cling to one article that only Japan has interpreted to allow whale kills in the Southern Sanctuary. Any reasonable person reading the facts can see the "research" killings are a thinly veiled smokescreen for commercial whaling in a sanctuary. Then you try to write off a sanctuary that every country but Japan honors.

No wonder world opinion has piled up against Japan on this issue. Why risk Japan's worldwide reputation for this "research" that has been been questioned and rejected by the IWC's scientific team? You never address why if the whales are killed for "research" Japan sells the meat commercially. Smells fishy to most of us.

I hope Sea Shepherd stops all whale kills in the sanctuary.

I

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Limbo,

The Japanese government's support of whale killing in violation of IWC resolutions and Scientific Committee finds and ignoring worldwide sentiment creates the sensationalism that allows Sea Shepherd to exploit the situation to draw in more donations.

If people didn't care about the whales, they wouldn't donate. And if Japan did not defy the world by continuing the hunt, Sea Shepherd would get no press on the issue.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 10:47 AM JST - 3rd January You are citing what is convenient for your argument and ignoring the >rest. The IWC has passed a resolution asking Japan to withdraw JARPA II, >their "justification" for killing whales for "research".

You are ignoring the fact that this entire exchange commenced with your allegation that Japan was conducting commercial whaling and not research whaling. I repeat for the umpteenth time, Australia is going to have to prove that before the ICJ and such resolutions that cite neither prove nor disprove that charge. I stand my position that Japan has been meeting the IWC Scientific Committee requirements for research whaling.

Any reasonable person reading the facts can see the "research" killings >are a thinly veiled smokescreen for commercial whaling in a sanctuary. >Then you try to write off a sanctuary that every country but Japan >honors.

No that has not been proven and won't be until the case goes before the ICJ and there is a judgement. Unti then you're simply expressing your own personal opinion. Only countries that apply for and conduct Research Whaling under Article 8 opf he IWC regulations are permitted to ignore Moratoriums and Sanctuaries, therefore your last comment is pointless since no other country conducts research whaling. Norway and Iceland simply conduct "commercial whaling" by objecting to the Moratorium.

No wonder world opinion has piled up against Japan on this issue.

If you bothered to examine the outcome of the June 2010 Agadir IWC meeting you will see that even the Anti-Whaling Nations the United States and New Zealand took positions separate from the anti-whaling hardliners lead by Australia. There are I belioeve 27 nations that are pro-whaling, and nations like Russia and South Korea are in line to resume commercial whaling. The comment that it's the "world against Japan" is a fallacy spread by the hardline anti-whaling crowd.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

And your allegation is that Japan is only conducting research. The IWC and it's Scientific Committee have found the JARPA II proposal dubious and twice asked for withdrawal and revision. The research, was deemed unnecessary even if it had merit.

Japan is killing whales for commercial sales. Any "research" is a convenient coincidence and ancillary to the primary commercial driver. Japan cannot confess to this overriding motive because that would be a blatant violation of IWC and IMO. No other nation hunts whales in the Southern Sanctuary for any reason.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 12:46 PM JST - 3rd January Ossan, And your allegation is that Japan is only conducting research.

Totally Incorrect. My allegation is that Japan has and continues to meet all of the IWC Scientific Committee requirements to qualify as conducting Rsearch Whaling as authorized by IWC Regulations Article 8. The consequence of which being that Australia is going to have an extremely difficult task of tryng to prove otherwise before the ICJ. If they are unable to do so, Australia will not be able to prove that Japan is actually conducting "commercial whaling" as they, and you, claim. This is one of the reasons why the anti-whaling nations of New Zealand and the United States refused to join Australia as a plaintiff in this case. In a court of law, facts aren't established simply because "you say so". And I repeat again, non-binding un-emforcable resolutions mean nothing as evidence in determining the question of whether Research Whaling is actually being conducted.

Japan is killing whales for commercial sales.

Simply your own speculation and unproven because the IWC rules require that the what meat be utilized.

Any "research" is a convenient coincidence and ancillary to the primary >commercial driver.

Again, simply your speculation.

Japan cannot confess to this overriding motive because that would be a >blatant violation of IWC and IMO.

Once again your speculation. Additonally the IMO has nothing to do with whaling, the IWC Does. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that it is just as equally possible that "Japan can not confess to this overriding motive" because they aren't violating, blatantly or otherwise any IWC regulation. In fact, to the contrary their entire Research Whaling operation is sanctioned by the IWC regulations themselves. And to harp on this point again, Australia had a chance to remove "Research Whaling" completely from the IWC regulations in June but refused to do so against the urging of the US and New Zealand.

No other nation hunts whales in the Southern Sanctuary for any reason.

No other nation has applied for and conducts Research Whaling under Article 8 which specifically exempts the country from recognizing any Moratoriums and Sanctuaries. Hence your statement is rather pointless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Most of the world doesn't care about whales or whaling. They're to busy living their own lives. A small, vocal, minority continually insists that "they" represent a much, much larger group than they actually do.

Watson is in the Antarctic to earn his living. He's been chased out of Canada, Norway, Spain and several other countries. Other countries have refused to register the SS terrorist ships. He's running out of places where he can ply his eco-pirate terrorism.

Watson is once again hoping that the media will repeat his lies and distortions in an effort to increase his personal revenue. His claim that the whalers are using water cannons ignores the fact that the water cannons have limited range and the SS had to deliberately attack the whalers before the water cannons could be used effectively.

"Help me, help me," says Watson, "the whalers are defending themselves from our violent attacks again."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

It is your opinion that JARPA II is valid research that justifies killing whales. Most nations and the IWC Scientific Committee disagree. You conveniently overlook two IWC resolutions against the Japanese and the rejection of JARPA II by the IWC Scientific Committee. You ignore the very institution you cite justifying Japna's whale killing in the Southern Sanctuary.

When the facts are inconvenient you overlook them to justify killing whales for commercial meat sales and hiding behind voodoo "research" to justify it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

arrestpaul,

Of course not every single person in the world is watching the whale hunting activities of Japan. BUT, enough of the world is watching and siding with Sea Shepherd to fund and increase their activities to stop Japanese whaling in the Southern Sanctuary.

It is clear to most who watch the issue as uninvested bystanders, that justifying Japanese whaling as credible research is a farce. The Japanese have killed more whales for "research" since IWC Article 8 was passed then in all the years preceding its passing. It is clear to the unbiased what is going on. And it is that house of cards that Japan has built that has created the environment where Sea Shepherd has been able to garner so much in donations - the public donating of their own free world without any political games.

Japan is losing the public relations war on whaling in the Southern Sanctuary because of its lame attempt to decieve and circumvent the intent of the IWC and Southern Sanctuary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 01:29 AM JST - 4th January Ossan, It is your opinion that JARPA II is valid research that justifies >killing whales. Most nations and the IWC Scientific Committee disagree

You are incorrect on both points. "Most nations" in terms of what? If you mean most anti-whaling nations then yes. Of course this begs the question of what anti-whaling nations are even doing being members of a Whaling Commission. The IWC Scientific Committe most certainly does not disagree as you state as they hae never once rejected data submitted by Japan since Jarpa started as being not scientific data. In fact, the IWC Scientific Committee has stated "The Committee also commented that the programme is providing information leading to a substantial improvement in knowledge of stock structure although further work is required;". Most certainly if the datas submitted by Japan was of zero value scientifically or "bogus" as some illiterates claim, one would hardly expect such a statement to emanate from the Scientific Committee. The IWC Scientific committe has issued no positions that would suggest that Japan is not in compliance with the IWC Research Whaling requirements.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 01:29 AM JST - 4th January Ossan, It is your opinion that JARPA II is valid research that justifies >killing whales.

Wrong, it is the opinion of the IWC Scientific Committee. I am not trained to make such a determination, and neither are you.

You conveniently overlook two IWC resolutions against the Japanese and >the rejection of JARPA II by the IWC Scientific Committee. You ignore >the very institution you cite justifying Japna's whale killing in the >Southern Sanctuary.

The IWC Scientific Committe has never rejected Jarpa or Jarpa II so I suggest we stop with the fabrications in that regard right there. And for what must be the umpteenth time, such resolutions do not answer the question of whether Japan is or is not conducting research whaling. That is what Australia musat prove before the ICJ.

When the facts are inconvenient you overlook them to justify killing >whales for commercial meat sales and hiding behind voodoo "research" to >justify it.

It is you who conveniently ignores the facts and constantly repeats his own unproven personal speculation as if they were fact. They aren't. A court isn't going to care how people like you feel about the issue, they are going to be seeking to prove or disprove the filed allegations to reach a finding.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan, It is your opinion that JARPA II is legitimate research, the IWC Scitentific Committee has experssed its reservations.

If you cling to the notion that it is the IWC Scientific Committee who is the legitimate judge, then why do you support the whale hunting that has gone on and is continuing under the justification of JARPA II which the ICW Scientific Committee has asked for resubmission with more substantiation and changes (which to date the Japanese have not complied with.) The findings of this committee (yes I reviewed their briefing and review of JARPA II) is that the lethal research is not adequately justified or defined and that the data, even if collected, is not necessary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

Your position seems to be that research killings must be allowed prior to the approval of the IWC Scientific Committee. This is like building a house prior to having the permits. As I have stated before the IWC Research Committee has asked for resubmission with better information and revisions. Japan hunts with no changes to JARPA II. The IWC passed resolutions asking Japan to withdraw JARPA II and cease killing whales in the Southern Sanctuary. You ignore the Scientific Commission and two resolutions as does Japan. It would seem Japan is the pirate here or at best a poacher.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8

I'm reading "The Report of the Expert Workshop to review the ongoing JARPNII Programme" and the conclusions are mostly positive.

You can call Japan ignorant all you want but I find the actual presence of anti-whaling nations within the IWC which is for the "orderly development of whaling" to be that of a pirate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 03:10 AM JST - 4th January Ossan, It is your opinion that JARPA II is legitimate research, the IWC >Scientific Committee has experssed its reservations.

Wrong, I am not qualified to make that determination and neither are you. However the IWC Scientific Committee most certainly is and they have never rejected any data submitted by Japan under Jarpa or Jarpa II as not being scientific data.

The IWC Scientific Committe has asked for resubmission and changes because there are anti-whaling members on the committee including Australia of all countries who have an agenda to dstrouy the IWC and it;s charter. The same committee which includes Anti-whaling nations have also stated regarding Jarpa and Jarpa II;

"The Committee also commented that the programme is providing information leading to a substantial improvement in knowledge of stock structure although further work is required"

"The Committee also noted that the programme is contributing useful information on the role of minke whales in the Antarctic ecosystem, particularly with information on feeding and energetics, as well as providing some information relevant to the Committee’s work on pollution studies and the effect of environmental change on cetaceans."

"The Committee welcomed the oceanographic and krill-related work undertaken since the 1997 Workshop. The Committee also agreed that considerable relevant data had been collected by the JARPA programme on matters related to body condition and feeding."

"The results of 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 a number of ways."

These are statements issued by the IWC Scientific Committee as regards Japan's "research whaling". I sugggest you ask yourself if the above supports your allegation that Japan is NOT conducting research whaling.

If you cling to the notion that it is the IWC Scientific Committee who is the legitimate judge, then why do you support the whale hunting that has gone on and is continuing under the justification of JARPA II which the ICW Scientific Committee has asked for resubmission with more substantiation and changes (which to date the Japanese have not complied with.) The findings of this committee (yes I reviewed their briefing and review of JARPA II) is that the lethal research is not adequately justified or defined and that the data, even if collected, is not necessary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan you are arguing with someone who is totally anti-whaling no matter what you or any organization thinks. This is a person with convictions as strong as the Taliban. Their way or the highway.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

As your text says, the IWS Scientific Committee stated the data was "not required". The ends do not justify the means. You conveniently left out all their reservations on the usefullness and applicability of the data and value of lethal research. Oh and you forgot to mention they asked for a submission of the whole JARPA II research proposal.

You blindly accept and promote the Scientific Committee findings for what marginal support they give your argument and then denigrate them and impugn their integrity when they reject JARPA II and essentially send it back for a redo.

You can't have it both ways. Either you accept their findings or you don't. This cherry picking what you want and ignoring the rest is denial of whole picture.

Show me the IWC resolution or the Scientific Committee statement that says they condone the ongoing whale hunts in the Southern Sanctuary either based on its research value or its compliance with IWC mandates and Articles. That would support your position. But you will not find it. It does not exist.

Moderator: Readers, you are going around in circles and rehashing the same old arguments. Further repetitive posts will be removed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Happy New Year all.

Shrkb8, as a neutral observer to this discussion I have to let you know that you lost the argument.

Simple facts: 1) ICRW allows for research catches, as the contracting government authorizing those catches sees fit. Japan is doing this. 2) Japan submits biological data from these catches to the IWC's scientific committee, and indeed the scientific committee itself USES the data. See the catch-at-age work on minke whale samples for example. It is not possible for Australia or anyone, yourself included, to prove that data that evidently does exist does not exist. 3) Australia's case at the ICJ thus stands no chance, and I continue to believe that Australia will drop the case before they suffer the larger embarrassment of losing it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8, to elaborate on the first fact, Australia and other nations have all agreed to the ICRW text, which permits special permit research such as that conducted by the Japanese.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

David,

Yes there is an ICW article that allows lethal research. That is not in question.

The question is whether the current "research" is valid. The ICW governing body has passed two resolutions AGAINST the curent Japanese research killing. The scientific committee stated the lethal research was not necessary. AND they asked Japan to resubmit the research proposal. Japan ignores all of this and kills whales anyway.

The public sees through the ruse. More funds come into Sea Shepherd and they expand their fleet to disrupt the whale hunts that Japan continues inspite of the IWC and it's research committee. You refer to the IWC only when it supports your position and then you ignore it when it conflicts with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8, the other thing for you to consider is why a bunch of anti-whaling nations remain adhered to the international convention for the regulation of whaling, when they clearly have to intention of ever acting in good faith with respect to the object and purpose of the convention. They want no whaling at all, not regulation of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why do I have a strong sense of "Deja Vu"?

Could it because we seen the same discussion and same arguments plenty of times here before. Parties change a bit with new members from both camps being very outspoken, etc.

For both sides continiously using the SAME arguments, Points don't get you any more respect only diminishes your position and lessen your arguments.

Stating the same thing over and over like a weapon or shield don't make it any truer.

Enjoy your argument but I see no progress being made and doubt there will be any in the future, neither was any made in previous discussions/arguments.

Have fun, back to your scheduled programming.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Whale hunting is authorized for scientific research by international agreement. Why should it matter if they use the extra whale meat in terms of commerce. Would you prefer that they just throw it away instead?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Genkimark.

I guess the rabid anti-whalers are the people that don't want any whales killed. Forgetting the numbers of whales(incl. highly endangered ones) that get killed by ship collisions, etc.

Guess they also don't want animals, fishes, etc to be used for food, testing and we need to release all our pets into the wild too as they will be happier there, etc.

The numbers for whale deaths due to humans are alarmingly high outside the antartica, etc hunts.

To me this whole conservatism efforts are directed in the wrong direction and driven by emotions, etc more than anything else. When the real impact that humans have on the populations are not reported in the media.

My view.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

genkimark, that's a good point. In fact it has been overlooked in this discussion that the IWC actually told Japan in a 1986 Resolution that meat eventuating from special permits should be used for consumption. Of course these Resolutions are non-binding, but the whaling convention itself does require that the meat not be wasted, so if it weren't being auctioned off in the markets and ultimately consumed it's not clear how else Japan could legally conduct the special permit research.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

David,

So in this case you cite a 24 year old resolution you like pertaining to meat consumption, but you ignore the more current ones from 2006 and 2007 that condemn the research and killing in the Southern Sanctuary. How convenient.

Cite the IWC when it supports you. Ignore it when it doesn't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

davidattokyo - "as a neutral observer to this discussion I have to let you know that you lost the argument"

Interesting that this first statement this time is a misrepresentation. Explain your blog and multiple contributions to simuilar articles here and elswhere purporting to provide Japans perspective on whaling?

Japans misrepresentation of its motives and research results have lost it the argument. All we have from the whalers, albeit with a depleted fleet, is the annual display of stubbornness and prevarication that draws Japans reputation as an honest business partner further into disrepute.

Every whale Sea Shepherd prevents from being taken is a win. Every whale the whalers take in the now farcical research programme is another nail in the coffin of Japans whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The scientific committee stated the lethal research was not necessary.

I'm wondering where you got this from?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They highlighted that the proposals did not include sufficient detail to be adequately assessed against many of the stated research objectives and methods. They questioned the ability to derive useful data in a timely fashion from some of the proposed research. They stated some of the proposed research results would be unreliable for use in any modeling or projections. And in several areas they questioned the potential value of the data at all.

I got the impression that "more" lethal research is needed to address those areas and not your assertion that "the lethal killings were not required to do effective management of whale populations."

Moderator: Readers, you are still going around in circles. Please focus your comments on what is in the story.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think most Australians dont really like whaling, but could put up with Japan whaling so long as it was in Japanese waters-or even close. Australia probably doesnt want to harm it's fishing industry either, but their not greedy enough to expect that fishing waters south of Australia is open slather. Japan wants the cheapest rates possible so they research. Australia should slap Japan with huge fines for trespassing. And get off the legal huff; anyway you look at it Japan just wants to proove they have the balls and the right to claim their territory-especially since theyre loosing that fight in Okinawa. Even Okinawans realize yours is where you are. Just cause you can produce a boat that will get you there doesnt mean you have the right. Australians are nicer thatn Taiwan, Russia, NK, they do things legally, or at least as soft as butter. So hypocritical balls of Japan push the only aggressive buttons they can. Too bad they thought Aussies were stupid-of course they were right about New Z.-but hey they could arrange whaling from New Z. and see how far they get.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese are not conducting research whaling in Australian waters. If they were they'd be chased out of there just like any other foreign flag fisheries vessel. They are whaling in an Antarctic area that Australia is "claiming", although only 4 countries recognize such a claim. Neither the United States nor Russia recognizes it. With the big deal that Australia makes about Japan "whaling in our waters" you would think that they would just chase them out of there. However talking such jurisdictional action would jeapordize their "claim".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“We got them before they started whaling and now that we’re on them, we’re hoping to make sure they don’t kill any whales for this season,” Watson said.

Japanese will kill as much whales as their ships can carry. There's noone monitoring them to see if they stay with their quotas. Only Seasheperd stays between them and death and destruction of these godly creatures. And only us to support seasheperd so they can succeed interrupting the killing. Best luck to you heroes!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Damien15 at 10:06 AM JST - 5th January Japanese will kill as much whales as their ships can carry. There's >noone monitoring them to see if they stay with their quotas.

In June Japan had agreed to the IWC proposal that would elimate research whaling, resume limited commercial whaling with numbers reduction and IWC onboard monitoring. But Australia squashed that possibility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

dontpanic,

I was just joshing, chill man. And I provide My Perspective on whaling, I don't pretend that it coincides exactly with Japan's. Indeed I think Japanese governments are partially responsible for the mess this issue has become due to a failure to properly assess the political situation at certain critical points over the years.

Japans misrepresentation of its motives and research results have lost it the argument.

That's not what the Australian government ministers and officials were saying in the Wikileaks with respect to Australia's chances of winning the ICJ case against Japan. Just FYI.

illsayit,

I think most Australians dont really like whaling, but could put up with Japan whaling so long as it was in Japanese waters-or even close.

Um, what Japan does in it's own waters doesn't concern Australians at all, anyway, so who cares whether Aussies think they could "put up with it"? Same situation with high seas whaling. Australia doesn't own the Southern Ocean. Australians control only Australia's internationally recognised territories, which doesn't include waters where Japan is conducting it's ICRW compliant research activities for the benefit of the goals stated in the ICRW.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

davidattokyo;"waters where Japan is conducting it's ICRW compliant research activities for the benefit of the goals stated in the ICRW."

There has been 2 resolutions past through the IWC stating Japans should stop hunting whales under the guise of "research" as it has no viable use, & that better research can be done using non-lethal methods. Just as Aus, NZ, & a host of other nations has joined forces to do, & a group that Japan was invited to be a part of but refused because it was non-lethal.

Ossan;"In June Japan had agreed to the IWC proposal that would elimate research whaling, resume limited commercial whaling with numbers reduction and IWC onboard monitoring. But Australia squashed that possibility."

Once again with this tired old line, so you can understand the actual figures, there would have been NO reduction in numbers of actual whales killed, the number of actual whales killed would have gone up. The "reduction" in numbers would have been from Japans self imposed quotas, which it fails to reach anyway due to SSCS. That is why the "deal" failed because it was not in the interest of conserving whale stocks, or about reducing actual numbers of whales killed. Secondly it would have simply changed the name from "research" whaling, to "commercial" whaling. If Japans hunts are purely about "research" & so important, & in the interest of the environment then why would it be so happy to give it up for "commercial" whaling?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh & the "deal" you speak of when you read the Wikileaks papers you see American officials stating take the reduction for the short term, but in the long term they would increase numbers, which is not how Japan was selling it to the rest of the world, once again more lying & corruption to get what it wants, just like a little child throwing a tantrum, & I guess that is why & how the deal failed & was blocked by Sth American, & European nations, not just Australia, because they saw it for what it was, another lie & bluff.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shouldn't the headline be "Japanese whalers clash with left-wing terrorists off Antarctica"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The last thing the Sea Shepherd people want is Japan to stop whaling. Then they'd have to think of another way to earn a very good living.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

billyshears: Sea Shepherd people volunteer their time - NO-ONE earns "a very good living" as no-one gets paid.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

A stab in the dark! Well they could work on those sub programmes. I can hear it now-The Green and Yellow Submarine!! Of course, theyd need the dollars. Wouldnt it be neat if Japan and Australia could co-operate on this. Work out the whaling, that subsidises some of it and gets the ball rolling, agree on a number, shake hands. Sell better tasting fish, preserve the Australian environment. Japan-we have the eco-image AND fishermen! Australia-we have the goods! US-chuckles. Russia-we have the top end covered. Hey! down the line you never know JAL and the aero-programmes that are sitting wasted in Australia could even hit it off!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

djbooth.

I would agree for the supporters, but how does Paul Watson and others on the ships, cove guardians in taiji, etc make a living?

They can't hold down a standard job with being away for months on end, etc.

Pls, explain how they can make a living, support family if they don't get paid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

manfromamerica: how can Sea Shepherds be terrorists? they are trying to preserve life - not end it. no whalers have every been hurt or killed - they do the killing.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

DJbooth.

Except that Bethune was convicted on causing injury, etc. And that SSCS has stated they don't care about injuries, etc to the whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zenny11 - You've got to be kidding. Sea Shepherd threw rancid butter at decks and the whalers threw heavy nuts and bolts at people in rubber dinghies, aims high powered water jets directly at them, aims debilitating noise generators at a helicopter pilot, and ran over and sunk the Ady Gil. Who is the more violent here?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

whalers threw heavy nuts and bolts at people in rubber dinghies

That is one step above SSCS, who fired line rifles at Faroese police in rubber dinghies, in an attempt to sink them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

KeikoTokyo at 01:34 PM JST - 5th January "Ossan;"In June Japan had agreed to the IWC proposal that would elimate research whaling, resume limited commercial whaling with numbers reduction and IWC onboard monitoring. But Australia squashed that possibility." Once again with this tired old line, so you can understand the actual >figures, there would have been NO reduction in numbers of actual whales >killed, the number of actual whales killed would have gone up. The

The Anti-Whaling nations United States and New Zealand supported the compromise. The anti-whaling conservation groups Greenpeace, Pew Environment Group amd the World Wildlife Fund supported the compromise. Perjhaps you;d like o explain my these entities would support a concept whereby the "actual number of whales killed would have gone up". And shouldn't you be more concerned about your country's desire to resume commercial whaling? They were furious at Japan for not including the right of countries that used to whale but are currently not whaling as they felty they were being cut out of the action.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

DJbooth - Sea Shepherd people volunteer their time - NO-ONE earns "a very good living" as no-one gets paid.

Wrong. Watson admitted on Lary King's show that the SS captains and essential personel (engineers) get paid. Watson gets paid to practice piracy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 - Who is the more violent here?

That would be Watson the pirate, who has no legal authority to be attacking or boarding any vessel in international water.

That would also be the eco-terrorist SS organization which brags that they HAVE SUNK TEN (10) FISHING VESSELS.

The SS are launching ACID, not rancid butter, in glass bottles, at the whalers.

The whalers have a right to DEFEND themselves from the ILLEGAL and DANGEROUS activities of a boatload of delusional vegans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

DJbooth - how can Sea Shepherds be terrorists? they are trying to preserve life - not end it. no whalers have every been hurt or killed - they do the killing.

Wrong. Again. Terrorists are people who operate outside the law. Terrorists are the people who ram fishing vessels, ram the Canadian Coast Guard, illegally board other nations vessels, demand $3 million for a toy boat that only cost $1.5 million and launch buteric acid at whalers.

The SS own actions make them a terrorists.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

arrestpaul; SS taerrorists? Really!! THe Japanese courts didn't think so did they? Unless of course they hand out suspended sentences to terrorists in Japanese courts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

arrest paul -

Hmm, the whalers defend themselves by cutting through the bow of an idling composite boat with a massive steel boat at full speed while aiming LRADS and water jets at the crew on deck? Sounds more like an attack then a defense...who are the pirates here?

You see Sea Shepherd as pirates, many of us see them as enforcers and the Japanese whalers as poachers.

With Japanese whale meat consumption down, maybe Japan should curtail their lethal "research". They could save a whole lot of money and gain a lot of political good will.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Butyric Acid is found in butter and paresan cheese. It is produced in the human body as well. It is used as a food additive and an ingredient in fragrances.

Sounds very dangerous. Especially when thrown at decks, hulls and superstructures. I heard Black Bear was notorious for his use of Butyric Acid to commandeer commercial vessels. Commercial Captains quivered at the thought of being hit with butyric acid and they begged Black Beard to use canons, guns and cutlasses instead out of mercy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is produced in the human body as well.

Wouldn't you want to have me arrested if I started firing bottles of, say, human feces at you while you worked?

With Japanese whale meat consumption down,...

Funny you should say that. We were just discussing whether that were the case, right here yesterday. Welcome to the board, Shrkb8. Please do feel free to catch up on the discussions that have already been had.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taj,

If I were illegally poaching, I would be glad you didn't do worse. And I would not call you a pirate or terrorist. As to your second comment, I am not the only one who has expressed an opinion that has already been stated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But the Japanese aren't illegally poaching so you're argument is pointless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Terrorists are people who operate outside the law.

When laws are protecting the profit of these killers, good people have the responsibility to protect these great animals from painful death. Seasheperd are heroes. No matter what you say, there are people like me who love what they are doing and will support them forever.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the profit of these killers"

profit? I thought it was unprofitable, and therefore a drain on the taxpayers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What has the whale research found out about whales?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan;"The Anti-Whaling nations United States and New Zealand supported the compromise."

I think you need to get your facts straight there again, NZ supported a plan to reduce numbers, stop hunting in Antarctic territories, & a phase out of whaling in 10yrs, as did Aus, Japan refused this outright as shown in the WikiLeaks documents,"a no-starter" as Japanese officials called it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Does whale meat taste any better than meat that you don't have to go to the end of the earth for?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What happens when the newly rich Chinese decide THEY like whale meat TOO?

Since their population is 10 times larger than Japan, can they take 10,000 a year for their "research" ???

Yeah, I know - "THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN"... except lots of Chinese tourists are buying up everything Japanese, so one of them may try whale meat, like it, and tell their friends in China it is a Japanese delicacy (or something), then they will want it in China too...

So to all of you who support Japan's bogus research - what is the answer???

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hear, Hear KevininHawaii.

Let's put the cards on the table - if it's for research, what are we learning? If it's for food and Japanese tradition, factory ships in the Antarctic is stretching that argument, So what is the point?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The research provides useful information for establishing the status of whale stocks so that they may be better utilised going forward.

Not useful if you are an anti-whaler, but then the whaling convention was never intended to be useful for nutcase anti-whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would argue that killing a whale by running it down in a diesel powered high speed harpoon boat and launching explosive tipped harpoons does not qualify as a "tradition" by any stretch of the definition. If they want to sail to the artic and chase down whales in row boats with non-explosive harpoons, I might buy the argument. If they call it a tradition to have some whale soup at new Year's I'd believe it (but it wouldn't take the killing of thousands of whales each year for that tradition). But whale meat is not a "traditional" staple of the Japanese diet. Besides all that some cultures had human sacrifice as a tradition, no culture has perpetuated that tradition. Bad traditions should become part of history.

As to Heda Madness - I don't buy the "research" argument in the numbers of whales killed. If they are not researching, they are indeed poaching.

Seems like the Japanese have very convenient interpretations of "research" and "tradition".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 11:53 PM JST - 6th January I would argue that killing a whale by running it down in a diesel >powered high speed harpoon boat and launching explosive tipped harpoons >does not qualify as a "tradition" by any stretch of the definition.

Not a very good argument since it's "whaling" that's the tradition, not the methods. I certainly would not dispute that the Inuit people have a "tradition" of whaling, and the fact that they now use outboard engines, high powered rifles, and snowmobiles to carry off the whalemeat doesn't diminish that fact.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 - Hmm, the whalers defend themselves by cutting through the bow of an idling composite boat with a massive steel boat at full speed while aiming LRADS and water jets at the crew on deck?

Yes, when the whalers are attacked by the eco-terrorists, they have a right to defend themselves. Watson has NO legal authority to attack anyone. The SS represent NO nation. They are acting outside of any recognized, legal authority. They are pirates who have deliberately sunk 10 fishing vessels. Any damage they receive is because they chose to put themselves in harms way. You chose to ignore the video of the Ady Gil being ACCELERATED into the path of the SM2. If you have to lie to make your case - you don't have a case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 - Butyric Acid is found in butter and paresan cheese.

In CONCENTRATED form and enclosed in glass bottles, it is found on the SS eco-terrorist, pirate ships.

Fired at high velocity against unprotected fishermen, it is very dangerous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 11:53 PM JST - 6th January If they call it a tradition to have some whale soup at new Year's I'd >believe it (but it wouldn't take the killing of thousands of whales each >year for that tradition). But whale meat is not a "traditional" staple >of the Japanese diet. Besides all that some cultures had human sacrifice >as a tradition, no culture has perpetuated that tradition. Bad >traditions should become part of history.

This is what I call "barking up the wrong tree". As foreigners neither you nor I have any authority to tell any people in other countries what they can eat or not eat, whether they call it a tradition or not. I'd be pretty incensed if some foreigners did that to me. Wouldn't you feel the same way? For that reason, going on about "what's tradition and what's not" simply creates resentment and resistance. Finally your comparison of human sacrifice to eating whales is absurd since whales are not humans. You DO agree with that don't you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

I will concede some of your points about "tradition". Regardless using the tradition card is a weak argument in this specific case. New England has a tradition of hunting whaltes. They got over it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

David,

You don't need to kill whales to understand the population trends. There are non-lethal ways to do that. You may get some useful data from lethal kills BUT: is the data in the end worth the killing. The IWC has repeatedly said "no". Those supporting Green Peace, Sea Shepherd and others are saying "no". Whales are a world resource not a Japanese resource - escpecially in the Southern Sanctuary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hindus have been patient till New England tradition of killing whales stopped. I am sure they will wait patiently till Japanese will stop this tradition of whaling. Who are we to force others to do things that the way it should be done? And moreover, gorilla antics by non-entities will be futile no matter what.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I actually find it quite interesting that anyone gets drawn into this argument by the position that Science and Tradition are the moral backbone supporting the Japanese whaling activities. They are both farcical positions. Here at JT, apart from people arguing the finer aspects of the semantics of each point of reasoning, people never come up with a convincing argument for either position. Tradition is flimsy, because many countries around the world have a tradition of whaling, but as members of a concerned and responsible international community they conferred and decided that it was an irresponsible and unnecessary practice that was best stopped. Not all traditions are best practice, nor sustainable. Democratic process at it's belated best. Also flimsy, because the Antarctic is not traditional hunting waters for any Japanese whaling fleet. If, as in the case of Taiji, they wish to continue the practice in home waters, then go ahead. But to continue to fish protected specied in international waters is piracy. Science is even more farcical, and somewhat of an insult to the intelligence of the international community. What have they discovered from all those 'specimens' they have killed? Where are they sharing their findings? For a remarkably advanced scientific country, their cetacean research looks incredibly ham fisted. And, Oh what a coincidence. At the end of all that research, they get to eat the stuff as well!!!! If I am honest, I just can't see any strength in people's position that their whaling is justified under either auspice. But go ahead and try and convince me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 07:37 AM JST - 7th January Ossan, I will concede some of your points about "tradition". Regardless using >the tradition card is a weak argument in this specific case. New England >has a tradition of hunting whaltes. They got over it.

New England does indeed have a very long tradition of whaling. But they never "got over it", the demand for whale oil simply dissappeared with the discovery and adoption of petroleum as an energy source. A tradition of eating whales to me is far more sensible and noble than the Western whalers that killed every single whale they saw, females and calves, stripped them of their valuable blubber (flensing) and throwing the rest overboard in what must be one of humanity's most horrible acts of waste of animal life and natural resources.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

The American whalers only killed every whale they could catch. Which back then was not every one they saw. They also risked their lives getting there and back. now you kick back in a high speed diesel boat that goes faster than any whale can go and then you launch (not throw) an explosive tipped harpoon into an exhausted whale that cannot outpace the boat. The Japanese kill infant whales and pregnant females. There is a much published picture of a female and her calf being hauled up the ramp on a Japanese factory vessel. I thought the Japanese were researching them primarily not for food. And they are not eating all the meat they are storing a large amount of the meat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Jkanda,

Whales are a world resource, not a Japanese resource. To act otherwise is either arrogance or ignorance. And Sea Shepherd has proven effective ... Not futile... by The ICRs own admission.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8,

Appreciate your responses to my posts. Nice when people can look at the problem from different angles and not be hostile but come to a good conclusion. The group of people who are fighting against the Japanese whalers have some serious issues. Only good thing I can think of is that some of them are unemployed and want to make good use of their time, rather than lazily sitting around trying to find work. But the whole point is what is the purpose of using outdated, uncouth way of resolving a problem that concerns the whole humankind. You are right, the whales as well as many other world resources are being depleted not only by Japanese but others also. Just a group of people running around with catapaults will not stop anything. Study the nature of the Japanese people first; figure out a way to bring them to the table and negotiate fairly to bring a solution.

Your statement about ICR's admission (chuckle)..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Study the nature of the Japanese people first; figure out a way to bring them to the table and negotiate fairly to bring a solution.

Oh a final solution to the absolute abolition of whaling? Yeah study your enemy and use that to get a total victory over them. Yes that is good advice for Sea Shepherd as we know there is no compromising with those types.

I used to be anti-whaling. Back in the 80s I was all for a moratorium on whaling. But given that that was 30 years ago now I am for limited catch and as long as they are not going after endangered species I'm ok with a hunt. I'm for limited catch so as to maintain Sustainability. But when people come to me with no compromise on their mind at all but to force me to do what they want then I feel that I'd want to meet their violence with violence myself. I'm all for the Japanese fighting back at these Sea Sheeps and I really hope that they sink another ship because Paul Watson can dupe some more rich imbeciles to donate money for more craft to endanger humans who are willing to die for a whale. When push comes to shove like with Bethune we see that that resolve sort of dissolves the closer they get to that death. Sea Sheeps. Bahhhhh Bahhhhhh!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mikehuntez, You are spot on. There is nothing wrong with a limited controlled hunt with strict internationally set guidelines that everyone follows. I personally think that this is the most sensible approach to the whole situation. While l do not support SS or pro whaling l can see that there is a need for both conservation and a commercial hunt. However as Jkanda says "Study the nature of the Japanese people first; figure out a way to bring them to the table and negotiate fairly to bring a solution." this is the problem as the Japanese by nature (and constantly demostrate it) believe they are always right and will not come to a settlement that doesnt suit them. If they were to back down and change tact a little maybe the anti whaling world would see them different rather than their current we are right you are wrong and we do what we want attitude.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 09:42 AM JST - 7th January The American whalers only killed every whale they could catch. Which >back then was not every one they saw.

Are you kidding? The American., British, Norwegian, Australian (which stated whaling in 1791 and ended in 1978) , YES Australians brought the entire world hale population to the brink of extinction, and you somehow think Japan's current whaling levels are any threat? Got news for you, using sailing mother ships and sculled dories they could come up on any whale they saw because there was no engine noise to spook them. Western whalers did take "every whale they saw". Furthermore whaling contined into the 20th century now decimating whales with motorized vessels and exploding harpoons. "From 1952 until 1962 a whaling station operated at Tangalooma, Queensland, on Moreton Island, which harvested and processed 6277 Humpback Whales during that period. It was forced to close after it had drastically reduced the number of whales in the eastern Australian Humpback population." The Japansese Research vessel did take a female and calf for data sampling and analysis. The western nations took ebvery female and calf they saw to boil down their blubber. I fer you do not grasp the magnitude of the damage that western whaling did to the world whale population.

They also risked their lives getting there and back. now you kick back in a high speed diesel boat that goes faster than any whale can go and then you launch (not throw) an explosive tipped harpoon into an exhausted whale that cannot outpace the boat. The Japanese kill infant whales and pregnant females. There is a much published picture of a female and her calf being hauled up the ramp on a Japanese factory vessel. I thought the Japanese were researching them primarily not for food. And they are not eating all the meat they are storing a large amount of the meat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

arrestpaul;"Yes, when the whalers are attacked by the eco-terrorists, they have a right to defend themselves."

First off the Japanese actively track down SSCS & attack them prior to them being anywhere near a whaling vessel.

"If you have to lie to make your case - you don't have a case."

Very good point, & Japan lies using "scientific research" BS so it can commercially hunt whales in a designated sanctuary, & the world see's this as a lie & ids why it causes Japan so much embaressment, & as you stated they,"don't have a case"

Ossan;"stripped them of their valuable blubber (flensing) and throwing the rest overboard in what must be one of humanity's most horrible acts of waste of animal life and natural resources."

You should take a close look at what Japan does in the Antarctic then dumping over 70% of the dead whale overboard, in breach of Antarctic treaties, & as you say a "most horrible act of waste of animal life & natural reasource."

As for your comments of a great "tradition", since when was going to the Antarctic to hunt whales a great Japanese tradition?

"As foreigners neither you nor I have any authority to tell any people in other countries what they can eat or not eat"

Less than 1% of Japanese population eats whale, is this the great tradition you are talking of, & a huge waste of taxpayers yen to fund it?

"YES Australians brought the entire world hale population to the brink of extinction"

Very interesting Ossan, & just where did you get that fact?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan,

Sorry Ossan, you have went way overboard on killing every whale they saw. They could not hunt the fast whales. That is why Minke whales are so abundant when the others were nearly driven to extinction. They also were not able to kill every whale in a pod. If you've read any of the accounts of whalers, in the days of sail you will read of sightings with no kill. Also, sea creatures can hear sailing vessels. You'll have to tell the dolphins that dance under the bow of my sail boat, that they didn't locate me by the sound of the hull against the water.

I do grasp the impact of western whaling as you call it, though Australia is not so far West. But it came to an end. As far as the US goes, I believe the last commercial kill was 1921. It was a much different world back then.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

KeikoTokyo: First off the Japanese actively track down SSCS & attack them prior to them being anywhere near a whaling vessel.

So Keiko SS are free to attack Whalers but if Whalers do it first you cry about it? Aren't we the spoiled child now. What's good for the goose isn't always good for the gander I guess. Does your SS balaclava have an embroidered "Prepare to Ram" on it too like the one I saw on Whale Wars? Nice touch for innocent pirates.

KeikoTokyo: You should take a close look at what Japan does in the Antarctic then dumping over 70% of the dead whale overboard, in breach of Antarctic treaties, & as you say a "most horrible act of waste of animal life & natural reasource."

Wow you change your tune quickly. First they were commercial whaling for the meat now they are dumping 70% of the whale overboard. I'm confused.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"whale meat again" - Vera Lynn

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntex - "So Keiko SS are free to attack Whalers but if Whalers do it first you cry about it? Aren't we the spoiled child now".

The whalers are there to hunt whale or Sea Shepherd? Can the whalers maintain the sham of the aggrieved party after a preemptive strike? You cant have it both ways.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

KeikoTokyo - First off the Japanese actively track down SSCS and attack them prior to them being anywhere near a whaling vessel.

"If you have to lie to make your case - you don't have a case."

Very good point, Japan lies using "scientific research" BS so it can commercially hunt whales in a designated sanctuary, the world see's this as a lie ids why it causes Japan so much embaressment, as you stated they,"don't have a case"

Hahahaha. Why would the whalers bother to track down eco-terrorists who are trying to find them? All they have to do is wait for them to show up.

Research is being gathered and shared with the IWC. The whale meat is being put to use instead of being wasted. The "WORLD" does NOT see these facts as lies, only the very small, vocal minority that supports the violent tactics of the SS does. You and Shrkb8 seem to have the same problem with reality.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shrkb8 at 12:01 PM JST - 7th January I do grasp the impact of western whaling as you call it, though >Australia is not so far West. But it came to an end. As far as the US >goes, I believe the last commercial kill was 1921. It was a much >different world back then.

You are right in that it was a different world back then. However let's not confuse 3 issues; ONE is that the western nations stopped whaling because the demand for whaleoil evaporated as the world switched to petroleum. None of the major whaling nations stopped commercial whaling because they thought the whales were cute or special. The "save the whales" movement didn't not arise until the late 1970s. TWO, the Western nations brought the world whale population to the brink of extinction, and the numbers being taken now by Japan, Norway and Iceland don't come anywhere near the previous kill numbers. THREE, the highest number of whale deaths throughout the world are caused by unintentional collisions with Ships, not by research, commercial or subsistence whaling.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The whalers are there to hunt whale or Sea Shepherd? Can the whalers maintain the sham of the aggrieved party after a preemptive strike? You cant have it both ways.

Preemptive Strike? Well they usually work well to keep terrorists at bay. Funny when you go looking for trouble and it comes to you then you scream about it? That is plain out childish. Typical of the SS radicals.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mike

No one is screaming about it. In fact Sea Shepherd seems to be reveling in it due to the PR value. But it IS disingenuous to try to take the legal high road and then resort to aggressive offensive and, as in the case of the Ady Gil, life threatening tactics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mike,

The IWC was born long before the save the whales movement to protect dwindling whale populations. And some Western nations were still hunting when it was formed. I don't consider whales cute, but they are worth protecting. Several hundred thousand Minke Whales is not a huge population over the area they are spread over. It is a drop in the bucket compared to the human population.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So we are clear that legal high road and aggressive offensive are opposites. Thank you. Sea Shepherd thinks they are legal pirates like some kind of People's Privateers. If the AG didn't put itself in danger then it would still be intact. I agree also that whales should be protected. When their numbers drop then we do another moratorium and take it easy for their recovery like they have now. I have no problem if Japan wants to take less than 1% of the population as long as they provide data that helps with their management in the future as well. I just hate the emotion that the Conservationist play on and especially the violent ones who then try to make themselves the innocent party after aggravating people who are legally allowed to do what they are doing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez;"When their numbers drop then we do another moratorium and take it easy for their recovery like they have now. I have no problem if Japan wants to take less than 1% of the population"

That is the problem, Japan currently ignores the moratorium & hunts under the guise of research. Even before the moratorium was in place & the IWC issued catch quota's Japan ignored them, that is why the moratorium had to be bought in in the first place. & as for simply do another moratorium do you think that is as simple as clicking your fingers & it is done?

Whale numbers have been slowly recovering but are still not at a level to allow commercial hunting of them, this has been proven many times over, & by using non-lethal research. As for,if Japan wants to take 1% of the numbers, then surely to be fair other countries must be allowed to do the same, not just 1 country, so then you have 88% of the population being taken if just countries in the IWC are allowed this 1%, but then other countries would also figure they should get their share & you have the population decimated again & made extinct.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whale numbers have been slowly recovering but are still not at a level to allow commercial hunting of them.

Commercial no. But this limited hunt that only Japan does in good faith to provide data at the same time is allowed. SS and supporters just can't accept that. But thanks for finally agreeing that they are on the increase. The IWC is in place to make sure over-whaling does not occur. That is their purpose. To manage the stock so that numbers don't start going down. It's called SUSTAINABILITY, a word you refuse to accept. SS and supporters don't care if the numbers are going up or down. They just want a total ban. The IWC Keiko would ensure that whaling countries would share the quota in a manageable way but you guys refuse to listen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez;"The IWC Keiko would ensure that whaling countries would share the quota in a manageable way"

This was tried prior to the moratorium, & the very reason the moratorium was bought in because Japan & others REFUSED to abide by the quota numbers & hunted with reckless abandon. & as was shown/proven in the WikiLeaks documents Japan was in no way going to stay at low sustainable numbers, but had every intention of raising the numbers once the moratorium was lifted.

As for "good faith" & Japan providing data to the IWC, the IWC has several times passed motions requesting Japan to stop its "research" program as it was of no use or benefit & the main source of division within the IWC. Now if Japan was so interested in acting in "good faith" & accordence with the IWC then JARPA2 would no longer be being continued, would it not?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see good faith in your opinion is if Japan suspends it's research whaling which may or may not have been requested by IWC. I see no evidence they have but I see a lot of pdf files on the IWC website about the scientific part of it. Admit it. Good Faith to you is for all whaling to end.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Showing "good faith" to the IWC would be abiding to motions that have been passed by the committee, several times. "Good faith" would be not hunting in an IWC designated sanctuary. "Good faith" would be not bribing 3rd world nations for their votes & corrupting an international organisation for our own purpose. Is this all the "good faith" you speak of when you talk of Japan & that they have shown the IWC?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, & going agaist & ignoring quotas imposed by the IWC prior to the introduction of the "global moratorium", a moratorium the rest of the world has abided by bar 3 countries. Or how Japan has organised another pro-whaling group in an attempt to over ride the IWC,(not even Norway or Iceland have been so brazen or arrogant), is this all the "good faith" you are talking about?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Keiko after supporting SS whose position on whaling is a Total Ban, Do you really think that I will fall for this fake indignation that you put out over Japan not being willing to compromise? You guys will use anything for your cause. Sorry I don't fall for that.

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